Sharpton, Others Call Stimulus Cartoon Troubling

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

MrsSpringsteen

Blue Crack Addict
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
29,289
Location
Edge's beanie closet
02182009.jpg


NEW YORK (CNN) -- A New York Post cartoon Wednesday drew fire from civil rights activist Al Sharpton and others who say the drawing invokes historically racist images in suggesting an ape wrote President Barack Obama's economic stimulus package.

The artist, Sean Delonas, called Sharpton's reaction "ridiculous," and the newspaper defended its decision to run his cartoon. But other African-American leaders joined Sharpton, who has been the butt of previous Delonas panels, in attacking what they called the cartoon's racial overtones.

"Sean Delonas' cartoon in today's New York Post is insensitive and offensive," National Urban League President Marc Morial said in a statement issued Wednesday afternoon. "Comparing President Obama and his effort to revive the economy in a manner that depicts violence and racist inferences is unacceptable."

The cartoon showed two police officers standing over the body of a chimpanzee they just shot, a reference to this week's mauling of a Connecticut woman by a pet chimp, which police killed after the attack. In the cartoon, one of the officers tells the other, "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill."

The nearly $800 billion stimulus package was the priority for Obama, the first African-American U.S. president, who signed it Tuesday.

"The cartoon in today's New York Post is troubling at best, given the racist attacks throughout history that have made African-Americans synonymous with monkeys," Sharpton said.

Sharpton questioned whether Delonas "is making a less-than-casual inference to this form of racism."

"The Post should at least clarify what point they were trying to make in this cartoon, and reprimand their cartoonist for making inferences that are offensive and divisive at a time the nation struggles to come together to stabilize the economy if, in fact, this was yet another racially charged cartoon," he said.

In a brief phone interview with CNN, Delonas called the controversy "absolutely friggin' ridiculous."

"Do you really think I'm saying Obama should be shot? I didn't see that in the cartoon," Delonas said.

"It's about the economic stimulus bill," he added. "If you're going to make that about anybody, it would be [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi, which it's not."

Col Allan, the Post's editor-in-chief, said the cartoon "is a clear parody of a current news event."

"It broadly mocks Washington's efforts to revive the economy. Again, Al Sharpton reveals himself as nothing more than a publicity opportunist," Allan said in a written statement.

But Sharpton and Morial were not alone in their criticism. Barbara Ciara, president of the National Association of Black Journalists, said the Post showed a "serious lapse in judgment" by running the cartoon.

"To think that the cartoonist and the responsible editors at the paper did not see the racist overtones of the finished product should insult their intelligence," Ciara said in a written statement. "Instead, they celebrate their own lack of perspective and criticize those who call it what it is: tone deaf at best, overtly racist at worst."

Jeff Johnson, a former activist turned Black Entertainment Television host, said provocative cartoons are good, but that "none of this is appropriate on any level."

"The Post ultimately has to answer ... [for] a specific reference to the president of the United States to violence and to his connection to an animal likeness," Johnson said.

In California, civil rights leader Earl Ofari Hutchinson called on the Post to apologize.

"In times past, that depiction of African-Americans has been vigorously condemned as racially offensive," Hutchinson said in a statement issued from his Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable. "The cartoon also subtly condones violence. We call on the Post management to issue an immediate apology and a statement that racial insults will not be tolerated by Post writers and cartoonists."
 
I think enough of you know I believe 'race' is at the top of list of problems we still have in this country.

And I don't find A G Holders remarks yesterday to be, excessive?


However, I have been hearing about this cartoon for some time now.

And now that I have seen it, I don't think it is a big deal.
( I expected there would be some indication that the chimp was Obama, it is not there.)

That bill was written by Congress, with input form several sources, if anything this cartoon suggest to me that bill is a piece of crap that could of written by a chimp.

And there is also, the tie-in of the recent tragedy of the chimp that had to be destroyed by Police because it viciously attacked a person.


And in a way, I don't fault Sharpton's reaction, with his life experience.
 
And now that I have seen it, I don't think it is a big deal.
( I expected there would be some indication that the chimp was Obama, it is not there.)

That bill was written by Congress, with input form several sources, if anything this cartoon suggest to me that bill is a piece of crap that could of written by a chimp.

I agree with you on this one. However, I can see how the knee-jerk reaction would be toward the other reaction.
 
If the editors of the Post did not think people would react this way then they are too out of touch with the public to write a newspaper. They knew exactly what they were doing and how people would react, regardless of what the cartoon was actually implying.
 
It would be a horrible cartoon even if it wasn't blatantly racist (which I believe it is). Since when is the sight of a bleeding, dying animal supposed to be funny?
 
