Think about it.

But what the New York Post seemed to lack was good editing.

The current events from which the cartoon got its inspiration, if you don't already know, were last week's chimpanzee attack and the more evident, Obama's stimulus plan. 

Now, obviously, editorial cartoons will and often do anger at least a small group of people, and I believe that the cartoon was drawn to do so. But to allow a cartoon like this to be published is entirely different.

As an editor, one's job is to not only fix style or grammar errors, but it is to also make absolutely sure that the content to be published is politically correct.

Bottom line, the cartoon has a racial undertone that does not sit well. Racist or not, the evidence is quite clear.

Apparently, as the NY Post claims, the cartoon was ONLY drawn to point out a flaw with the stimulus plan. It also claimed that sometimes "a cartoon is just a cartoon." Click here to read the apology.

Well, maybe to the cartoonist, but think about the millions of people who will see it - people from all types of racial and economic backgrounds. It's not hard at all to connect the dots in this cartoon, whether one wants to or not.

Already, a strong stigma has surrounded the latest presidency. Many people have been sensitive to our nation's first African-American president. To personify any governmental issue with any racial image is just asking for it. People are still sensitive. Journalists, cartoonists, photojournalists and editors must keep that it mind at all times.

I definitely agree with Keith Woods in saying that just because the cartoonist's intent wasn't to offend people, does not mean that it didn't.

Next time, please, let's edit the content better.