Posted on 02/08/2002 9:43:02 AM PST by toupsie
regards
While This disgrace published in the paper is unacceptable. I would like to clarify that Jeffords is the Flip-Flop Senator from the State of Vermont, Not NH. Our "flip-flop" senator would go by the name of Smith, whom bailed out of the Republican party, only to jump back into it.
*note: I'll be voting for Senator Flip-Flop smith in the up-coming election.
Live Free or Die Trying
I agree - what I meant in my post is that I hope we are keeping our responses to the editor civil - so that he does not simply disregard the reaction. By all means let him know how you feel.
Don't misunderstand me. I have a nephew who's an artist and the polar opposite of this cartoonist.
I wasn't bashing artists, just the editor's attempt to hide behind "art."
Dear Sir or Madam:
Did you see today's cartoon in the Concord Monitor, which showed President George W. Bush crashing a plane into the WTC?
Do you realize how offensive this is, by showing no respect for the dead in order to score a political point?
Are you sure you want to give this paper your advertising dollars?
If they can put things of such poor taste in their newspaper, what does it make your company look like to potential customers?
Can you spell C.H.U.M.P.??
Sir:
My husband and I read with great interest your "apology" for the scurrilous, hate-filled political cartoon that you published.
Your initial poor judgment is only superseded by your current arrogance and Mr. Marland's mean-spiritedness - this was not an apology to anyone. You are only "sorry" for your "mistake" because of the national outrage that was sparked by your tastelessness. I'm sure you are aware by now that you are the object of ridicule and disgust throughout the nation.
You didn't even have the decency in your non-apology to refer to President Bush by his title - you called him "George Bush" , then merely "Bush". You never once referred to him as President Bush. Your choice of terminology speaks volumes.
I live in California, so I have no idea whether or not people actually pay for your fishwrap birdcage-liner, or if people can just pick it up as a freebie outside supermarkets. However your screed is distributed, it's a waste of time, energy, and effort.
regards
Dude, your writing's priceless!
So, for the editor of that nasty rag: half-assed apology not accepted, old stick. As far as I'm concerned, your newspaper and its editors, and its freelance cartoonist, can STILL go to hell.
Re: Why we shouldn't have run Mike Marland's cartoon
Mr. Pride,
I am somewhat gratified by your light retraction of Mike Marland's incredibly offensive editorial cartoon. However, your continued support of Mr. Marland and his mindset of using the incredible atrocity of September 11, 2001 to misrepresent President Bush's budgetary policy, in my opinion, nullifies any and all effort spent on your part. You might respect his talent as an artist but his judgement needs to be seriously questioned. He might even be a personal friend of yours, but the publication of the cartoon represents gross editorial malpractice on your part. It is as offensive as printing a caricature of Aunt Jemima eating fried chicken and watermelon with a welfare check stuffed in her back pocket to represent Black History Month.
You make several errors in your retraction.
Though Mr. Marland's cartoon might be copyrighted, it does not prevent fair use by private citizens in the course of public debate. As a seasoned editor, you should know better. That is basic Journalism Law 3001 at the Manship School of Journalism at Louisiana State University -- a fortunate experience of mine in college. I happened to be one of the individuals that reproduced the image under fair use on the World Wide Web for debate over its content and not commercial gain. Feel free to engage me in legal action over this. I would welcome the occasion to take this to court and further promote your editorial common sense to a national audience as the case would no doubt become. Reply to me and I will send over the relevant contact information so we can legally engage in your perceived copyright infringement. However, I feel you will want to sweep this major editorial error as quickly under the proverbial carpet as possible -- as I am sure your publisher and advertisers who financially supported this travesty would.
As an editor of a private publication, you have no ability to censor. Censorship can only occur by the actions of a governmental body. Your decisions as an editor are not a function of censorship but of the natural editorial process. Everyday of your career as an editor, you make decisions as to what should and should not appear within the pages of the Concord Monitor. That should be a function of your experience and common sense. If you wished to have excluded Mike Marland's repugnant editorial cartoon, he would still be free to publish it in other publications without fear of governmental intervention. You give yourself undue flattery over this statement and your ability to prevent Mr. Marland's constitutionally protected ability to express himself. We all have the right to speak but not to be heard.
You claim at some point in the future that the September 11th atrocity will be legitimate fuel for editorial cartoonists. Do you think the sunken grave of the U.S. Arizona is legitimate editorial fuel after 60 years? Would editorial common sense allow you to publish a Mike Marland editorial cartoon that desecrated the grave of the brave men that perished from the unprovoked assault of the Japanese on December 7, 1941? I doubt it would nor do I think in the future the World Trade Center will be legitimate fodder for cantankerous editorial cartoonists. However, your editorial decision in publishing the Mike Marland cartoon has already crossed that line. A decision, I feel, you will carry as a heavy burden the rest of your career.
The correct response by you to this editorial error should have been a full apology without reservations or explanation. To further qualify your decision in the editorial process does nothing but excuse the action as if it was the mistake of spilling milk on a clean table. I would suggest that Concord Monitor take the advertising revenue from the Friday edition and pledge it to the thousands upon thousands of my grieving neighbors through one of the various charities seeking to meet their needs.
Sincerely yours,
Robert M. Toups, Jr.
(personal address information deleted for WWW publication)
I ALSO gave my full name and New Hampshire address.
Thinking of going down to their headquarters tomorrow and burning Mike Marland in effigy!
BTW, did you notice the disgusting physical condition of that government school cell that you posted in #136 ?
D@mn&d fire hazard.
Don't you get it folks, 'free speech' only belongs to our country's enemies. When you express outrage at the depraved ravings of idiots like this NH newspaper, Demidog calls us 'the real terrorists'. It looks like he is ready to put us all against a wall, and shoot us, for foolishly thinking that we have the right to freedom of speech.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.