Maybe it is because liberals are constantly thinking about race.

They had the same problem with teabags, if I recall…

This page alone should be splashed everywhere until the race-baiting hypocrites go away. Geez but they make me sick.

large percentage of the questions awaiting me are about an “Editor’s Note” that appeared on page A2 of The Washington Post on Sunday. This was how it read:

“The headline, illustration, and text of ‘Below the Beltway,’ a column in The Washington Post Magazine today, may cause offense to readers. The magazine was printed before a widely publicized incident last week in which a chimpanzee attacked and badly mauled a woman in Stamford, Conn. In addition, the image and text inadvertently may conjure racial stereotypes that The Post does not countenance. We regret the lapse.”

The reference was to my column in that day’s Magazine, about a recent scientific study involving monkeys and the human sexual response. Here is the column.

The Post’s editor’s note has preemptively taken a bit of a thrashing on Web, from the left and right, from citizen bloggers, from wackjob, tooth-gnashing “commenters,” as well as from certified actual journalists with (401)k plans. I don’t need or want to add to the clamor, and, in any respect, I am hardly an unbiased observer. But the thing is about me, so I will say this:

I think the editor’s note was a mistake, but a well-intentioned one. I particularly understand the first part, wishing to assure readers that the timing of the subject matter was coincidental, and that we were not somehow making a tasteless reference to the chimpanzee attack in Connecticut. The remainder of the statement I feel was issued with a dismaying overabundance of caution that — to quote the editor’s note itself — may “inadvertently conjure racial stereotypes The Post does not countenance.”

I fear that the conjuring of racial stereotype was entirely the work of the apologizer, here. I don’t think that any reasonable reading of this column, or the headline, or the illustration, would find any racial implications at all, nor did I intend any. I think the best evidence of this is empirical.

If I write a column that says cats are stupid, by noon on Saturday I will have received 30 e-mails telling me what a jerk I am. Readers are not bashful about voicing their objections, and the objections generally come straight to me, right away, on the day most people first open the Magazine.

On Saturday, there were no e-mails complaining about this column or the art. Then, on Sunday morning, readers found that editor’s note, which essentially INVITED people to interpret the column as bigotry. That led to an outpouring of … no letters.

Before publication, the column had been read and approved by many editors, two of whom are black. On the week before it was published, during the height of the news about the chimpanzee attack, the column (though not the illustration) was sent to editors at the 20-odd newspapers around the country that buy it through syndication. None of those editors complained or saw the need to apologize to their readers.

So, in short, I believe The Post erred here, but I think the impulse behind the decision was fine: Too often, newspapers reflexively stand stony silent behind something they have done, even when it becomes manifest that what they have done was blameworthy. In this case, however, there was simply nothing to apologize for, so, in the eyes of some, the apology might seem craven.

In short, yes, I believe it was a misfire. I have misfired many times myself. Stuff happens. I’m not angry.

If you are within the reach of these pixels and feel I’m wrong about this — if you found that the column or the illustration had racial implications — please speak up. I’d like to hear from you, particularly if you are black.

…

Total darkness on the coverage of Muslim woman beheading on American soil last week!

No funny comedy skits on Blacks / Muslims on SNL or other comedy venues…!

What does it mean?

That liberals are fearful too.

Conservative readers are dropping the subscriptions to these lefty rags.

Now the conservative business owners need to stop giving their advertisement Dollars to these lefties too.

Strike the fear into these liberal left-wing media.

Fairness doctrine will automatically follow.

How about implied sexual abuse of animals?

How about the idea that a white brunette will sleep with anything of the opposite sex?

How about the idea that men with pot bellies and glasses get rejected?

See, you can read into this all you want, and Sharpton is just following his calling of grievance, and sniveling minorities and guilty whites are more than willing to open their arms up to do that.

Why doesn’t someone make a cartoon of that?