Outrage from New Hampshire! (Sickening! Bush Crashing into WTC)

PoliticsNY.com ^ | 2/8/2002

[toupsie]

Outrage from New Hampshire!

Our friends at sister site PoliticsNH.com brought this offensive political cartoon to our attention. It was drawn by Mike Mariand and printed in today's Concord Monitor.

We don't have a problem with those who criticize President George W. Bush. In fact, we've taken a few shots at the Commander-in-Chief ourselves, when we thought he deserved rebuke. But to use the horrific September 11th terrorist attack on the World Trade Center that killed almost 3,000 innocent civilians to make a political point about the president's budget is disgusting. If Mariand were drawing cartoons in 1941, would he have drawn President Franklin Roosevelt piloting one of the Japanese fighter planes that participated in the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor to convey his opinion on an issue of the day?

If you would like to tell the folks at the Concord Monitor what you think about their political cartoon, we urge you to e-mail Mark Travis, the editorial page editor at mtravis@cmonitor.com. (2/8)

[NewHampshireDuo]

Which paper is the Concord Monitor attempting to merger with?

[anniegetyourgun]

Thanks for the ping AP - you're right - it really is low.

[MeekOneGOP]

Outrage from New Hampshire! (Sickening! Bush Crashing into WTC)

Atrocious! E-mail provided in the above post, fyi. . .

---

Thanks for the ping TGYC & Sabertooth!
(((PING))))))
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my ping list!. . .don't be shy.

[Brian Allen]

What a bunch of despicible idiots.

The "editors" let this get by?

The "editors" ARE the "bunch of despicible idiots!"

Liberalism is a mental illness!

[independentgrrl]

Here's the email I just fired off. I am livid!

Mr. Travis,

Your decision to print this cartoon is repulsive in the extreme. Your support for the idiot who drew this cartoon shows your insensitivity to the victims of the 9-11 disaster as well as their families and the nation at large. My cousin and his family (including their toddler) were passengers on Flight 93. I saw the news footage of their plane crashing into one of the towers. It was heartrending to see the planes carrying passengers crash into the buildings. I still have nightmares about that awful day. How you found humor in this piece of trash is beyond me. You, sir, are repugnant and contemptible. I am writing your advertisers of your tastelessness. Hopefully, they will pull their ads from your disgraceful publication.

[archy]

And just for fun, I also e.mailed the White House Press Office and asked for a statement.

-archy-/-

*****

Good work!

193 posted on 2/8/02 2:32 PM Pacific by metesky

***** *****

To: archy

And just for fun, I also e.mailed the White House Press Office and asked for a statement.

archy, You Rock!!!

194 posted on 2/8/02 2:34 PM Pacific by Inspectorette

To: archy

Wow, you are good! :)

195 posted on 2/8/02 2:34 PM Pacific by Snowy

To: archy

archy: You are a man with a plan. Thanks! Someone should tell that cartoonist -and probably has by now - to act his age, not his IQ.

Yeah, yeah. Thanks and all that. But numbers count, so keep slamming the Concord rag, and offer your complaints to other outlets in your own areas, as well as any toll-free forum where you can spread the word.

And soon, we'll also have a toll-free number for reporting such activities. That too should be an interesting one to FReep and spam.

-archy-/-

[Ditto]

Someone should tell that cartoonist -and probably has by now - to act his age, not his IQ.

I'd have to guess that they are probably about the same.

What in the hell could this guy have been thinking?

Even if he hates Bush with a passion, which is his right, that cartoon is tasteless beyond description. It would be equally tasteless if it were done to a Democrat.

Only a moron would open himself up for the kind of abuse he is going to get.

[The Mayor]

Thanks for the ping, I will craft an email and send it along ASAP!

[Republican Wildcat]

Thanks for the ping.

Time to get the address books going with this, as well as sending this off to other media outlets. Everyone be sure to e-mail this to local radio talk show hosts as well.

[nicmarlo]

bump for later; pretty disgusting, I'd say.

[MeekOneGOP]

Thanks for posting this here! I am appalled over that. Here is the e-mail they got from me:

This is the MOST disgusting and atrocious thing I think I have seen in my life.

You need to print a retraction and an Apology to President Bush and the
American people. DAMN YOU! !

I would like a reply also.

Richard Meek
Rowlett, Texas

http://www.politicsny.com/images/gbcartoonsmall.jpg

---

I included the picture so there would be NO doubt what I was talking about! !

[grannie9]

Hi Habs.. This is one of the newspapers that was always against the Manchester Union..which is real Conservative newspaper... Other than that, I know nothing about them..

Oh..excuse me.. other than they should be shamed right out of the City...and State...

[okiedust]

Ok Meek, here's the one I sent. sir: The cartoon in today's paper showing the president flying a plane into two towers labeled "Social" and "Security" was, 1. Beyond tasteless 2. Intellectually vapid 3. Cruel and hateful 4. All of the above I pick response number four, a tribute to a world view so self satisfied, it cannot relate to anything beyond its own parochial ideas. That is how these things get drawn, and why an editor allows them to be printed. I, of course let them know my name and address, so they know that at least in Dallas some folks keep up with the rest of the world, unlike the good folks at the newspaper. They hate it when we "hicks" tell them they don't understand the world. He, he.

regards

[MinuteGal]

I used the link provided by "in the Arena" in post #161. Thanks, Arena, this was most valuable.

