I like what Edward Gilbreath has to say about it:
"The debate over whether the cartoon was just boneheaded insensitivity or blatant racism is something that will continue as long as there’s such a thing as mono cultural editorial teams (wasn’t there anyone in that NY Post newsroom to raise a caution flag?) and monophonic civil rights activists (Al Sharpton leads the charge again). But as a journalist, one of the most interesting aspects of the controversy for me is the ethical questions it raises for the media and other communication leaders.I think the ability to voice one's disagreement with public officials is part of what makes the United States a great country. But we can do it in a civil manner without resorting to outdated and racist stereotypical images. Unfortunately, this is not the first time that this type of thing has happened with President Obama nor is it the first time a president has gotten compared to a simian (see at left). But because of the racial baggage that comes with it, I would hope that political junkies could think of something more original when they wish to disagree with the president. President Obama should not get treated with kid gloves because he's African American. But neither should his race be used a backhanded slight from those that still think black people belong in the back of the bus.
From my perspective, the question should be: Will we use these incidents to start constructive conversations about race, culture, and understanding (the kind I believe Attorney General Eric Holder was attempting to get at yesterday), or will we use them as justification for our hostility and as vehicles for our continued separation?"