Calling All Coulters



America has considered my call-out of my fellow columnist and the results are in: it's nearly unanimous!



Brad writes:

Rall v. Coulter. Preferably on the internet as I don't have cable. Someone (or thing...) needs to put her in her place, especially with her "Christmas Message" on her homepage. "To The People Of Islam: Just think: If we'd invaded your countries, killed your leaders and converted you to Christianity YOU'D ALL BE OPENING CHRISTMAS PRESENTS RIGHT ABOUT NOW! Merry Christmas" http://anncoulter.com/ Have a good new year Ted and I hope sometime in your life, you get to kick her ass (intellectually and publicly).

But Ann, we DID invade two Muslim countries and kill their leaders. We even sent missionaries to try to convert them to Christianity but alas, they keep getting killed. Yet: no Xmas presents! What's up with that? Besides, Muslims get Ramadan presents--assuming the U.S. hasn't reduced their countries to rubble in the name of liberating their oil--er, them.



America has spoken. How about it, Ann? We could make some cash and have fun at the same time! Have your people call my people. It should be easy, seeing as they're the same people. Unless you're afraid, of course.



Wendy's



Russ writes:

"my desire to see Wendy's become the nation's predominant fast food chain (the fact that McDonald's kicks Wendy's ass proves the intrinsic injustice of capitalism)" Bah, McDonald's and Wendy's both deserve scorn. Perhaps Wendy's more so. 91% of their political contributions go to the Republican party.

http://www.choosetheblue.com/mainFrame.php?backlevel=002..001Choose%20The%20

Blue.002Restaurants%20and%20Bars&prodcat=Fast+Food

I'm actually surprised to see you (apparently) advocating for any multinational corporate fast food chain. What is your take on patronizing big corporations that drive out local businesses? (Wal-Mart being an obvious prime "bad guy" example.) A couple years ago I decided I was sick of the homogenization of Anytown, USA spreading everywhere and I totally quit eating at big national chains and only patronize local restaurants. I thought it would be inconvenient or difficult to convince friends who were dining out with me, but it turned out to be quite easy.

See what happens when you toss off some flippant remark? Russ is right, of course. Hell, I read "Fast Food Nation" too. Obviously all multinational corporations are evil, and fast food joints especially so. They contribute to environmental degradation, cultural homogenization and they underpay their employees. But the point I was trying to make is this: when you're driving on the highways of this great land where there are only burger joints to provide sustinence, you'll find that Wendy's makes better burgers than any of the other major national chains. Far better. And yet they're ranked third or fourth in sales. It's like VHS's victory over Betamax--capitalism does not always choose the superior product, is not efficient, and is not the natural state of human affairs. (What is? Still working on that one.)

2005 Editor & Publisher Predictions Column



Prediction number eight in Joe Strupp's column reads:

8. Ann Coulter will drop her column after her syndicate, Universal Press, refuses to dump Ted Rall, "Doonesbury," and "Boondocks."

Hey, you never know. What I do know is that, along with my desire to see Wendy's become the nation's predominant fast food chain (the fact that McDonald's kicks Wendy's ass proves the intrinsic injustice of capitalism), one of my fondest wishes is to mix it up with Ms. Coulter on the political front. She bullies most of her wimpy liberal counterparts on TV by resorting to insults they're unwilling to return. God knows that that wouldn't be the case with me. Could that be why we've never crossed paths on the airwaves?



Which would you rather watch, HANNITY and colmes or RALL v. COULTER?

French Edition of TO AFGHANISTAN AND BACK



The French edition of TO AFGHANISTAN AND BACK is called PASSAGE AFGHAN. It just came out in France, where I'll be doing appearances next month in order to promote it. There have been several reviews, mostly positive, in the French press. One appeared recently in Le Point magazine, another in a publication called Benzine.



, first cartoonist featured in the new "Attitude" series, is interviewed in this week's Newsarama. Scroll down to find ordering information on Amazon for the new book, and please buy it--sales of this volume will help determine whether we'll be able to publish full-length compilations of cartoons by other cartoonists from the two-volume set.



Aircraft Carrier to Fight Tsunami



An anonymous FOR writes:

Kind of like the 1950's horror movies, where a man made monster of environmental symbolism is solved by greater military spending. But it isn't strange at all for Bush. Indonesia is a muslim country rich in oil. It's reflex by now. Maybe it is part of the larger oil seizure plan we're paying for?

Mark Fiore, do you read this blog?



"Liberal Racism"



One Republican talking point--the idea that liberals, rather than the conservatives who fought tooth and nail against desegregation and affirmative action, are the real racists--seems to have longer legs than usual. Even though it hasn't picked up any traction in the black community, the rightists equate criticizing self-hating Uncle Tom types like Condi Rice to racism. The latest entry in this genre appears in a column by one Jeff Jacoby in The Boston Globe. [NOTE: CORRECT LINK IS HERE NOW.]



Is it gauche to point out that blacks who provide cover for and work against the interests of other blacks are despicable? Perhaps. But it's true.



Read the column. My favorite assertion, besides the race stuff, is that liberals have a monopoly on "poisonous" dialogue. What about the Republicans who called Tom Daschle a traitor for opposing Bush's permawar policy? What about Ronald Reagan, who accepted the endorsement of the Ku Klux Klan when he accepted his party's nomination in 1980--in the same town where the four freedom riders were infamously murdered in 1964? What about the hordes of Republican pundits like Alan Keyes, who suggested that I should be shot and/or jailed for opposing Bush's ersatz war on terror? When it comes to hate speech, I--like all Dems--are mere pikers. Our problem isn't that we're too mean. Our problem is that we're not mean enough to people who have it coming.

The Militarization of Charity



Is it me, or does it seem strange that the United States is responding to the tsunami by sending warplanes, aircraft carriers and a strike group? If this keeps up, we'll go the way of Pakistan, where the military takes care of every government function from guarding borders to collecting garbage.

Attitude 3 Clarification



Please bear in mind that I'm NOT looking for mainstream political cartoonists for Attitude 3. Mainstream would include widely syndicated comic strips like Doonesbury and big daily paper cartoonists like Tom Toles. I'm a fan of both, but the Attitude series is devoted to bringing cartoonists toiling in relative obscurity to the larger audience they deserve. Again, please send suggestions and URLs to chet@rall.com for alternative/underground/up and coming social commentary and/or political cartoons. Extra points for online strips. You can check out the Attitude 1 and 2 listings in the Buy Stuff section of this website to see what kind of cartoonists made the cut for those anthologies.

Pictures on the Wall



Jon writes to ask:

In the Alberto Gonzales cartoon (12-23-04-C) it appears to me that the picture on the wall closest to

the door is blurred out. Have you been censored? Does the "C" designation mean censored? I'm I just paranoid? As for the content of that blurred frame it appears to be a pyramid of naked hooded detainees, but I might be

wrong. Inquiring minds want to know. If you cannot respond directly to me can you post something on your blog? I'm sure others have noticed. I can't be the only one.

Indeed Jon is not. The photos on Alberto Gonzales' wall are of Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. The one on the right shows prisoners' hands sticking out through holes in the wall. And no, the "C" doesn't mean censored. I do three syndicated cartoons a week. The date codes are for Thursday of each week; the A goes online Thursday, the B Saturday and the C Monday. (Though you can see them early by subscribing to the Ted Rall Subscription Service; email chet@rall.com if you have $10/year and an email account.)



Column Correction



Morris writes:

Whether it’s your editors or yourself who put this in your column, I just wanted to correct a minor error: Roosevelt’s mansion is in Hyde Park, along the Hudson River. New Hyde Park is a town on Long Island. (I realize this isn’t an earth-shaking matter!) On a more cynical, serious note: I would venture to suggest that all natural disaster head counts (e.g., the Asian tsunamis) have to be higher for Republicans, because they are obliged by their belief system to count the unborn fetuses. I’m surprised that they’re too stupid to ever make an issue of this.

Morris is, of course, correct. New Hyde Park is in Nassau County, Long Island. Hyde Park, FDR's home, is upstate along the Hudson River near Poughkeepsie. I'm still chuckling about the fetus thing.

Andy Singer on Newsarama



Andy Singer, first cartoonist featured in the new "Attitude" series, is interviewed in this week's Newsarama. Scroll down to find ordering information on Amazon for the new book, and please buy it--sales of this volume will help determine whether we'll be able to publish full-length compilations of cartoons by other cartoonists from the two-volume set.



Attitude 3 Shoutout



Do you know a great alternative political and/or social commentary cartoonist who hasn't appeared in ATTITUDE 1 or 2? If so please email me at chet@rall.com, ideally along with a URL for his or her website, for consideration in a possible ATTITUDE 3 collection. Please note: I am especially interested in ONLINE cartoons for this anthology.

Wish I'd Thunk Of It



In my cartoon satirizing those magnetic ribbons, I should have called the red, white and blue one "French reporter" instead of "generic." Damn.



And Merry Christmas to those of you who care about such things.

"Perceived," Indeed



The always astute Norman of A Sharp Stick fame responds to this morning's post about a pirate radio attempt to organize opposition to Bush's looming coronation:

I checked out the CNN article on the pirate station in DC. I loved the last para:

"A third group, www.ReDefeatBush.com, seeks to focus attention on perceived voting irregularities in the November election." "Perceived" irregularities? What a bunch of fucking wimps. When are they going to start reporting perceived bank robberies? I notice the WMDs in Iraq remain perceived, despite being reported as actual.

Salon.com Names ATTITUDE 2 One of Its Best of 2004



Salon, a website that should run my cartoons but doesn't, reviews ATTITUDE 2 today. Unfortunately, Salon's website has become a total nightmare to navigate thanks to a new system that forces you to watch ads before you get to the good stuff. So I'm posting the relevant section in its entirety:

Cartoonist/columnist Ted Rall has spent the last several years calling bullshit on the power brokers that have been running this country into the ground. This second anthology of up-and-coming or established alternative cartoonists is Rall's love letter to the genre that has brought him to prominence.

