Daily Kos has been in a frenzy over the past 24 hours over the New York Post cartoon scandal. The assumption that I've often heard made is that first of all, the cartoon referenced Obama, and secondly it "encouraged" assassination. I don't think that either of those assumptions are truly defensible in light of the facts. In any case, The New York Post can't truly be guilty of inciting racism and violence. I'll apologize right now for the brevity of this diary- I'm just laying out a couple of facts that I think are fairly self-explanatory.
The first assumption (that the cartoon referenced Obama) is comparatively easy to disprove. I'm attaching the cartoon in case my readers aren't familiar with it. For those who object, I'll refer you to Eric Holder- shouldn't we be having frank discussions about this?
The caption very clearly states that "they'll have to find somebody else to write the next stimulus bill". If this caption were to reference Obama, it wouldn't make a whit of sense- President Obama didn't write the stimulus bill. In fact, it was written by David R. Obey (D-WI) and other Democratic House leaders. I quote the New York Times Jan. 26, 2009 article on Mr. Obey:
it was Mr. Obey, the third-most-senior member of the House, who, in large measure, shaped the bill, in concert with other House Democratic leaders.
David R. Obey is a white male- the cartoon can hardly be construed as racist in that context. Errant conclusions are understandable. That's why I'm writing this diary.
Secondly, I wish to debunk the assumption that the cartoon encouraged regicide/tyrannicide or whatever- there's no --cide to describe the murder of a democratically elected representative. Perhaps "assassination" is the most cogent term. The fact of the matter is that the cartoon referenced a popular and well-known news item that happened at some point in the past. It did not encourage/condone any future action. Again, an understandable conclusion, but the timeline of events is very important. By the same method of analysis, a cartoon lampooning a proponent of/a representative of a proponent of any of Mr. Obama's policies could be considered harassment of our President. I don't think that's a good precedent to set. And remember- comics are supposed to be humorous!
Once again, I apologize for the brevity of this diary but there's not much more to say without resorting to pure bloviating. Thanks for reading!