New Cartoon Collections by FORs:

If you’re in the market for some interesting, hard-hitting political cartoons, please check out two new books by my friends Mikhaela Reid and Masheka Wood. Mikhaela was in “Attitude 2” and Masheka is up and coming. Both are self-published, so every dollar (well, most of them) goes to cartoonists at a critical time in their careers. Come on, support new talent, folks! Ordering information, etc. follows:

Mikhaela and Masheka’s Books:

Attack of the 50-Foot Mikhaela! Cartoons by Mikhaela Reid (Foreword by Ted Rall).

Bushies are bum-rushing Cheney’s secret bunker! Ex-gays are quaking in their closets! Abstinence educators are shivering in their shiny silver purity rings! Greedy CEOs are heading for the hills and Minutemen are bolting for the border! Cartoonist Mikhaela Reid is on the rampage—and no hypocrite is safe! Attack features 150 of Reid’s greatest cartoon hits, plus rarities, odds, ends and behind-the-scenes commentary! Available June 4 at Lulu.com!

Deep Doodle: Cartoons by Masheka Wood.

Masheka Wood takes you deep into the warped, candy-colored recesses of his brain as he tackles a variety of social, political and just plain grody targets. Here are Wood’s “Not Just Knee Deep” cartoons, assorted illustrations and a delicious dose of old-school comics. Prepare to lose your mind—or your lunch! Wood’s work has appeared on MTV, The New Standard and Jackson State University’s art exhibit, “Other Heroes: African American comics creators, characters, and archetypes.” He is a 2007 Glyph Comics Award nominee for ‘Rising Star.’ Available now at Lulu.com!

Mikhaela and Masheka’s Book Tour:

Click on any of these events for more details or view the calendar here.

Three Troops Missing in Iraq

4,000 U.S. soldiers are searching for them. For three people.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands of Iraqis have been kidnapped–some by gangs, others by insurgents, others by U.S. forces. But the U.S. occupation forces don’t lift a finger to find them.

It’s been said before, and I’ll say it again anyway: Until we start acting like other people’s lives count for as much as Americans, people overseas are going to hate our guts. Who can blame them, really?

Ted Rall Discusses the French Elections: Live in Washington DC

I’ll be joining Radio France Internationale correspondent Claude Porsella, TF1 correspondent Guillaume Debré, and fellow cartoonists Jeff Danzinger (New York Times Syndicate), Kal (The Economist, ex-Baltimore Sun) and Nick Galifianakis (Washington Post Writers Group) for a panel discussion about the French presidential elections tomorrow night in Washington.

When: Wednesday, April 25, at 6:30 pm

Where: Alliance Française, 2142 Wyoming Avenue NW | Washington, DC 20008 | Phone 202.234.7911

Cost: $8.00 for members of the Alliance Française, $12.00 for all others

Cartoonists wth Attitude in San Francisco

Today is day two and the final day of the Alternative Press Expo (APE) independent and small press comics creator confab at 620 7th Street (near Brannan) in San Francisco. Come out and buy artwork and books by yours truly, Mikhaela B. Reid, Masheka Wood, Ben Smith, Matt Bors, August Pollak, Stephanie McMillan and others. Look for the CWA booth! Yesterday was fun but soggy; today is looking to be sunny and dry. It’s today between 11 and 5; hope to meet you there.

Congrats, Censors!

Media Matters for America, founded by David Brock, is crowing from the sorta-left (can you really trust an ideological traitor?) about Imus’ firing. MM is even distributing a hit list of right-wing talk show hosts and others who they want to see fired for spewing what they deem to be offensive language.

