Wow! I hope you didn't hurt you back reaching that far. Especially given the caption: "They'll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill." That doesn't say anything about killing the bill. I'll say it slowly this time. Per...cep...tion: Obama... =.... Stimulus...

carp, you don't have to be racist for the cartoon to none-the-less have a racist subtext. Only the author and/or publisher have to be racist.

I'm gonna say this again, because I think it's a very important distinction that you're not making. Because you are not racist or don't see the the innuendo does not remove the poorly masked message. Glad you're not racist. Never thought you were. Wish I could say the same for the cartoonist or the publisher.

Obama didn't write the package , what hes got the time to type out 1,100 pages

He and the administration had a whole lot of input to it, though.

You keep missing the key point here, carp: The larger perception is that Obama wrote the bill. And even though he didn't actually write it, he was a key driver, having significant input. It's the visceral response that the cartoon elicits. And that's why it's racist — at least on the surface. And if you have to start rationalizing and pulling obtuse connections out of your butt, you're already to late.

You are correct;
In fact that was the first thing all them TV talking heads pointed out "Obama did not write it" was his ideas and tons of input from others

Like I said only a racist or people who want to live in the past will make that connection = Sharpton created the larger perception

Archive this post. Show it to your great grandchildren because what I'm about to say is truly a once in 10 lifetimes event:

I agree with Sharpton on this one!

Maybe KO will list me in his next Best or Worst Persons segment.

LOL

I don't agree with Sharpton at ALL . in fact he created a bigger mess . What we should be talking about is freedom of speech -vs- Sharpton perception of racism

I will agree with Sharpton on that Imus radio head incident , now that was blatant

I remember way back in elementary school, maybe 4th or 5th grade, there was one teacher who had class lessons on reading a newspaper. Every day we'd sit at our desk and the teacher would go through page by page and enlighten the students on how to read a paper - beyond the headline news, but discussion and understanding of what was on the business pages (how to read the stock listings and what they meant), sports pages (how to read and understand baseball scores and team standings) or "letter to the editor" and op-eds. Sometimes we'd discuss the humor in one or two particular comic strips, but the highlight each lesson was interpretation of the daily editorial cartoon ... because those messages were always somewhat tricky. As young students it was always a lively debate to make sense of that cartoon, how to relate the visual metaphors to a current news event, how to understand how those metaphors were being used to convey a new political or emotional message or idea.

I credit that teacher for inspiring me to begin reading newspapers at a very early age and to make it part of my everyday routine to this day.

If carp is unable to connect the visual metaphor of the one tragic event and understand the new meaning given to it by the content of the cartoon's written word ... well, that's too bad. I think a classroom of bright 5th graders could have a more insightful interpretation of the cartoon's message than what I've read here.

<tongue>