I suppose that if I saw this cartoon without having first read anything about it, my assumption would be that it alluded to the "monkeys at typewriters could've produced this garbage" idea. On the whole it's a poor and very heavy-handed 'statement,' particularly given the eyebrow-raising implied depiction of the stimulus writer(s)' violent death; normally you'd expect the visual references to be much more blatant when something that shocking is implied. That makes it more likely for readers to make the associative leap that the chimp represents Obama.
 
Last edited:
However, I have been hearing about this cartoon for some time now.

And now that I have seen it, I don't think it is a big deal.
( I expected there would be some indication that the chimp was Obama, it is not there.)

That bill was written by Congress, with input form several sources, if anything this cartoon suggest to me that bill is a piece of crap that could of written by a chimp.

And there is also, the tie-in of the recent tragedy of the chimp that had to be destroyed by Police because it viciously attacked a person.


And in a way, I don't fault Sharpton's reaction, with his life experience.

I agree. I think, maybe, the Post assumed too much of its readers with this one. And it's why I lament the dumbing down of everything, mainly because you have to these days to avoid misinterpretations and knee-jerk reactions like this.
 
I don't know if they just weren't thinking or if they knew exactly what they were doing-but I would think that a good general rule would be to never use a monkey in anything associated with President Obama:|

Referring to Bush as a chimp just isn't the same thing, for obvious reasons

We went through all of those issues during the campaign-with people who made Curious George t-shirts to represent him and other, let's just say, racially insensitive--->downright racist things.

This is what the Post said about it today

Wednesday's Page Six cartoon - caricaturing Monday's police shooting of a chimpanzee in Connecticut - has created considerable controversy.

It shows two police officers standing over the chimp's body: "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill," one officer says.

It was meant to mock an ineptly written federal stimulus bill.

Period.

But it has been taken as something else - as a depiction of President Obama, as a thinly veiled expression of racism.

This most certainly was not its intent; to those who were offended by the image, we apologize.

However, there are some in the media and in public life who have had differences with The Post in the past - and they see the incident as an opportunity for payback.

To them, no apology is due.

Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon - even as the opportunists seek to make it something else.
 
Apparently he's also known for some of his cartoons about homosexuality and gay rights

Loathsome: Ten Cartoons from Sean Delonas

custom_1234980228711_delonas4.jpg

Lovely. Well, I still don't see the Obama connection to the current cartoon we're critiquing here (especially since he has an affinity to label the people he's lampooning, and there's no label here), but I can certainly see more of why Al Sharpton and others are sensitive here. The cartoonist and the Post obviously have a bad track record.
 
Apparently he's also known for some of his cartoons about homosexuality and gay rights

Loathsome: Ten Cartoons from Sean Delonas

custom_1234980228711_delonas4.jpg

When I see that cartoon

I think it is a swipe at anti-gay people.

Because, it is only stupid people that make the argument

"If gay people can marry.

Then people will start marrying sheep, dead people, furniture, or whatever they want to call their significant other."
 
When I see that cartoon

I think it is a swipe at anti-gay people.

Because, it is only stupid people that make the argument

"If gay people can marry.

Then people will start marrying sheep, dead people, furniture, or whatever they want to call their significant other."


You need to click on the link and look at the rest of his work.
 
No one thinks Obama himself sat down at his iMac and wrote the stimulus bill. It was a knock on everyone involved, mostly COngress.

And further, I would submit that the cartoon isn't racist - but I can't say the same thing about the people who saw a chimpanzee and immediately thought "OBAMA!"
 
You need to click on the link and look at the rest of his work.

did you see the rest of his work?

or just a selected 10 out of perhaps hundreds or even thousands ?

I based my original statements on that one cartoon

and my last on that selected cartoon.
 
This cartoon guy is way out of his league...

Poll: Obama More Popular Than Jesus, Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr. - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

John Lennon once claimed the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. Now President Obama has evidence that he's more popular than both.

Obama topped a new Harris interactive poll that asked 2,634 Americans who they admire enough to call a hero.

Jesus came in second on a list that includes God, Mahtma Gandhi and George Washington.
 
Come on guys. It's pretty obvious that this guy hates African Americans and thinks black people are chimpanzees. It's the simplest answer! It couldn't have just been a stupid little cartoon with no racist intent. I mean seriously, if you saw a chimp you'd immediately think of a black guy too, right?
 
Al Sharpton is concerned he won't have anything to complain about anymore since white people voted for Obama! This is ridiculous and I see No racist overtones in this cartoon at all. Keep perpetuating your racist fear mongering Al, but I'm not buying!!:|
 
C'mon now, I get that people don't like Sharpton, but to suggest that people viewing the comic are jumping to racist conclusions is a bit absurd. Reminds me a bit of the events leading up to the schoolyard fight in Jena, when nooses hung in a tree were "a harmless prank" and anyone seeing it as racist was making assumptions etc etc. It's possible that the intent wasn't racist; you could make a case that the comic was an attempt at humor that showed poor judgement. But looking at it as racist isn't in any way a reach IMO.
 
Back
Top Bottom