About the recent editorial cartoon on the subject of “race attack.” I question The Bulletin’s taste and judgment in publicizing this cartoon. Was the intent to minimize the racial incidents that occurred in our nation’s capitol over passage of the health care bill? Was the intent to ridicule those subjected to racial incidents? Was the intent to imply that racism is somehow OK or fashionable again?

I wonder which of the following The Bulletin would condone: a sign in a recent D.C. protest that read “There’s an African lion in the Washington zoo and a lyin’ African in the White House” or a black congressman being spit on or another black congressman being called a racial epithet (the latter two incidents related to the House debate on health care reform). Is The Bulletin suggesting that these types of behaviors are acceptable? Is your intent to suggest they should be overlooked or tolerated?

The correlation in your cartoon between “race attack” and a political statement (“we’re targeting you in the November race”) is belittling and disingenuous given the real incidents that have occurred.

I find the implications in your cartoon disheartening, to say the least. You took a serious and disturbing trend in U.S. politics and turned it into a snide jab at the Democrats. What’s next: a call from The Bulletin to return to the Reconstruction era? For shame! You owe your readership an apology. You also owe us better coverage on national news.

Beth Hoover

Bend