"For years, I've been frustrated at the lack of attention generated by this genre of alternative weekly-based political and social satire cartoonists," Rall explains over the phone, "which has been around pretty much since the late '80s and early '90s. And it's true that you can argue that not all them are social or political cartoonists, or even in alternative weeklies -- most of my clients are in dailies, actually -- but there are certain things these comics have in common. They tend to be drawn by a certain age group; Generation X is certainly the wellspring of the first or second wave of the alt-weekly cartoonists. They feature stripped-down or abstracted drawing styles to convey complicated ideas; for that reason they tend to be wordy, text-based exercises. And since I work in that genre, I love it but am endlessly frustrated by the lack of exposure it gets. This stuff always falls between the cracks."

Unless you're there to catch it, which some, like Salon and other forward-looking publications, are. But no matter how much indie cred artists like David Rees, Keith Knight and Aaron McGruder receive for their outstanding work, there are toiling cartoonists like Tak Toyoshima, Emily Flake and Max Cannon who may never get the credit they deserve. Which is where Rall comes in.

"Here you have intelligent and funny comics being ignored because no one yet has pulled it all together as a genre," Rall added. "That's one reason why I felt these cartoonists had a hard row to hoe, because people need to have genres, to be able to categorize things. If it's something you've never seen or heard before, it doesn't fit anywhere. So the goal of the first book was to say there's strength in numbers, and it did much better than I or my publisher ever expected. But this was before 9/11, so in a way the scene we were documenting changed right as we were putting the book to bed." Ergo, the new book, which features interviews with the aforementioned, as well as 15 more budding Matt Groenings, many of whom deserve to be stars already.

Crash the Party January 20, 2005



CNN is reporting that an underground swell of activism is beginning towards the end of bringing massive numbers of American patriots to Washington to protest the inauguration of America's first unelected commander-in-chief. Apparently the call is beginning on pirate radio.



(Bush, of course, remains no more legit today than he was before the 2004 election. Running for "re-election" of an office you stole in the first place allowed him to capitalize on a fake incumbency he never earned. It's like his pal Gen. Musharraf of Pakistan--would he be legit if he ran for president and won?)



Anyway, let's hope the festivities in Washington are attended by as many real Americans as Bushite neofascists.



Tillman Mailbag



Matthew765@aol.com writes:

Tillman just voted "most inspiring". Just need a "least inspiring" contest and Ted could finally get a trophy (something tells me he never, every, got one for sports as a kid, boo hoo).

Matt Kremer

San Diego, CA

Yeah, and I lose sleep over that every night. But Tillman is an inspiring example of what happens when you're uninformed (he signed up to go to Iraq to avenge 9/11, only to later be sent out again, this time to get killed by his own comrades), misguidedly nationalistic and jingoistic. How much better for him, his family and America had he remained here and played the game at which he was so gifted.



Standard Republican Gay Sex--Obsessed Mailbag



dustumho@yahoo.com writes:

Dearest Ted,

There comes a man in every gay man's life where he has to just stop the lies and admit that you love the cock. Today is your day my fudge-packing, non-existant friend. You're a target for all queers, accept it.

If you voted for Bush, you voted for this guy.



And Since We're Judged By Our Enemies



The Washington Times, the hard right paper embraced by the GOP despite being owned by the Moonie cult (maybe because?), has nominated me as one of its 2004 "knaves" (yes, the paper likes its oratory out of Canterbury Tales). In a piece by the editorial board, the Times writes:

Those who denigrated the life of President Ronald Reagan, especially cartoonist Ted Rall, who said, "If there is a hell, this guy is in it."

If a guy who assassinated children, imported cocaine to fund right-wing death squads and nearly destroyed the economy isn't twisting on the devil's fork right about now, who is? Please vote for me, and vote often, Ohio style!

Sorry, Everybody



If you're familiar with the post-election website Sorry Everybody, you may be interested to know that I wrote the foreword of a new book based on the site.



From the publisher's press release:

Twenty-year-old University of Southern California student James Zetlen launched www.sorryeverybody.com on November 4 as a way for Americans to express their disappointment (and, sometimes, outrage) about the results of the election and how it will affect people around the world for the next four years. To date, more than 26,000 people have uploaded their thoughts, images, and opinions to the site. Sorryeverybody.com has become an international phenomenon, receiving more than 75 million hits from people around the world. After announcing the book project on the site, Zetlen reported receiving more than 700 comments in just a few hours.

The $14.95, 256-page Sorry Everybody book will be in stores in time for the inauguration and will feature photographs that have appeared on the site: Democrats and Republicans; priests and marines; professors and veterans; suburban moms and hipsters and hipster suburban moms; mountain climbers, divers, and businesspeople; women with gray hair, boys with blue hair, and girls with pink hair; gay people and straight people; people from California to New York to Ohio to Texas to Arkansas. They've all come together between the covers of this book to say, "Sorry, everybody."

Sorry Everybody features a foreword by Ted Rall, America's hardest-hitting editorial cartoonist for Universal Press Syndicate, and an award-winning commentator who also works as an illustrator, columnist, and radio commentator.

Ted Rall Named 2004's #2 Most Annoying Liberal



For the third year in a row right-wing bloggers hellbent on destroying America have declared me one of America's Most Annoying Liberals. I've been named along with such other luminaries as President Al Gore, Oscar winner Michael Moore, Nobel Peace Prize winner Jimmy Carter and legendary CBS anchorman Dan Rather. As Generalissimo El Busho says, we're defined by our enemies and I am damned proud to be hated by people who hate such admirable patriots.

Attitude Presents: Andy Singer's "No Exit"



Fans of the ATTITUDE 1 and 2 anthologies of alternative cartoonists will be interested to know that NBM is launching a new "Attitude Presents:" series featuring cartoonists in the ATTITUDE books. Each collection in the series, once again edited by me, showcases an artist who appeared in the book but whose books either have never enjoyed broad circulation or don't have collections at all. This is an attempt to bring worthy new artists to a broader public--something many comics fans say they want.



First in the series and now available is Andy Singer. It's 128 pages of hilarious, politically-minded social commentary gag panels by the brilliant artist of "No Exit." Order now and please let me know what you think!



Volume 2 in the series is by Neil Swaab, of "Rehabilitating Mr. Wiggles" infamy.

Ted Rall Subscription Service



Alexandria helpfully inquires:

I was reading your work in the Washington Post online until recently. Now I worry, what if Ted Rall keeps actually saying things and more papers drop him? So I want to point out what Michael and Nicole Jantzen are doing for the Norm. They are offering subscriptions to the strip, and if they reach 4000 people Michael Jantzen will keep drawing the Norm. If not, they are refunding the money (all electronic sources like Paypal) minus the processing fees.

Public television stations say that only a small percentage of viewers actually donate, but you are such a necessary voice maybe this approach would work for you.

I don't necessarily want anymore coffee cups, bumper stickers, or tee-shirts, so the cafe-press doesn't appeal to me. I donated to the Norm because the cumulative time I have spent enjoying that strip was worth a fee. I would subscribe to your site using the same reasoning. (Although your styles a wee might different...)

The Times and Post partially aside—both papers still run my work in their print editions—most of my clients continue to be supportive of my work. This is not a THE NORM type situation. That said, it's true that drawing cartoons and writing columns is a shoestring operation from a financial standpoint. So I'm very, very grateful to anyone who wants to support my work financially.



The best way you can do that is to write a letter to newspapers and magazines that you read but don't run me to encourage them to do so.



The next best thing is to buy my books.



You could also buy my original art. (Now I accept PayPal!)



After that, there's the handy dandy Ted Rall Subscription Service, which is coming due, as it does every year, at the end of this month. For a mere $10 per year (did I mention that I accept PayPal?), you can have emailed to you each and every week all three of my cartoons and my columns, plus whatever freelance work I produce. You get the columns as much as a day before they go online, and my cartoons as much as four days before the Great Unwashed Nonsubscribers see them on the Web.



To pay via PayPal:



1. Send me an email at chet@rall.com.



2. I'll tell you how to pay; after you do, you're signed up.



To pay by cash or check:



1. Send $10 to Ted Rall, PO Box 1134, New York NY 10027.



2. This is important: Send your email address ALONG WITH YOUR PAYMENT.



Trans-Afghanistan Opium Pipeline



Robert writes:

Don't know if you've seen this column on the death of journalist Gary Webb, who looked into Reagan-Bush regime's support of drug trafficking as part of the CIA backed Contras effort. and the complicity of the mainstream media in ignoring the story and attacking the messenger. http://www.alternet.org/election04/20742/



Earlier this evening I was looking at a Lisa Ling (National Geographic Channel) report on "The War Next Door" which is basically about the $2 billion US sponsorship of defoliation and anti-guerrilla warfare in Colombia in the last 4 years. Nice cameo by W talking about narco-terrorism and how terrorists fund themselves through drug trafficking. Interesting, given his Daddy's and Reagan's illicit drug trafficking and arms dealing with Iran, the Contras, and the state-sponsored terrorism against the people of Nicaragua and Iraq through Reagan-Bush proxies.



Is it ironic that Afghanistan is now the world's biggest producer of heroin, following the invasion and overthrow of the Taliban? or pathetic? I'm not sure which. Bush's Double-You -Suck failure in Afghanistan - no Osama, and turning Afghanistan back into a contender in the world of narco-terrorism, to use his own terms.

It's entirely possible that reopening the heroin trade was a Bushie war aim in Afghanistan. We certainly know that hunting down Osama (he was in Pakistan, not Afghanistan), taking out the Taliban (we didn't) and getting the 9/11 guys (they were in Egypt and Saudi Arabia) had nothing to do with it.