Over on the probably-right are outfits like BeliefNet, that are using Imus’ firing as a staging ground for attacks on popular music. Tipper Gore, call the batcave! Here’s what BeliefNet’s latest email says:

Don Imus Controversy
With Imus Gone, Let’s Clean Up Rap
“Imus got what he deserved, but the root of the problem is our vulgar culture. As a black woman and a child of God, I ask, Why don’t Christians stand up to rap artists?”
Poll: Should Imus Have Been Fired? | Discuss
His Apology: Accept It | Not Enough
Talk Radio Is the Real Culprit
“It’s time to stop handling these rappers with kid gloves and letting them run free every time they cry “I’m innocent.” Young minds are at stake every time they turn on the television and see a man disrespecting a woman, sliding a credit card down the crack of her backside–thanks, Nelly–or just allowing women to exploit themselves in a music video for a crummy paycheck. (Yes, the women agree to be in these videos by their own free will, but when will they decide they don’t want them to sell themselves to the highest bidder anymore?) Young ears are being flooded with the poisonous lyrics of today’s rap music. Stop conveying the message that it could ever be appropriate to call a woman a “‘ho” or a “b*tch”–regardless of what you personally know about them. It’s not okay, ever–whether you’re an African American rapper or a white talk-radio shock jock. “

Charmers all around, I’m sure.

Well, congratulations. It took you 30 years to notice that he told tasteless (and often funny) jokes, many of which relied on racial and gender stereotypes, but he’s gone. Hurrah!

Meanwhile, the Rutgers women he offended have seen their lives improve not…one…bit. Their fathers and brothers still risk getting pulled over and searched and beaten and raped and murdered by police for no reason whatsoever. African-American team members whose parents live in inner cities spent their spring breaks in areas that have been abandoned by city and state governments that don’t care what happens to them. Their own job prospects are limited by their skin color. But hey, at least they got that loud-mouth talk show host fired. Yay for racial justice!

No one is crowing louder than the left. There’s just one, or maybe two problems: One, it’s not like Imus will be replaced by, say, me. (I’m keeping my phone open just in case CBS calls, though.) Two, he was one of the most progressive voices on talk radio.

Obviously, Imus’ “hos” joke was stupid. But an apology was more than sufficient. He didn’t deserve to be fired. Could it be that the P.C. soft-liberal “left” has played into the Republicans’ hands–again?

Follow-Up Interview Re: Coulter Censorship

The excellent New England-based LGBT newspaper Bay Windows has a follow-up interview with me about the campaign by some gay organizations to get Ann Coulter’s column cancelled by newspapers. I oppose censoring Coulter because opposing censorship is always the right thing to do, even–especially–when the person being considered is unappealing. Sadly, the First Amendment is the least popular part of the Constitution–everyone is in favor of speech they agree with.

Human Rights Campaign Responds; I Reply

A spokesman for the HRC (I’ll spare her email in-box by not posting her name) has replied by email to my Open Letter about their campaign to get Ann Coulter out of newspaper syndication. Here’s what she wrote:

Thank you for contacting the Human Rights Campaign regarding censorship and the First Amendment.

We take freedom of speech and First Amendment issues very seriously, and we understand your concerns.

We believe that this is not a question of censorship. There are plenty of other people on the right who share Coulter’s values and views but understand the value of civility and respect.

Ann Coulter is free to spew her vile and hateful speech but as a community we are also free to exercise our collective power. And when Coulter defends herself on Fox News by saying “‘faggot’ isn’t offensive to gays,” it is our responsibility to make sure she, and those who carry her columns, understand that we know otherwise. “Faggot” is a loaded word — a word that too often is used as a weapon to demean and wound our community.

If she had made a racist or anti-Semitic remark, there would not have even been a question of whether a newspaper should continue carrying her columns. We must speak out in order to move the “F word” into that same column of universally understood hate speech.

Thank you again for contacting us and if you have any other questions please do not hesitate to contact me directly.

Now here’s my reply:

I hate to belabor the point–well, really two points–but it’s important to note that Coulter’s comment did not appear in her column, but rather in a speech. Surely there’s a First Amendment issue involved when one is punished for one’s views, no matter how reprehensible, by being deprived of earning a livelihood in another forum.

If I own a restaurant, for example, should I fire a waiter after I learn he is a neo-Nazi skinhead? Even neo-Nazi skinheads are entitled to pay their rent, as long as they don’t spew their political beliefs at my customers, other waiters or myself. To believe otherwise is to advocate economic censorship. To say otherwise is to embrace the sophistic statement that one is free to say whatever one pleases as long as one is willing to accept starvation as a result.

