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)

[PhilDragoo]

Right, I saw that on Fox News Sunday this morning.

Tony Snow showed the cartoon.

He reads his email.

[TatieBug]

Sent an Email reminding this jerk that there are millions of Americans with compasion and wished him good luck in his compassion theropy...not to worry...he'll get punished in NH!

[Ben Bolt]

You nailed it Brian . the cartoon is actually there lighter side . They hate us and what we stand for , period . They will do literally anything to take a shot at inching closer to there goals . excellent observation you made . the left never sleeps .

[Republican Wildcat]

bump

[Interesting Times]

First, although I find the artist's opinion to be infantile, banal and pig-headed reactionary bile, his right to have it printed by a willing editor must remain beyond dispute if we as Americans truly value the First Amendment.

True, but irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Nobody is suggesting that the government should drag this guy or his editor away in chains. And we have every right to express our own opinions about the sick hacks who created and published this.

The First Amendment doesn't protect them against criticism.

[in the Arena]

I just received this from one of the Concord Monitors advertisers.

If anyone is in the Concord area please support this business.

Please send Darrell at the Music Barn a note thanking him for his support.

From: DarrellMus@aol.com

Subject: Re: Concord Monitor Political Cartoon
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 11:22:23 EST

Having found the recent ad in the Concord Monitor in such poor taste, it has been our decision to cease all advertising in this newspaper until an apology is forthcoming.

Thank you for your concern.

K.C. Darrell
Darrell's Music Hall

[MinuteGal]

I received the email from Mr. Darrell, also.

I congratulated him to the heights for his decision to withold advertising till the paper issues an apology.

I also took the opportunity to voice my hope he didn't consider the self-serving "apology" issued by the editor to be legitimate. I parsed a few phrases of the phony "mea culpa" for Mr. Darrell's benefit.

But I did it all gently and intellectually in good freeper fashion and ended my email with a salute to his astuteness.

Leni

[BlueLancer]

"The Marxist interpretation is that Robin Hood's band of merry men stole from the rich to give to the poor. The conservative interpretation is that Robin Hood was about resisting an arrogant state that monopolized the land, overtaxed its populace."

I always thought that the story was about a bunch of guys who got to wear cool looking green tights, shoot bows and arrows at bad guys, live out in the woods, and generally get the inside track with all of the babes.

Sheesh ... the story must be a little bit deeper than I thought.

[Nix 2]

Not a very popular cartoon, was it? I'm jealous mine didn't get in there, but the sentiments were the same. Another one for the good guys. Are they going to smack this guy?

[diefree]

Mine wasn't there, but I got a reply from one of the advertisers who is going to hold his ads for a while.

[nicmarlo]

Fox news has a segment on this a.m. about that cartoon, and interviewed a couple people. All expressed disapproval......duh!

[metesky]

There are soom good articulate letters there, but after the editor's blame-shifting, Clintonian non-apology all I see ahead is status quo anti.

[vikingchick]

Thanks for the update!

[okiedust]

Well, well. I bet they have enough letters to publish a special section. Saw the Fox segment on this and they interviewed random folks at a grocery store in the town. Common comment was, "that's disgusting." Good.

regards

[sgaspar]

Geez ... I wonder how many letters they got. Too bad they didn't publish mine. I'm glad we got them to admit that the cartoon was wrong.

[cinciphil]

Thanks for the ping, mine was definitely unfit for publication.

[Timesink]

I notice that they only published the most wishy-washy of the hundreds of letters they received. They were all of the "Hey, I hate Bush too, but still..." or "Gee, uh, don't ya think this was a bit much?" variety. Even at this point, the Monitor is still going out of its way to cover up the fact that people were utterly outraged by this jackass's cartoon and the editor's mealy-mouthed non-apology apology.

This, my friends, is why so many newspapers are dying. They don't even have the guts (or is it common decency?) even just to say flat-out "We screwed up. It was completely inappropriate. We apologize unreservedly."

This is why Fox News Channel's ratings are exploding. Why the New York Post had the greatest circulation gains of any paper in the country by FAR last year. Why Rush Limbaugh is more popular than ever, after 12-13 years on the air. Why FR is one of the most active discussion sites on the Internet. We are winning, and they're shooting themselves in the foot.