That said, there's a number of recent news articles, including one titled "Afghanistan Sees Bright Prospects for Trans-Afghan Pipeline" on News Central Asia (http://www.newscentralasia.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1031), that indicate that the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline project is alive and kicking as a major motivator of the U.S. occupation of Afghanistan.



What happened to Gary Webb is a national disgrace. He was one of America's finest and most honest reporters, punished for nothing more than doing his job. RIP, Gary.



ATTITUDE 2 a 2004 Book of the Year



The UK Guardian newspaper has named ATTITUDE 2: THE NEW SUBVERSIVE ALTERNATIVE CARTOONISTS (edited by yours truly) one of its 2004 Books of the Year.



I have a beef with their one gripe, though:

One gripe, though. President Bush is not a simian idiot (see how easily he turned the key caricatural traits associated with him - stumbling over sentences, etc - to his advantage at election time). Rather, he's the guy who has led a neo-conservative revolution. That's the ugly fact of the matter, and 'subversive' humorists had better get used to it.

Isn't it possible that W. is a simian idiot who led a neoconservative (counter)revolution?

Let's See If This Posts



We'll start this experimentation in Blogger tech revisionism (thanks to Mr. B--you rock!) with selections from the mailbag:



Denny wrote:

ted, ted.......again, you have some wrong information..... 390,000 Frenchmen died during the 1940 invasion? WRONG!!! Several resources I checked bring the total of French casualties during the ENTIRE WAR to 213,324. These are the dead, not wounded. Because you did mention Frenchmen DIED during 1940. I had to check this out because I found you hard to believe. More French soldiers were killed in 1940 then American's for the last 60 years?? By the way, US casualties between World War II and the current war are about 373,855. Another point I see you are trying to make is that the Allies, basically the British, left the French to defend themselves. Well, I would hope that you would at least agree that defending your own country becomes a larger priority then helping defend someone elses. I think you would have to agree that had the British not evacuated the 300,000 troops from France, that they too would have easily been overrun by the Germans in late 1940. As a side note, about a quarter of those toops were FRENCH! I have to ask, where do you come up with these stats?

So did Russ:

You know, the "cowardly French" meme is so virulent that I had ceased to even consciously think about it. Thanks for the good discussion of it. It is indeed ridiculous that the right (while claiming to support the proud sacrifices of brave troops dying for their country yada yada) would so blithely dismiss the deaths of hundreds of thousands of French soldiers who actually did die defending their country. BTW, where did you get the

490,000 figure? That seems high. As far as I can tell, it seems more like 200,000 - there's a fair bit of variance in different estimates, e.g. see: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/ww2stats.htm Not that I think it affects the point you're making - 200,000 or 490,000 or whatever, it's still a lot of soldiers dead fighting against an invasion.

As did D.:

The ignorance and stupidity of the Limpblob rightards would be amusing if it weren't so pathetic...

How about WWI? At Verdun alone, the French Army lost nearly 400,000 dead and wounded, on a battlefield that was not even 5 square miles...'They Shall Not Pass', their rallying cry, carried out to a 't' to say the least...total casualties on both sides, 700,000 plus over a period of only 10 months.

France has forgotten more about dying, war and killing than (thankfully) the US as a nation will ever know. Perhaps their reluctance to engage in our idiotic neocon adventures in the Mideast can be explained by this.

The rightards conveniently forget that the French backed our Afghan invasion; I personally watched French AF Mirage 2000s depart Bishkek airport loaded with bombs to hammer Taliban positions...

French soldiers are as brave as any other nations'...to hell with the chickenhawk critics, though ignorance of history is nothing new for them...and now, as we see in Iraq it is coming back to bite them.

What was D. doing in the Kyrgyz Republic? Well, anyway, what we've learned today is that estimated casualty figures vary even when they shouldn't. After all, the French government provided military funerals to their dead; surely someone could have counted them up. But, upon further research, it seems that I posted one of the higher estimates from the 1940 Battle of France. But as one of the writers above points out, 200,000 is still more men than we lost in all of Vietnam in combat, four times over.



It's war: one side wins, the other loses. Losing isn't shameful; failing to defend your country is. The French clearly weren't guilty of that in World War II.



So where does francophobia originate? Partly from the fact that we resent owing our very nationhood to them; French-bashing is a kind of patricide. FDR played a big role, repeatedly telling the American public that France didn't deserve to be a great power after World War II because it hadn't fought hard enough in 1940. (What about the US, which didn't fight AT ALL when the shit hit the fan in 1939-40?) And the French Vichy Government shamed the country by collaborating with the Nazis rather than going into exile as honor demanded.

Technical Problems



I've been having trouble updating my blog. Hopefully this will be resolved shortly. Thanks for your patience.

French Cowards



Got some fresh hate mail about the new column going up tonight:

Have you thought about moving to France.... They don't fight anyone, even peoples invading their own country.

Yeah, but more of them can spell. But enough of that.



One trope of the extreme/Bushist right is that France is an effete nation. "Old Europe," Herr Rumsfeld calls it. They didn't fight in World War II, for example.



While France was shamed by the conduct of many of its citizens during the war—the Vichy regime was heinously fascist and anti-Semitic, and participated in deporting thousands of Jews to their deaths—I find the notion that they didn't fight pretty damned amusing. After all, 390,000 French soldiers died trying to defend their country from the German onslaught during the six week invasion of May-June 1940. That's more than the U.S. soldiers who died fighting on both fronts of World War II, Korea, Vietnam the two Gulf Wars combined.



In every war, one side loses. France, most historians agree, lost to Germany in 1940 because its military and political leaders committed a series of errors. They failed to extend the Maginot line to the Belgian frontier, allowing the Germans to simply go around it. They refused to appreciate the importance of tanks as the new weapon of modern warfare. They created a defensive strategy that relied too extensively on fortifications. And their Allies evacuated to Britain rather than fight to the end. But none of the 390,000 Frenchmen who died in 1940 deserve any of the blame for those strategic errors. And the Republican Right ought to be ashamed to impugn their bravery.

Greetings from Occupied America



Andrew from the Great White North writes:

I enjoyed your recent column re dying for one's country, as I've always been annoyed by that particular falsehood. However, I'd like to whine about one error of fact: your statement that the US has only been invaded twice by a foreign power.

It's not really true, because in your first example, the War of 1812, it was the US doing the invading. The US was not defending itself against a British invasion, but invading British territory in what is now Canada. The ostensible reason was to protect maritime sovereignty, but the fact that none of the warhawks actually hailed from coastal states puts the lie to that one. The real reason, it seems, was to halt British colonial ambitions in Canada and remove obstacles to western expansion. In other words, the politicians of the day concocted a patriotic lie under cover of which they launched a war to advance American geopolitical interests and their own commercial ends.

In that respect, the War of 1812 bears a remarkable resemblance to certain present-day events, but there was an important difference. The American soldier of the day, a part-time militiaman, didn't see much benefit in dying for the warhawks economic ambitions, so he often fought with little enthusiasm. This leads us to the Battle of Queenston Heights, in which American reserves refused to participate on grounds that they didn't sign up to fight foreign wars, but to defend their homes.

Good points all. It's important to remember that, from its inception, the story of the United States' expansion has been tied to aggression. However, this week's column refers to the fact that the British did invade the United States in the course of the War of 1812, burning both the White House and Capitol in the process. For that matter, the Mexicans didn't really start the Mexican War of 1846--we did. But they did invade U.S. territory.



Ken writes:

Thank you for your most recent column, pure quality as usual. And I live for your cartoon thrashings.

You referenced the Japanese balloon attacks on coastal Oregon and Washington "without casualties" I read a long time ago and cannot tell you the reference, that there was a life lost to one of these incendiary balloon devices. As I recall it was a young girl on the Oregon Coast who was casually hiking in the forest with a church group. She encountered one of these devices that had not gone off, when she touched or handled it, it exploded and she was killed.

The article revolved around the notion that this girl was the only person who died from hostility on the mainland, the 48 states in WWII. Sorry I can't provide citation, No ax to grind, I just thought you might find it interesting. Perhaps I'll Google around and see if I can find some internet reference to the incident.

Several people wrote about this. They're right. A girl was in fact killed by a Japanese balloon bomb.



Jill writes:

It occurred to me that one of the problems with the Democratic party right now is that they often don't know how to select a winning candidate during the nomination process. I reflect that in the case of Kerry the nomination process was basically over after about 6-12 states had voted and that the votes in these early states really influenced others. Potential candidates were out of the race before it got to the southern and mid-western states. Considering how important these states have become re electing a Republican president perhaps the Democrats would do well to look at this nomination process to see if they can overcome what I see as a liability that is built into the process. Can that process be changed?

Probably not, but my primary objection (no pun intended) to the current system is that the electorate does such a shitty job picking nominees. Small committees--the proverbial smoke-filled room--were more likely to emerge with candidates with strong personalities and positions on the issues than what we currently have: design by committee. On the other hand, the DNC/DLC picked Kerry many years ago for the '04 slot, so it's not like the big shots are picking the candidates anyway. Why waste money on primaries when the fix is in against insurgent candidates like Dean?



Dean writes:

Hi, loved the article; just want to tell you that Japan occupied 2 Aleutian islands in WW II, and there was one major battle in which hundreds of US soldiers died defeating the Japanese. That was all after the Dutch Harbor bombing you mention in the article. I used to work for a museum in Anchorage, and put together a program on historic sites in Alaska, including the WW II sites in the Aleutians.

I don't know if it's hundreds of causalties, but this is generally correct. Two small islands were occupied by the Japanese in the Aleutians after the Dutch Harbor incident and had to be dislodged by force.