I used this link because it hits the advertisers AND the editor in one shot.

I won't replicate my email as so many of you think I'm such a nice little girl, lol.

Leni

[Captain Shady]

Doesn't even look like President Bush .Our President has better hair.

[MinuteGal]

Oops, got that old "Mailer Daemon" back from the link I got on reply #161. Well, back to the drawing board. I simply HAVE to cast my pearls of wisdom before the swine.

Leni

[LoneGOPinCT]

Emails have been sent to the paper and many of the advertisers. What a dispicable display. Anyone who has lost a friend or family member, of which I am one, as well as those who lost their lives received a slap in the face from that a$$hole. I'm used to the Bush-bashing in the press, but that is stepping over the line of common decency.

[counterrevolutionary]

Why we shouldn't have run Mike Marland's cartoon

A whiny, self-justifying column from the paper's editor. I still don't think he quite gets it.

[BJClinton]

Way to go FReepers! They're already apologizing.

From their site:

Why we shouldn't have run Mike Marland's cartoon (The following is Mike Pride's column for the Sunday Monitor 2/10/02.)
By MIKE PRIDE
Concord Monitor Editor

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Judgment is at the heart of my job as editor of the Monitor, and because judgment is subjective, it can be wrong as well as right. The decision to run Mike Marland's Friday editorial cartoon was mine alone, and it was a mistake.

The cartoon depicted a caricature of George Bush flying a toy plane toward the World Trade Center. Marland had written "Social" on one tower and "Security" on the other.

Marland is a free-lancer. He's a terrific cartoonist, and we've been lucky to have him on the Monitor's editorial pages for nearly 20 years. Perhaps some readers remember that in the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11 his cartoons captured American grief, anger and resolve. We've reprinted one of them with this column.

This Mike Marland Cartoon ran in the Monitor on 9/12/2001 One reason Marland has been so good is that we allow him free expression. A cartoonist needs to be able to do two things, to draw and to think. The views Marland expresses often agree with the Monitor's editorial positions, but not always. They are his views, not ours. We have declined to run a cartoon or two over the years because we found them tasteless, but this has been a rare occurrence.

I first saw the Bush cartoon Thursday night on a proof of the next day's editorial page. I knew instantly it would be controversial, meaning I knew there would be a public outcry if we ran it.

That alone is not reason enough to pull an editorial cartoon. An editorial cartoonist's function in life is to provoke. Whenever I see a cartoon that I think might be too provocative, I ask myself whether the reaction I am experiencing is an impulse to edit or an impulse to censor. If it is the latter, I err on the side of publishing and resolve to take the heat if there is any.

That was my thought pattern with Marland's Bush cartoon. I thought that rejecting the cartoon would be censorship. The attack on the trade towers was a singular, devastating event, but my own reaction to the cartoon was not visceral. Rather, I read it as I thought Marland had intended it: as strong criticism of the threat that Bush's budget poses to Social Security.

On Friday, after the cartoon ran, I spoke with Marland to tell him I was writing this column. One idea behind the cartoon, he said, was that the terrorist attack had had a direct bearing on Bush's budget and the fate of Social Security. But my decision to run the cartoon assumed that for others, as for myself, enough time had passed for the wounds of Sept. 11 to heal and for the terrorist attacks to take their place in the long history of political satire. Sometimes artists, including political cartoonists, get there before the rest of us. I thought this might be such a time. In retrospect, the decision was wrong for three interrelated reasons.

First, I should have foreseen that most readers' reaction to the cartoon would have nothing to do with Bush and Social Security. That was Marland's intended subject, and since there was nothing subtle about his message on the issue, there was no question readers would understand it. But their principal response would be to the use of the tower tragedy in a cartoon.

That was the second reason I should have spiked the cartoon: The spot where the towers stood is sacred territory. Yes, the country has had time to pass through all the stages of grief, but the World Trade Center site remains a symbol of national sorrow. Probably that will be true long after the events of Sept. 11 have passed from human memory.

Finally, running the cartoon was a mistake because we live in the world of the Internet. A local editor no longer makes decisions in a vacuum. Residents of Central New Hampshire took the events of Sept. 11 and their aftermath personally, but personal connections to those events were few. Had I been an editor in New York City, there is no way I would have even considered publishing this cartoon.

Well, these days, news travels fast. Even though Marland's cartoon was copyrighted, it was on the Internet by midday Friday. Monitor editors' e-mail queues and voice mails were soon filled with messages from New York and elsewhere expressing disgust and anger over the cartoon.

When we decided to run the cartoon, I did not even consider this possibility. I should have, and that alone should have kept me from running it.

I'm sorry we ran it. Marland intended it to provoke, not offend. Generally I try to see things not just through my own eyes but also through the eyes of readers. I wish I had been wise enough to do that in this case.

Friday, February 8, 2002

[Hacksaw]

How many times have we seen someone or some group on the left completely and erroneously overstate their case by comparing certain conservative politicians to Hitler or the Nazis? Or compare some conservative plan or ideology to slavery?

Ahhh... It's not only the left who does that...