You are mistaken when you write: “If she had made a racist or anti-Semitic remark, there would not have even been a question of whether a newspaper should continue carrying her columns.” Coulter has in fact made numerous racist comments in her column, including her use of the derogatory slur “raghead” to refer to Muslims. It is a tribute to the Muslim-American community that they did not try to counter her bigotry in this respect with a call for censorship–one that only would have served to strengthen her.

I agree with you that “faggot” is not a word that elevates civilized debate. Its use epitomizes not only homophobia in the most literal sense, but the anti-intellectual strain that keeps America from being as good a nation as it could be. But it’s only a word—and no word should prompt us to go down the road that leads to any form of censorship or would-be censorship.

There are more constructive ways for political progressives to flex their muscle. When gays and lesbians in Columbus, Ohio had trouble convincing local bar owners to open their doors to a “gay night” a few years back, they wrote “gay money” on their paper money and spent it locally. When “gay money” began turning up in the till, bar owners realized they were ignoring a potential source of income at their own detriment.

Anyway, Ann Coulter is not the enemy. The “mainstream” Republicans who embrace her as their attack dog, such as presidential candidate Mitt Romney who introduced her at CPAC, are those who are truly keeping us back.

An Open Letter to the Human Rights Campaign

New York City, March 11, 2007

Human Rights Campaign
1640 Rhode Island Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20036-3278
Via email: hrc@hrc.org

Media Matters for America
1625 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
Via email: mm-tips@mediamatters.org

Re: Ann Coulter Censorship Campaign

To the Boards of Directors:

As a progressive American who shares your views, it pains me to learn that the Human Rights Campaign and Media Matters for America have sunk to the same tactics to silence syndicated columnist Ann Coulter as right-wing extremists deployed against me and other commentators critical of the Bush Administration during the politically repressive years following the September 11, 2001 attacks.

I find Coulter’s work both ideologically and tonally at odds with my own. She is an intellectually dishonest purveyor of hate speech whose cover—”it’s only a joke”—is belied by the fact that she isn’t funny. My contempt for her is also personal. At the 2006 Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) conference in Washington, D.C., and in her column, she slandered and libeled me by falsely stating that “Doonesbury” cartoonist Garry Trudeau and I had both entered Iran’s Holocaust cartoon contest.

So Coulter is no friend or ally. She is my foe and, I believe, an enemy of core American values of decency, generosity and common sense. As a fervent proponent of the First Amendment and an opinion monger who relies upon the right to free expression to earn a living, however, I must set aside my personal resentment—and I ask you to do the same. “I disapprove of what you say,” Voltaire supposedly said (but probably didn’t), “but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” It’s a noble and very American sentiment even if it’s a quotation misattributed to a Frenchman.

It is without pleasure but with profound sincerity that I respectfully request that you drop your campaign to ask newspapers to drop Coulter’s column in the aftermath of her archetypically reprehensible remark that Senator John Edwards is a “faggot.”

During the 1950s, a defining characteristic of McCarthyism was to deprive actors of work in Hollywood to punish them for political views expressed elsewhere. Attempting to stifle a creative person in a forum in reaction to content that did not appear in that forum is a chilling revival of the spirit of McCarthyism. Coulter’s “faggot” slur occurred in a speech to the 2007 gathering of CPAC, not her column. Displeasure at her remark would be more appropriately directed at that organization, which invited her back despite her equally distasteful rhetoric last year.

Moreover, the specific means you are encouraging people to use to contact newspaper editors are pernicious and possibly illegal. Many will misrepresent themselves as regular readers and/or subscribers to these publications, advocating a kind of fraud that may constitute a crime—”tortious interference with contract”—in many states. Your websites contain form letters and “talking points” which you ask people to send to a list of editors of newspapers that carry Coulter’s column. Your obvious intent is to convince each editor that his or her newspapers’ readers are angry about her column when, in fact, 99 percent of the emails received by each editor will be sent by someone who lives nowhere near the publication’s area of circulation, and her column is not directly at issue.

Will this work? Possibly, in some cases. Right-wing extremist groups used similar sleazy tactics against me between 2001 and 2005, asking conservatives to impersonate angry subscribers to my client publications. While most editors saw through the deception, some didn’t. In the ideologically charged atmosphere of the time, even papers with sterling, left-of-center reputations were cowed into submission. During the Clinton years, I was one of The New York Times’ most frequently reprinted editorial cartoonists, and a contributor to the Op-Ed Page. Under Bush my work appeared a few times before disappearing.

Now that the political winds have changed in our favor, progressives whose views were marginalized, insulted as acts of treason and subsequently vindicated by events are understandably tempted to get even with caustic personalities like Coulter for their vitriol and intolerance. More than ever, however, we must resist the urge to lower ourselves to their level. How can we complain about right-wing hatred if we match it with our own? How can we bemoan right-wing censorship campaigns if we do the same thing?

We must take the high road, and not merely because it’s the right thing to do. Remember, the “they do it too” race to the bottom cuts both ways. A few years ago, liberals who complained about right-wing censorship were reminded of 1990s-era campaigns to boycott the sponsors of Dr. Laura Schlessinger’s radio show and get Rush Limbaugh fired from his side job as a sports commentator.

“The issue is that anti-gay epithets should be so beyond the pale that anyone who uses them immediately becomes anathema to public discourse,” wrote HRC President Joe Solmonese in The Huffington Post. Even for a militant defender of gay rights like me, this argument makes me shudder. Once we establish one litmus test for who’s allowed access to the public square—no “F” word, no “N” word—who’s to stop the other side for doing the same—no Bush-bashing, no criticizing the troops?

Censorship of pundits who spew idiotic words like “faggot” only adds to their hateful power. HRC would be much better off directing its energies towards it core mission of “working to achieve gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender equality…[and] end[ing] discrimination against GLBT citizens.” Isn’t making marriage available to everyone who falls in love more important than spinning your wheels in a vain attempt to erase a single vulgar slur from the dictionary?

Media Matters for America’s mission statement states that it is “dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.” Where does censoring people like Ann Coulter fit with this goal? She is, after all, one of the leading purveyors of “conservative misinformation.” If you get her and her ilk to shut up, what will you have to monitor, analyze and correct?

Thank you very much for your consideration.

Very truly yours,
Ted Rall

Ted Rall, winner of the 1995 and 2000 Robert F. Kennedy Journalism Award for Outstanding Coverage of the Problems of the Disadvantaged, is a syndicated editorial cartoonist and columnist for Universal Press Syndicate. He is, most recently, author of “Silk Road to Ruin: Is Central Asia the New Middle East?”

Censorship Campaigns

Memo to HRC: Please fucking STOP!

RIght-wing campaigns to censor me after 9/11 were profoundly anti-American. Now that the left is ascendant, groups like the Human Rights Campaign are calling for Universal Press Syndicate–which also distributes my work–to drop columnist Ann Coulter.

These campaigns, whether directed against Coulter or myself, are wrong. Censor the other side and you justify censoring your own side. If people are upset about Ann Coulter’s anti-gay slur against John Edwards, they need to ridicule her. Or, better yet, just ignore her and move on. Or, better than that, write their own insults against John McCain!

Killed Cartoons: Casualties from the War on Free Expression

A pair of censored Ted Rall cartoons along with the backstory thereof appear in David Wallis’ new anthology “Killed Cartoons”. From the official website:

The collection, heralded by cartoonist Gahan Wilson of the New Yorker as “amazing in its range,” includes spiked art about everything from the Iraq War to teen fashion trends. Works by renowned contemporary artists such as Garry Trudeau , Steve Brodner, Edward Sorel, Doug Marlette, Ted Rall, Paul Conrad, Matt Davies and Anita Kunz are displayed alongside unearthed gems by legends like David Low, Herblock and Norman Rockwell.