Jeff writes:

Were you trying to argue that no military action since 1846 was unjustified? It seems as if you are just arguing over semantics, and in a way to poke fun at soldiers who died in Iraq. Fighting for your country's geopolitical interests is the same as defending your country when one aspect of America's geopolitical interest is to protect our country from foreign threats through military action that may not have been provoked by direct attack, but that furthers our country's security. There seems to be no point in your article.

This week's column raises more questions than answers. Obviously the U.S. can justify the retaliatory war against Japan in World War II. And the Civil War could be justified by both sides as self-defense. But I have no interest in "poking fun" at the Iraq war dead. Quite the contrary--those deaths are tragic, pointless, a waste. I don't agree, obviously, that promoting the geopolitical interests of one's country as determined by its political and business leaders is the same as "fighting for your country." That's just not what people think of when they think of "defending America." The point of my column is to expose the military death cult for what it is: a fraud.



Mike wrote:

Great work, as usual, in your column this week. I've often argued that nobody's died for this country since the revolutionary war. Well, that's not entirely true: lots of people die for this country — police officers, for instance — but not in our myriad military actions.

I must make a small exception, however, to your statement that the attacks on Pearl Harbor (in my hometown) and Dutch Harbor were on American soil. They were certainly on American forces, but neither Alaska nor Hawaii were states yet. Hawaii, for its part, was a colony ill-gotten by overthrowing its government.

Accurate points about Alaska and Hawaii. Still, they were--from the standpoint of mainstream, non-Howard Zinn, American history--U.S. territory.



Finally, Jo writes:

Just a note to say thanks for your excellent piece titled, They Fight and Die, But Not for Their Country. As a career soldier and a veteran of the Gulf War, I believe you are right on target. Soldiers fight and die for their fellow soldiers, regardless of the war. It is tragic that our country's leaders continue to exploit them in the name of patriotism. America's soldiers need better leadership at the top; leaders who respect their skills and potential as human beings.

This Week's Cartoons



This week's cartoons will be posted online on Monday due to the Thanksgiving holiday. On Monday you'll be able to view Saturday and Thursday's cartoons in the archives by clicking "previous cartoon."

More Various



Owen asks:

Thanks for your book "Wake Up America, You're Liberal". It's a very thought-provoking and encouraging read. As a Brit with more interest in US than British politics -- blame `The West Wing' for starting me

off on that -- there's sadly not that much I can do once encouraged! Still, I'll be keeping an eye on the Democrats in case any of them show any sign of having read it...

One thing, though: in your proposed policy platform for a revived liberal Democratic Party, you suggest minimum wage reimbursement for Congressmen and Government officials. It's a nice soundbite, but surely this would exacerbate the current situation where only the independently wealthy can afford to campaign for President and Congress? Wouldn't it further lock in small-c conservativism?

That could occur, of course. I remember that, when I was a kid, Ohio state legislators earned nominal salaries that had to be supplemented by other professions to pay a mortgage on even a modest home. As a consequence, only wealthy people could afford to serve in the House of Representatives. But the big expense these days isn't living; if you're a politician it's the ability to raise enough funds to run a campaign. That means you have to have rich friends even if you're not friend--but, for the most part, only rich people have such buddies. So it's already a rich man's game. It just seems more than a little galling that the taxpayers have to provide healthcare and other benefits to Congressmen who don't support the same benefits for them.



Perhaps my proposal should be supplemented by a "maximum wage" for politicians, to make sure they live just as poorly as a minimum-wage worker without benefits, regardless of where their salary comes from.



R writes:

I am amused at the condescension of Ultra Liberals towards those with whom they disagree. They think that insults takes the place of intelligent and rational arguments in the marketplace of ideas. You are on the way of becoming as useful as a buggy whip! Irrelevant due to your vitriol aimed at those who you should be trying to persuade to your viewpoint. I am a registered Democrat and see the hypocrisy of the Republicans who send off other people's children to war while they hold their coats.

A diatribe of expletives is no replacement for sound rationale thinking or policy. You are alienating more of those who would consider your ideas Ted. Get a clue. Your anger is getting in the way of your message.

I get a lot of these emails, mainly from Republicans. Which makes me wonder: why should you care about my message being more effective? More to the point, what "diatribe of expletives" do I employ in my work? None. I can be snotty, sure, but my worst, most vicious slurs against the Republican liberals (you can't call such big government, deficit-spending nation builders "conservative") pale in comparison to the stuff Rush and Company crank out every day. I'm trying to, in my little way, counter a tide of BS running the opposite direction.



Sid asks:

I have read your last five pieces and I am convinced that you are French. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I would love to live in a world without violence, in a world not rife with insane religious positions, in a world where the political opposition is not hated. I would love to see two, or more, candidates for the presidency of the United States, actually debate issues rather than repeat talking points. Alas, I live here, on Earth.

Yes, I do have a point. You are extreme. Your words invite insane opposition, rather than intelligent discussion. You can influence people, that fact incurs responsibility. Could you please rethink your presentation?

I am French. I am also American. I'm a dual national, born here with a French parent. Anyone who wants to make that an issue is welcome to do so, with the caveat that there wouldn't be an America if France hadn't saved our butts from the British back in 1781. But I'm curious: How do my words "invite insane opposition"? All I'm doing is saying out loud what many Democrats say and think in private. And I'm totally, utterly unapologetic about being politically progressive. I am so damned tired of wishy-washy liberals constantly trying to reason with assholes who have no desire to be reasoned with. Jesus, people, grow a spine. We're getting our asses kicked out there; let's play as rough as they do.



Mark shows how it's done:

Ted,

I sent the following message to the ombudsman of the Washington Post after reading his editorial today...



Dear Ombudsman,

Your handling of the Ted Rall controversy troubles me. In my view, you have cow towed to those who don't really believe in free speech (much less dissent). As you are probably aware, there is a well organized campaign (crusade) on the right to squelch the voices of people like Mr. Rall. Thanks to organizations like yours, it appears they will succeed. Please at least be honest and admit to yourself that your actions regarding Mr. Rall were motivated as much by fear than by fairness.

Various and Sundries



Daniel asks:

I'm a long-time reader (only about three months, actually, but I've read the entire archive, including one Ann Coulter article I accidentally clicked on and was very confused by), first time writer, and I was moved to ask you a question after reading the absurd attack mail you recieved after the H&C interview. I didn't see the interview myself, as we don't get Fox News here in Canada (yet), but I can't imagine you doing anything to warrant that kind of a response. You mentioned that you do recieve civil correspondence from conservatives that disagree with you, but rarely print them because they lack comic value. I was wondering what the rough split is between the reasonable and the insane. Of course, I'm also curious about just how a reasonable attack would look. Do they point our percieved flaws in your reasoning or facts, use irony (which, as the accusations of treason against you prove, can be misread in print) or do they just respectfully disagree and occasionally promise to pray for you?

Conservative hate mail runs about 10-to-1 in favor of the "fuck you, sperm drinker" genre. The other tenth typically wonder whether I really believe the things that I write (well, what do you think?), where I grew up or what happened to me to make me so bitter (I'm not), and yes, the random promise to pray for me (which I appreciate because hey, you never know). I'm sure right-wingers receive hate mail; I wonder how many threats of violence and sexual-orientation comments they receive from liberals compared to reasoned discourse. If you're one of my many readers among the rightist blogosphere, please email me and let me know.

Full Text of This Week's Column



A technical glitch affected this week's column, effectively cutting roughly half the words. Here's the complete version.



IF IT'S 2005, IT MUST BE TIME FOR ANOTHER WAR

Bushies Gear Up for Invading Iran

NEW YORK--You've heard this song before. There's this country, see, and they hate America. They'd nuke us if they had the chance, you bet they would. Damn Muslim religious fanatics! Guess what? They have weapons of mass destruction! Either that or their scientists are about to develop them. Whatever--we can't let that happen. We've gotta hit them before they hit us! What's that? Of course we're sure! Our intelligence says so. Huh? No. We can't show you the proof. We'll say this much…a little bird told us. A little exile bird that wants to run the country after we overthrow the current regime. They wouldn't lie, and neither would we. And while we're at it, can we borrow your son for the next few years?



Colin Powell, disgraced by his 2003 fictional anthrax speech at the U.N., is closing his run as Bush's poodle-in-chief with a bravura repeat performance. His last big PR project: conning us into war against Iran.



The Administration's sales pitch for "Attack on the Ayatollahs" reads a lot like the one for "So Long, Saddam." There's a supposed "grave and gathering threat"--a nuclear-capable, America-hating Iran. Even as presented, the intel is sketchy. Iran, Powell says, has "been actively working on delivery systems"--missiles that could carry nukes. During the Cuban missile crisis, JFK went on television to show us the satellite photos. Powell thinks we should believe him just because. "I have seen intelligence which would corroborate what this dissident group is saying," says the outgoing Secretary of Rationalization. Not that there's much there there: "I'm talking about information that says that they not only had these missiles, but I'm aware of information that suggests they were working hard as to how to put the two [missiles and nuclear weapons] together." Bombs haven't even started falling on Tehran and the WMDs have already become WMD-related programs.



Powell's intel is enough to make a 2005 gold star mother pine for George "Slam Dunk" Tenet. First, it's ancient. The Iraq WMD info ended in 1998 and was proven wrong in 2003. Powell's claims that Iran obtained schematics for an atomic bomb from Pakistan are even older, dating to 1996. Moreover, the Iran sourcing--the National Council for Resistance in Iran (NCRI)--makes Ahmed Chalabi look like a Boy Scout. The NCRI, a front organization for the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), is a bizarre, Shiite, pro-Baathist (yes, you read that right) guerilla army infamous for crushing the 1991 Kurdish uprising on Saddam's orders. Better yet, it's designated as a "known terrorist organization" by Powell's own State Department.



