"...and there it is." (Winnie the Pooh)

The reaction to Disney's announcement of a new Winnie the Pooh cartoon without Christopher Robin, who will be replaced by an adorable little red-headed girl, has been universally negative. Bloggers like Kevin D. Melrose, John Scalzi (from whom I ripped off the milk carton pic), and Neil Gaiman all think the "creative" decision is dumb, dumb, dumb. Or, as Gaiman's perky 6-year-old replacement might say, "Bitchcakes."

"We got raised eyebrows even in-house at first," USA Today quotes a Disney Channel staffer regarding the (oh, let's abandon any pretense of objectivity) chuckleheaded switch*, "but the feeling was these timeless characters really needed a breath of fresh air that only the introduction of someone new could provide." At least that statement models the semblance of a human personality, unlike the promise made by another company spokesperson to the Times of London: "The young character will elicit physical, cognitive and emotional responses from the viewing audience and will also address them directly." Ironically, the Times adds, the one person who might not mind the swap-out would be Christopher Robin Milne, whose widow reports that he "hated the character."

*No, really, this has to be the dumbest decision in children's programming since the Kids WB makeover of the Looney Tunes characters: