[calvin sun]

You're right. Maybe I'm being too cynical. My reaction to the reference to the "copyrighted cartoon" was that he was trying to cover himself, or put the blame on those who distributed the cartoon. My comment referred to the issue that FR is having with the Washington Post and the LA Times: namely, that the "fair use" doctrine allows copyrighted material to be reproduced for the purpose of discussion.

[Lancey Howard]

My reaction to the reference to the "copyrighted cartoon" was that he was trying to cover himself,

Follow your instincts - - they are usually right. This guy Pride, by referring to "copyrighted cartoon" was making it clear that it was somebody else's cartoon. The comment reminded me of how Clinton, following the Waco tragedy, took full responsibility by saying he stood behind Janet Reno's decision to burn the place down. If it walks like a weasel, talks like a weasel....

[snopercod]

He could have been making a pitch for the National Endowment for the Arts.

Sure, we knew that displaying a crucifix in a jar of piss was offensive and tasteless, but it's not our job to censor, but to provoke.

[LS]

I agree with Calvin: his insertion of the phrase about the Internet essentially says, "Well, if our ignorant local yokels were the only ones who had seen this, we wouldn't be in trouble. But danged if that Internet didn't show everyone what we were up to."

It is reasoned, but the apology should have been, "Our artist was wrong to draw such a stupid depiction equating the mass murder of 3,000 people with slightly LOWER INCREASES in social security, and I was a fool or a coward for not pulling it. In either case, both HE AND I were completely wrong."