Only the Bushiban know whether they plan to invade Iran. But, as Time magazine reports, "the neoconservative hawks who championed the Iraq war have long advocated an aggressive pursuit of regime change in Iran." Washington kremlinologists are waiting to see whether Bush will promote anti-Iran neocon John Bolton from Undersecretary of State for Arms Control to Deputy Secretary of State. A Bolton ascension, goes the word on K Street, probably means a third war. At bare minimum, writes centrist New York Times scribe Nicholas Kristof, "the United States will discuss whether to look the other way as Israel launches airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites," a move that could easily lead to a broader conflict if Iran retaliates by attacking U.S.-occupied Iraq or Afghanistan, or Israel itself.



Does Iran pose a threat to the U.S.? The rejoinders are obvious. If Bush cared about real threats, he'd go after North Korea, which has at least six nuclear weapons and an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) that can hit the U.S. Of course, North Korea isn't the second biggest member of OPEC. Iran is, with 10 percent of the earth's proven oil reserves. Besides, no one with sense believes Bush about anything.



But enough snark.



Iranian nukes, minus a high-precision long-range delivery system, can't do us much harm. Iran's Shahab-3 missile has a maximum range of 800 miles, far enough to hit Israel. But that's Israel's problem. Iran has no ICBMs capable of traversing the Atlantic and accurately hitting an American target--and no immediate prospect of developing one. Besides, the Iranian government has repeatedly made overtures to the Bush Administration to talk about their nuclear program, only to be rebuffed. It would be truer to say that the U.S. is a threat to Iran.

I Was Waiting For Someone to Ask



MIKENOMGI@aol.com writes:

I get a kick out of you saying you will report all threats to appropriate law enforcement agencies. There aren't enough law enforcement officers in the world to investigate all the threats you must get. Besides - what officer in their right mind would go after anybody who threatened a worthless piece of shit like you? Jackass!



and



Sorry Ted. I forgot in my last email to tell you to go fuck yourself. Please accept my apologies.



and

Hey Fuckface! Oops., Sorry. fuckface shouldn't be capitalized when referring to you. I notice you post the email addresses of those of us who despise you, and would love to meet you on a street corner, preferably in Pat Tillman's home town. Tell us, Jackass; why don't you post the addresses of the few sick fucks who agree with you. Anyway, keep on posting. You are giving all us Rall-haters a forum to see who hates you the most. How does it feel to be the most despised human bein.....oops, again - I meant piece of shit - in the whole country?

Angela writes:

I was reading your blog and was just sickened by those nastly e-mails that you were bombarded with. I couldn't help thiking that a bunch of 12 yr olds had e-mailed you. I can't beleive there are adults that talk like that - just sad.



Anyway, the reason I'm writing though is I saw an unfair patter in that post. All the nasty e-mails you received, you posted their e-mail addresses. And the nice ones, you only posted their first name. I don't know if you did it on purpose, but it seemed like you were saying, "go ahead and tell these assholes what you think, but leave the good guys alone." Yeah, they were immature jerks, hardly worth talking to since you can't reason with such, but it wasn't fair at all. And I've come to expect better from you.

I publish the email addresses of those who show no respect or courtesy when they write. Right-wingers feel no accountability when they write hate mail to liberals; well, that stops here. It's my website and my email address; I make the rules. Is it unfair? In the same way that Sean Hannity treats his Republican guests with deference and his Democratic ones like Abu Ghraib torture victims, sure it is. I'm nicer to liberals because they're nicer to me. Pretty simple, and it's high time that Democratic legislators start treating their Republican counterparts the same way: Act like a pig, get treated like one. Act civilly, so shall we.



Don't want your email address posted here in the Rallblog? Don't write things you wouldn't want the world to see.



Speaking of which, tlv822@yahoo.com writes:

If you post an e-mail public....You will continue to solicit those of us that are decent enough to recognize slime for what it is.Look forward to me and many many others to fill your box with our special kudos you asshole.

Sharp-eyed Republicans will note that I don't print the email addresses of conservatives who disagree with me in a civil fashion.



And Rita writes:

Ted, I'm thrilled to hear from you. Sincerely. Since you're in an advice-taking mood, may I offer another piece? Post more positive responses. I've sent a few. The illiterate morons do not deserve

disproportionate representation, hilarious (scary) as they are.

Yeah, think I'll do that. Though it seems a tad immodest, no? Anyway, Randy sez:

I did not see you on Fox last night. I stopped watching that channel long ago. I used to watch O'Reilly quite regularly; some of his comments are right on the mark. But more and more it became apparent that he was mainly there to toot his own horn rather than calmly and intellectually argue a point of view. I'd get pissed just listening to his rude interruptions night after night. Hannity wasn't much better. He interrupts and offers no intellectual rebuttal, just emotional retorts that often have no persuasive substance.

Interestingly, most of these anti-Rall bloggers you have posted tonight are impressively vulgar and threatening. Hmmm, so these are the righteous and moral God fearing/respectful patriots that have delivered us another 4 years of the Bushiban regime? I notice they don't have a command of the English language, either.

Exactly so. So amusing that these are the so-called Christians. What happened to turning the other cheek? Where are their precious moral values?



The Washington Post Dropped My Cartoon, Yet Ran This



www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000725897

Hannity Fallout



So last night I did "Hannity and Colmes." The topic, as sold to me as well as the viewers, was whether editorial cartoons by Pat Oliphant, Jeff Danziger and Garry Trudeau about Condi Rice went too far and whether they were racist in their depictions of the Secretary of State Designate. Unfortunately for anyone who had to sit through what must have been pretty dull television, Sean "Johnny One Note" Hannity resorted to his now old schtick of yelling about "offensive" cartoons that *I* have drawn--terror widows, Pat Tillman, etc.--and barking at me to apologize. Thanks to Hannity's continuing obsession over cartoons of mine that date back more than two years (!), we never got to discuss Condi, whether black conservatives are sellouts, or whether those cartoons in question were in fact racist.



'Tis sad. I was longing to get the chance that race is a legitimate subject of cartoons about Rice. After all, she serves a "president" who gave a key speech at Bob Jones University and a vice president who called Nelson Mandela a communist terrorist and voted against sanctions on apartheid South Africa. Bush's father voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Ronald Reagan launched his 1980 campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi, a small town to which he had no tied save for the race-baiting message of symbolism: it was where the four "freedom riders" were murdered in 1964. The Republican Party is racist to its core and Condi's skin color shouldn't innoculate her from criticism for serving people who hate people like her.



Instead, we got Hannity yelling. Oh, well. Now, on to the post-Hannity mailbag. And you wonder what kind of people vote Republican? Well, here they are:



PLigeti@aol.com wrote:

you are one of the most arrogant shitheads I have ever seen in my life.

jerryfenimore@msn.com wrote:

Rall is. in my opinion, the most disgusting excrement masquerading as a human being. Jerry Fenimore Littleton, CO

ddonley@hot.rr.com wrote:

I cant believe you on Handy Combs, and what you said about Tillman, you are one SICK sonofabitch

Whatever you say, Handy Combs.



beck1932@cox.net wrote:

I agree with Sean your the most despicable excuse for a human being I've ever

seen! Your human garbage..... I hope your mother has had her tubes tied.... Bob

Cch4m@aol.com (a regular stalker of mine) wrote:

My My what a stinking litlle asshole....has little teddy rall had his diaper

changed today. Boy teddy I'll bet you really shit your pants the wednesday

after the election huh? What a disgusting piece of shit............

Phillip wrote:

Having just watched you on Hannity and Colmes, I'd like to ask you

if you'd still believe Pat Tillman to be an "idiot" if he had died serving

in Haiti, or Somalia, or Kosovo, or Bosnia instead. Sincerely, Philip Prindeville

Portland, OR

No.



Many Republicans, who are obviously closeted gays themselves, are obsessed with homosexuality. dwimmer@sc.rr.com wrote:

You are an absolute piece of gay shit. More people than you think voted for George Bush. HE DID WIN. You are a dumb idiot. You and Michael Moore would make a "cute couple". Pathetic.

dhildreth82@yahoo.com wrote:

Looking at you on TV, im sure you have never had sex. You are very fat and very ugly, and sound like a whiney little baby. You are a ugly, fat snot nosed weasel.

Does this mean our date is canceled?



PayneDA@msn.com wrote:

I think you the worst human being in the world. You are an animal. I hope

that all the horrible, hateful, discussing comics you have drawn are visited

back a 1000 times over. May God forgive you, America will not. You discuss

me. You write and draw garbage and you are garbage. I will continue to write

any and all newspapers to hammer you until you are finished in my country.

You are an animal. You are a hateful, ignorant, animal. Thank you, David A Payne PayneDA@msn.com

ka3kzh@adelphia.net wrote:

I just watched you on Fox and I don't know of your cartoons but if you said something about Pat tillman , a hero in my mind , you are a piece of shit . Someone has to protect this country and I'm glad its not you . If you don't like this country move to Canada like your friends .

Yeah, good thing Tillman went to Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11. To, um, "protect" us. I wonder if he found the WMDs before his own comrades shot him.



neuro1953@yahoo.com wrote:

You are a female.Your estrogen level is quite high and you have 0 testosterone.I would bet that you have sexual problems.i would gladly diagnose and treat yor hormonal problem which is quite obvious.Sincerely.Dr.Tom Moore

BassmanNFL@aol.com wrote:

Dear Ted, I am a Democrat and even you made me sick. As a Viet Nam vet you

do not get it. We at war, you big dummy. Ever hear of 9-11 and all the

assaults of terrorism since 1979. I'll bet you never served a day in the

military. Every GI that has served has made it possible for you to spill you

garbage. And your comment and cartoon regarding Pat Tilman was below the belt.

I'll bet your mother and father are ashamed of you. If I had been there on

the show, I would have kicked your sorry ass. Take that, you punk.

nutclub@yahoo.com wrote:

You are a DISGRACEFUL low life to shun a great American like Pat Tillman.

In case you forgot, Pat Tillman died (A HERO) in Afghanistan, not Iraq.

You're so out of touch that you probably think we shouldn't have even gone

into Afghanistan.

I can't believe Hannity and Colmes gave you this much face time push your

propaganda.

Doug Duncan

Evansville, IN

Actually, Tillman volunteered in the spring of 2002 to go to Iraq. That's where we went first. Then they rotated back for another tour of duty to Afghanistan, where he died tragically, another young life lost for BushCo. But yes, I do think we shouldn't have gone into Afghanistan. Pakistan, on the other hand...Saudi Arabia, on the other hand...maybe even Egypt.



antmanv1@yahoo.com wrote:

i know you won't read this, but if given the chance I would punish you for your homo shit.I would love to meet you boy, oh boy , would I...my name is pain and you can report me fag, but you can go to hell! you are a loser in a loser party with a loser future. bye, bye. maybe I'll see you on a street corner soon...

michael_g_b@hotmail.com wrote:

Hey, I was wondering. Do you have a birth defect that causes you to speak out of the corner of your mouth? I mean, I just want to know. You're pretty much the goofiest looking guy I've seen on television in a while, and I'm really interested to know how someone so ugly got to be a guest on Foxnews. You're an inspiration for all the closet freaks! By the way, will you be making any appearances in Texas any time in the near future? I'd really love to meet you face to face!

Thanks for asking about my facial disability. Yes, it's true--I suffer from Dick Cheney Syndrome.



Paulcamaro5@aol.com wrote:

I saw you last night on Shawn Hannitys show!,you are the most

despicable,loathsome,and detastable waste of protoplasm I have ever encountered.A pox on

your house.I hope you and your family are killed in the next terrorist

attack.The only good thing about you panty wearing linguine spined liberal scum is that

you abort your own crack babies.Oh, by the way asshole, before you refer to

me as a bible thumping idiot FYI I am an atheist.I wish I could have been there

to see the look on your face when Bush won the election.Remember asshole we

have political capital and we are going to spend it :).

DRUMDETEC@aol.com wrote:

well? aren't you? adam/ohio...red state conservative

Why? Are you hitting on me?



bobjones77@gmail.com wrote:

Saw ya on Hannity & Colmes tonight. Great job. Thanks to the wonders of television, I now think you are queer in addition to being a liberal idiot asshole.

jespada7@juno.com wrote:

You are one of the sorriest son-of-a-bitches that I have ever seen.

You're nothing more than a really sick bitch-ass bitch. F U sick bitch!

reckstam@yahoo.com wrote:

I seldom see Alan Colmes go after liberal guests. When you get him saying you don’t represent his views in the Democratic party, you are really out of step w/ America. To be left of him is a LONG ways left. And your 9/11 widow cartoon and others discussed were out of line and disgusting.

Ron

Best laugh of the day so far! Alan Colmes doesn't go after liberals? To be left of him is a LONG ways left? Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha



Juan wrote:

I really was disturbed by your comments at the Hannity and Colmes show, as well as your cartoons. I believe in freedom of expression but not like that. Death is the end of one's life, and it must be treated with the utmost respect. You are treating it as a diversion. Death is not to be mocked. Are you compelled to apologize to the people you have offended? Do you have a conscience? Please revisit your heart!

Either you believe in freedom of speech or you don't. And yes, death is the end of life. But life can seem like death when you're sitting between Mssrs. Hannity and Colmes.



sierraview@charter.net wrote:

I saw your appearence on Hannity and Colmes, and I just wanted to sent you a

heart felt fuck you. You are scum, and a real ass hole. May death find you

soon you coward.Matt Minden, NV

jer.lyn@verizon.net wrote:

I was watching Fox earlier, and heard you make the comment that "Michael Moore Is A Patriotic American", among other comments.As I watched your mouth open, I could see soft streaming shit pouring out. The more you spoke, the more shit spewed out. You are a worthless punk, and you should really be shot for treason. Maybe you are motivated by sexual frustration. Perhaps you and Michael Moore butt fuck each other while your mother watches.Have a nice day!!

Gerald B. Braverman

P.S. You have my email address. Please look me up if you ever come to Pittsburgh.

Fortunately, not all Fox watchers are assholes:



Ted wrote:

Good job on Hannity and Colmes last night.  The lack of dialogue is frustratrating. I wanted like never before to grab Hannity by his ad hominem and tell him to shut up and let you talk. You kept your cool, something I couldn't have done.

Jeremy wrote:

Just bumped into you on some Fox "news" show and wanted to give you kudos for your courage for being on the program and the way you handled yourself. Well done!

Zack wrote:

I just viewed you on some horse shit news program, and I found it strikingly

ironic how i had just gotten out of a long conversation with my father about American policies. My father did the exact same type of jumping on thoughts that those bigots did to you! I think its another type of brainwashing that the news provides, I was just looking up the word hypocirit dehumanization and brainwashing. Its insane how hypocritical America is, they first dehumanize others, then kill them, then say that America loves them by giving them schools. And you are not sick as the guy is calling you now,

Stick to your principles, above all else. Mainstream Republican news programs just don't understand that there are other ideas out there besides their own. Do not say you regret making any of your comics, they are out of humor, and because a few people are offended for some reason, they should consider those whom they offend, such as you or I. So I commend your bravery of subjecting yourself to that! So yea, it would be cool if you emailed me back some of your political ideas, I would be very greatful.

-Zack

(sorry its kinda nonsensical, I was trying to watch T.V. and think at the

same time)

Chris wrote:

Thank you for (all) your cartoons! I saw you once again on Hannity's show tonight and thought you did well once more. I think you are a fine American and are speaking the truth in your cartoons and trying to get the message out that what is happening in Iraq is a national disgrace. Each time Hannity accuses you of being a sicko I love the way you respond by telling him he is helping to kill Americans in Iraq. He and his type are trully leading America down the wrong path!I also 100% understand and agree with the cartoon about the football player. once again, thank you,

Deirdre wrote:

Watched H & C tonight with the hopes of actually HEARING what you had to say. So much for "fair and balanced"...

Robert wrote:

I don't usually watch Fox news channel, but here I am in Boston on business, flipping through the hotel channels, and there you are being insulted and attacked by Sean Hannity and Michael Reagan.

I heard some words about you representing Condi Rice in fat lips and using "jive talk" but when I checked out the cartoon I didn't see either of those - I guess it fit their plan of attack, like the non-existent WMDs for which reportedly 1227 Americans and approximately 100,000 Iraqis, mostly women and children, have lost their lives over.

Kudos for keeping your cool in the face of intolerable rudeness.

I also got up-to-date on your blog and saw the stuff about the developmentally disabled metaphor.

My daughter has been a special education teacher for about a decade, and I think she would have seen the point of the cartoon and not been offended. I was a little confused as to whether you were comparing Bush himself or Bush voters to developmentally disabled kids. But I did understand that it was a metaphor, not making fun of developmentally disabled folks.

On the other hand, if I were mentally slow, I would be insulted at being compared to Bush and Bush voters.

Keep up the good work. Don't the let the bastards get you down. I enjoy Steve Bell's cartoons, too - got a bookmark for Guardian and Observer and Greg Palast and those dudes.

That's all for now, I've got to change the channel off of Fox before I vomit.

Mark wrote:

i am a 24 year old michigan resident. i just finished watching you on hannity & colmes, and i am not sure if i have ever wanted to choke sean hannity so badly. i honestly cannot stand him, or the obvious bias of the show format- but i watch regardless, just to know what they are saying. hannity is an obvious bully, nothing more, nothing less. i just wanted to congratulate you on a firm stance. sean's whole agenda was to embarrass and belittle you, and i think you should be proud of your appearance- you made the best of what he was trying to do to you. i appreciate what you have done and what you are doing. thanks for fighting the good fight.

Fox News, "Hannity & Colmes"



I'll be a guest tonight at 9:30 East Coast time. Topic of the discussion will be cartoons by Pat Oliphant et al. about Condi Rice: Is making an issue out of her race fair?

"Renewed Hope for Afghan Pipeline"



That's the headline from today's Asia Times, essential reading for South and Central Asia watchers.



Some highlights:

Renewed hope for Afghan pipeline

By Raouf Liwal

KABUL - Prospects for the trans-Afghan pipeline seem good, with the Asian Development Bank (ADB) indicating that it is set to launch a preliminary report on the US$2 billion project linking the vast gas field in Turkmenistan to Pakistan, through Afghanistan.

The earlier contenders for the project, first mooted in the 1990s, were US oil and gas company Unocal and its Argentinean rival Bridas. Both had initially agreed to pay $300 million to Afghanistan per annum as premium for using the land. But in December 1998, Unocal said it was withdrawing from the Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline consortium for business reasons and would no longer have any role in supporting the development or funding of this project. Bridas, too, withdrew from the project, analysts suggest for security reasons. But now, according to insiders, there are strong indications that Unocal could be favored by Afghan officials to return to the venture, though the company's role is not exactly clear in the ADB-led project.

Half of the 1,800-kilometer pipeline will pass through Afghan territory to supply gas from the Dawlatabad city of Turkmenistan to Gawadar Port of Pakistan. The trans-Afghan pipeline has been one of the most controversial issues among Western politicians, investors and major world gas companies, including Unocal and Bridas, since 1995.

ADB officials say the primary plan of the project will soon be released. Engineer Mandokhil, an advisor to the mines and industries ministry, told Pajhwok Afghan News: "ADB's technical and economic study will be completed and the three countries involved in the project - Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkmenistan - will hold a meeting in Islamabad at the end of November. The final results will be announced then." Gul Ahmad Kamali, head of the energy and road projects with the ADB, said his organization's part in the pipeline project was to assess the facilities, provide technical advisors, and conduct surveys.

Oil analysts in the region say whoever takes the project will reap millions of dollars each year from the venture. But Afghanistan's security has been a major concern for investors. Mandokhil added that should India participate in the project, it will give more momentum to regional business.

Turkmenistan, the world's biggest producer of gas, is desperate to get its huge gas reserves out to the market and boost its weak economy by presenting its energy supplies to South and Central Asian countries. The trans-Afghanistan pipeline will first go to Pakistan's Gawadar Port of Pakistan and then to India. The gas will then be transferred to Bangkok through ships.

Hakim Taniwal, the former mines and industries minister, now minister of employment and social affairs, told Pajhwok that the three partners discussed the pipeline's security at the seventh meeting in Islamabad, as well as India's role in the project.

Engineer Nazar Mohammad Mangal, acting minister of mines and industry, said the pipeline would give Afghanistan the opportunity to get involved in regional development and economic projects. "I've just returned from India, where I attended a conference of South Asian Energy [SAE]. Afghanistan joined SAE in this conference, so the windows of hope are open for us," Mangal said.

Salam Azemi, a former Unocal advisor, said the project was very important for Afghanistan in terms of economic and regional benefits and would provide jobs for many Afghans. Afrasyab Khattak, a Pakistan-based regional analyst, said the project would benefit both Afghanistan and Pakistan, despite past hiccups. "Our region is very backward in economic development. This project will benefit our nation tremendously. Though improper rivalry and some initial problems had impeded the business, it's a good time to seize the initiative," Khattak said.

The revised scheme, apart from the $300 million annual income, should pave the way for extension of a railway alongside the pipeline, provide jobs to thousands of Afghans, distribute free gas to the areas through which the pipeline passes, and should ensure construction of electricity and road facilities in these areas. Azemi says Pakistan-India relations should improve and the Kashmir dispute settled before the project comes into effect.

I Hate Being Right



A few days ago, U.S. and Iraqi collaborationist militia stormed a Baghdad mosque, trashing the joint. I called that entry "How to Win Friends and Influence People."



Here's today AP update:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A U.S.-Iraqi raid on the Abu Hanifa mosque — one of the most revered sites for Sunni Muslims — spawned a weekend of street battles, assassinations and a rash of bombings that changed Baghdad. The capital, for months a city of unrelenting but sporadic violence, has taken on the look of a battlefield. The chaos has fanned sectarian tension and deepened Sunni distrust of interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, a Shiite installed by the Americans five months ago. It has also heightened the anxiety of the city's 6 million people — already worn down by years of sanctions and tyranny, then war, military occupation, crime and deprivation.

"Baghdad is now a battlefield and we are in the middle of it," said Qasim al-Sabti, an artist who kept his children home from school Saturday, which is a work day in Iraq. When he sent his children back to school Sunday, the teachers didn't show up.

In a sign of public unease, merchants in the outdoor markets, where most people buy their meat, vegetables and household supplies, say crowds are below normal. Many shops near sites of car bombings have closed. Adding to the sense of unease, U.S. military helicopters have begun flying lower over the city. The distant roar of jets has become a fixture of Baghdad at night. The latest escalation appeared to have been triggered by a U.S.-Iraqi raid Friday on the Abu Hanifa mosque in the Sunni neighborhood of Azamiyah as worshippers were leaving after midday prayers. Witnesses said three people were killed, and 40 were arrested.

The next day, heavy street fighting erupted in Azamiyah between U.S. and Iraqi forces and Sunni insurgents who tried to storm a police station. The fighting, involving mortars, rocket propelled grenades and roadside bombs, raged for several hours and left several stores ablaze, according to witnesses.

Almost simultaneously, clashes broke out in at least five other Baghdad neighborhoods. In all, at least 10 people, including one American soldier, were killed throughout the capital Saturday. Lt. Col. James Hutton, spokesman for the U.S. Army's 1st Cavalry Division, which is in charge of security in Baghdad, acknowledged that there has been an increase in insurgent activity in the capital. But he linked the increase to the fighting in Fallujah, where U.S. troops are still fighting pockets of resistance after recapturing the city last week, rather than the raid on the Abu Hanifa mosque.

I'm just a cartoonist and writer sitting on my ass in front of a computer. Maybe because I've spent a little time in the Middle East and talk to Muslims, I saw this one coming.



Why didn't the Pentagon?

FYI



I now accept PayPal for original artwork, books, etc.

Ted Rall on Air America Monday Morning



I'll be a guest on Air America's "Unfiltered" with Lizz Winstead, Chuck D and Rachel Maddow on Monday morning, at about 11:30 am East Coast time. The topic will be--what else?--censorship by the media. Case study: The Washington Post. But there will be, I'm told, other things to talk about as well. Set your RCRs!



For those who live in Jesusland, you may livestream Air America online through their website.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Today's Mail



Alex writes the Good:

I read your column religiously every week. Who says the Left isn't devout?

No journalist better articulates my hopes and fears about this beautiful country. Your writing has inspired me, and made me a better citizen. Armed with information and emotion from your work (and other progressive sources), I have spent the last few years engaging people in discussion whenever I can. Like loving and responsible parents owe it to their children to teach them right from wrong and let them know when they make mistakes, patriotic citizens owe it to their country and their leaders to do the same, and your writing plays a pivotal role in galvanizing this effort. While the mainstream media rewards passivity and complacency, your writing inspires action and commitment.

When this wonderful nation behaves like a drunk driver, the mainstream media behaves like the bad friend who jumps gingerly into the passenger seat, while you try to do what a true friend should and take away the keys -- and yet it is responsible and progressive citizens such as you and I who get called "un-American" when we are the only ones actually trying to save America.

I was shocked to read about WashingtonPost.com's recent actions where you are concerned. I have already written them to express my total dismay. As I said in my letter to them, it is nothing short of shameful that they would dismiss their most intelligent, well-researched, courageous socio-political commentator, in the midst of the most censorship-heavy and repressive period in recent media history.

Ted, you have my unconditional support and gratitude, for everything you have done and continue to do for our great land.

If there is ever anything I can do for you, please let me know.

As I wrote below, I do have regrets about the cartoon that prompted the Post's (heavyhanded) decision. But Alex understands what I'm trying to do, conveying it perfectly with his DWI analogy. When this country that I adore goes off the rails, yielding to its worst impulses, it's the duty of patriotic Americans to speak up, to try to get us back on the straight and narrow.



Frequent correspondent Izzy writes:

My general feeling is, what the hell is the point at this stage.



I've spent most of my waking hours since Nov. 3 feeling physically sick and trying not to scream. I don't see any way out of this. Friend of mine says it's time to just let go of the wheel put the car in the ditch (metaphorically, scene from fight Club comes to mind...) and then go on from there. Considering the last few years, and the exponential growth in horror that we all expect to see (and are already seeing) from BushCo, what answer is there??? The game is rigged... There's no way out. As the Good Doctor (Hunter Thompson) says, "We are as doomed as shithouse rats". My signature line use to be, "Keep the faith" or "March or Die". Too late...

Yes, things seem grim. Things are grim. Our country is in the hands of a stupid, vicious dictator. He's already started sabre-rattling against Iran--talk of "regime change" is already being bandied about in D.C. We, the United States, run an extensive system of concentration camps around the world where thousands of innocent people are being tortured by our own government employees. Bushism is neofascism minus the cool uniforms.



The United States, not to mention the world, have been in far worse situations--and we've survived, even gotten better. It is our duty not to give up or give in, but to keep on fighting. This is all the more true when the situation looks bad. After all, do you want to be like the "fans" of a losing baseball team who only show up to cheer at the stadium when there's a chance of winning? Any liberal asshole can work to get rid of the Repugnicants when, as occured before November 2, we had a good chance of expelling them. What takes genuine commitment is to keep fighting now. Chin up, Izzy. And don't go to Canada unless they start rounding us up too.



MIKENOMGI@aol.com writes:

You're such a whacked-out lefty, even the NYT and Washington Post don't want you. Maybe you could do a singing gig with Streisand or that nutcake washed up hippie Ronstandt. Jackass!

This one stands for itself.

Stop Pro-Torture Lawyer Alberto Gonzales



I wrote about Gonzales in my column this week. He's a dangerous man, far worse than the departing John Ashcroft. A new website, www.StopAlbertoGonzales.com, contains everything you need to know--and can do--about the threat of his ascension to Attorney General. It's not too late--not yet--to do something.

How to Make Friends and Influence People



From today's Associated Press:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraqi forces, backed by U.S. soldiers, stormed one of the major Sunni Muslim mosques in Baghdad after Friday prayers, opening fire and killing at least three people, witnesses said. Another raid overnight at a hospital allegedly used by insurgents in Mosul led to three arrests, the military said.

About 40 people were arrested at the Abu Hanifa mosque in the capital's northwestern Azamiyah neighborhood, according to the witnesses, who were members of the congregation. Another five people were wounded.

It appeared the raid at Abu Hanifa mosque, long associated with anti-American activity, was part of the crackdown on Sunni clerical militants launched in parallel with military operations against the insurgent stronghold of Fallujah.

On Thursday, the Iraqi government warned that Islamic clerics who incite violence will be considered as "participating in terrorism." A number of them already have been arrested, including several members of the Sunni clerical Association of Muslim Scholars which spoke out against the U.S.-led offensive against Fallujah.

"The government is determined to pursue those who incite acts of violence. A number of mosques' clerics who have publicly called for taking the path of violence have been arrested and will be legally tried," said Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's spokesman, Thair al-Naqeeb.

U.S. troops were seen securing the outer perimeter of the mosque area and sealing it off. Some American soldiers also were seen inside the compound.

Witnesses heard explosions coming from inside the mosque, apparently from stun grenades. Inside the office of the imam, books and a computer were found scattered on the floor, and the furniture was turned upside down.

Say you're Iraqi--how can you not just love our troops and their local collaborationists?

I'd Love To Draw That "Crudely"



British national treasure, UK Guardian cartoonist Steve Bell, catches shit from American ideological turncoat and right-wing sellout David Horowitz here. (Scroll down a bit until you see the color cartoon.) Drawn "crudely"? Not only is Horowitz blind to the fact that he supports an Administration that uses "Mein Kampf" more as a self help book than a cautionary tale, he's obviously just, plain, blind.

E&P Covers Washington Post.com Flap



It's here.

There They (We) Go Again



If you liked the Rush to War Against Iraq, you'll love the Rush to War Against Iran(TM)! One different letter, twice the danger, all brought to you by the same colorful cast of characters!

Iran Trying to Fit Missiles for Nuclear Weapons

Powell Says U.S. Has Intelligence on Tehran's Plans

By ALAN CLENDENNING, AP

SANTIAGO, Chile (Nov. 18) -- The United States has intelligence indicating Iran is trying to fit missiles to carry nuclear weapons, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said.

Wow, Colin! Do they have lots of anthrax too? Better call Kofi Annan and book another UN speech to let everyone know what a terrible threat we face!

Mohammad Mohaddessin, of the opposition group National Council for Resistance in Iran, displays an aerial photo of Tehran during a press conference Wednesday. The group says Iran isn't being honest with the U.N. about its nuclear activities. Powell partially confirmed claims by an Iranian opposition group that Tehran is deceiving the United Nations and is attempting to secretly continue activities meant to give it atomic arms by next year.

''I have seen intelligence which would corroborate what this dissident group is saying,'' Powell told reporters Wednesday as he traveled to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Santiago. ''And it should be of concern to all parties.''

Thank goodness for those helpful dissident groups! After all, they have no motivation for lying. It's not like the National Council for Resistance wants to run Iran after a U.S. invasion or anything. Ahmed Chalabi, call your office.

Pressed by reporters on the intelligence reports, Powell said the intelligence indicates that Iran ''had been actively working on delivery systems'' capable of carrying a nuclear weapon.

Powell said there is no evidence to suggest that Iran has developed the technology to make a nuclear weapon, but suggested that the regime is working to adapt missiles for nuclear warheads.

'I'm talking about information that says that they not only had these missiles, but I'm aware of information that suggests they were working hard as to how to put the two together,'' Powell said.

Oh. Well. That's not exactly the same thing, is it? Yes, you can use a missile to launch a nuke. But you can also use it to carry conventional weapons. Or launch a satellite. I mean, heck, you could mail a nuke to New York. Would that make any country with a postal system a nuclear threat?

A senior official for the National Council for Resistance in Iran said Tuesday that a bomb diagram - along with an unspecified amount of weapons-grade uranium - was provided to Iran by Abdul Qadeer Khan, the disgraced former head of Pakistani's nuclear development which was tied to both Iran and Libya.

He said the designs were handed to the Iranians between 1994 and 1996, while Khan delivered HEU - highly enriched uranium - in 2001.

Once again, the same old story--ancient intelligence from a dubious source already caught lying repeatedly. All Powell has is a friggin' cartoon--and he's sabrerattling anyway. God, Colin, do you have anything left of your once shining rep?

Banned in the United States as a terrorist organization, the group was instrumental in 2002 in revealing Iran's enrichment program in the central city of Natanz, based on what it said was information provided by sources in Iran.

"Banned in the United States as a terrorist organization." Wow. Nice sourcing, Colin.

The opposition group says a facility at Lavizan-Shian northeast of Tehran was part of a secret nuclear weapons program. Powell declined comment on Khan, but said ''for 20 years the Iranians have been trying to hide things from the international community.''

Well, yes. Because the international community has imposed trade sanctions on them, attempted to overthrow their government and even bankrolled Saddam Hussein's invasion of them. If I were the Iranians, I might be trying to keep things discreet too. Hell, I might even be trying to develop nukes to save myself from what happened to Iraq next door. But who has more to hide from the international community than the U.S.? Since when do we open our doors to international arms inspectors? Yet we are by far the greatest danger facing the world today. We have more nukes, and we're the only country to ever have used them. Twice. On civilian targets.

OK, So Not Everyone is Negative



A number of Washington Post online readers dismayed that they dropped my cartoons in the aftermath of a write-in campaign have written to express their dismay. You can pipe in by sending your two cents to washingtonpost@mailnj.custhelp.com.



Marvin writes:

I have just heard that you have dropped Ted Rall’s cartoons. I am the parent of an autistic child, and I, like others, was annoyed by Rall’s cartoon depiction of a disabled child. But Rall was trying to make a point; he just picked an unfortunate, somewhat thoughtless way to do it. But one mistake should not lead to censorship. I hope you will reconsider your action and once again run Rall’s incisive cartoons.

Joseph wrote:

I can not believe that the esteemed Washington Post, home of the famed Watergate reporting, is caving in and canceling Ted Rall's comic. Offensive or not, one of the major reasons education is so lacking in our public schools is the policy of inclusion. Although that wasn't the primary target of Rall's cartoon, his point is well illustrated. My mother has FIVE mentally disabled children in her second grade class this year. Not only is it more than she can handle, it's a distraction to the other children in class and a serious detriment to their education. Teachers are not babysitters. Parents of mentally disabled and disturbed children often have very unrealistic views of what their children can accomplish (they're in denial) and what other people can tolerate in their children's behavior.

Rall once again had the guts to show people the ugly truth -- why do you think they're so offended? Do you honestly believe retarded children don't drool, shout nonsense and make a scene? Do you think the thousands of autistic, emotionally disturbed, and mentally disabled children aren't a cause of both fear and amusement to the other young children in a second-grade classroom.

This was another cowardly act of the media bending to the will of the bully -- be that politically correct bully or that of the Christian Coalition. You're a newspaper, not a greeting card company. You're supposed to report the harsh truth, foster debate and open minds, not shirk from things people find "in poor taste."

I'm sure the people who were offended by the doodles of Ted Rall were not motivated by his anti-war stance.

With contempt,

Someone else wrote:

do you understand how certain groups become "untouchable"...beyond criticism, and not only that, but beyond anything that can be interpreted as criticism? Do you see how a group of obsessive do-gooders can wield power? Your profession (you know, cartooning) is economically distributed...they can knock you off the Post without killing you. But what if you were a reporter? A reporter who told certain unpleasant truths, about certain untouchable groups..?



Your career could be ruined completely, just on somebody's dislike of facts. [And your portrayal was mild compared to certain true cases. For example, a family member of mine taught at a school in which a comatose boy was wheeled from classroom to classroom in a gurney. He had a full time nurse dedicated to him. If you said, "His parents are bilking the taxpayers in order to escape their own child during school hours"...imagine the outcry!]

Joe says:

It appears you have offended yet another cowardly newspaper afraid to publish hard line crticism of our government. Your editorial cartoons are no longer listed with the Washington Post online.

I am not affiliated wirth any political party because I consider myself an independent thinker. I try to look at all sides of an issue before I take a stand and form an opinion.

The severity with which you attack Bush brings me to believe you are disgusted with the direction our government has taken toward world domination.

American businesses used to rob third world countries of their natural resources by offering trinkets and glitter. Not any more; now they fight back. The destruction and death the United State Armed Forces are doing to Iraq and it's people is deplorable and unforgivable.

I know that Bush thinks he is on a mission from God to bring about the destruction of the Middle East in preparation for the second coming of Christ, but I don't understand how he can justify what he is doing to his God. Being raised in the Catholic faith, I can't make any sense of his purpose. Chritianity follows the philosophy "the end never justifies the means."

Once Bush had been re-elected, applications for emmigration to New Zealand and Canada increased one hundred fold. If all of the people who hated Bush but didn't want Kerry as president had voted for an independent candidate, we would have a new president!

Now they are all fleeing the country.

Your audience is shrinking as more papers drop your cartoons. Your wit is honest and hard hitting. How about offering constructive criticism? Maybe if editorial cortoons made suggestions to the readers along with the satire readers would start digesting what is printed and become more informed voters.

Constructive criticism? Pick up my book WAKE UP, YOU'RE LIBERAL. That's all about constructive criticism of both the right and the left.



C.S. writes:

I personally found the classroom analogy in your recent cartoon quite insightful. Upon examining it a second time, I do find your depiction of the disabled child to be overdone to the point where it is arguably offensive. But the context also makes it clear to me that by making the disabled child such a goober you were commenting on how you view Bush fans, not developmentally disabled children.

Moreover, I do not think you should have to apologize for making the perfectly reasonable argument that disabled kids don't belong in mainstream classrooms -- at least not all the time. Traditional schooling is barely tolerable for regular kids. The idea that special needs children can learn anything in such a setting is questionable at best. I have a younger sister who is disabled. As a child, she was a victim of adults who tried to force her into the mold of normalcy. She was "included" to the point where she never even developed basic reading, writing, and comprehension skills. Her learning needs were different from those of most children. She therefore needed a tailored curriculum, but she didn't get it.

In my view, you were merely saying with this cartoon that it is not conducive to learning for severely disabled children to share a classroom with non-disabled children. It's not like you were advocating that we relegate them to leper status or anything. It was a satirical cartoon aimed at a political faction that has never met a low blow it didn't like. Rather than fight amongst each other, I think we should turn our anger on those who truly seek to exclude our children from receiving adequate education. By that I mean Bush and his base (the "haves" and the "have mores," as he calls them).