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.
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).
More on Last Week’s Toon
A write-in campaign by advocates for the disabled (they took offense at last week’s cartoon in which I compared the results of the presidential election–wherein a bunch of uninformed morons in the red states demonstrated their ability to get their way at the expense of people who actually pay attention to current events) continues
One of the hazards of this profession is that it requires fearlessness mixed with perfection. Draw 200 cartoons a year that people enjoy and you’ll get few if any thanks. Certainly no one conducts a write-in campaign of praise. Draw 1 that goes astray–intentionally or otherwise–and everybody calls for your head. No wonder so many cartoonists don’t take risks in their approach or in their politics. People are negative; they only react negatively.
When I wrote earlier that I intended to research the subject of mainstreaming in the public schools–now called “inclusion.” I will. But I’m confused. If your goal was to educate me, to convince me that I was wrong to depict disabled children the way I did with a view towards (presumably) gaining an ally in the media…why try to censor me?
If I had to draw that cartoon again, I’d take a different tack. I regret hurting people who I have nothing against. I do want to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable, and I think I failed in that with this cartoon. Not to mention that the cartoon failed–too many people got bogged down in the analogy and the main point got lost.
No one bats 1.000. I sure don’t.
More from the Overstuffed Mailbag
Steve writes:
With a wide grin, I read your editorial entitled “Confessions of a Cultural Elitist”. While I’m not in total agreement with all you said, it made some curious points. Unfortunately, in this society, there will always be a cultural gap between those who have and those who have no clue, those who can think and see reality and those who follow the herd. Though we shouldn’t gloat and make them feel less than they are, it’s difficult to imagine how their sub-society can exist in to the future. Sorry to see your type writhe in such obvious agony. Maybe the next 4 years will teach the “cultural elite” a few lessons.
Yes, it’s true. Those of us voted against Bush–i.e., for Kerry–are in agony. I’m curious about the gloating, though. When Bill Clinton drove the right to distraction, I didn’t reflexively laugh them off. I thought about it. What was it about Clinton, I wondered, that drove Republicans so batshit crazy pissed off? Most of it, I concluded, was style: his smug arrogance, though nothing on the order of Bush’s, must have been grating to those who voted against him. But, especially after Clinton got caught lying under oath, a long-term pattern of sleazy misconduct rose to the level, in their minds, of impeachment. Again, what he did pales in comparison with Bush’s crimes. Still, Clinton did deserve impeachment.
Back then, I broke ranks with fellow lefties by calling, repeatedly, for Clinton’s impeachment. And part of what caused me to do so was the fact that Republicans hated him so much. Nowadays, as Democrats seethe over Bush’s policies and style, it might behoove Republicans to consider why we despise him so much. You might not agree with all of our reasons. But if you really opened your minds, you might see that we have a point. After all, Democrats didn’t hate George H.W. Bush this way. Not since Richard Nixon has a Republican president been hated this much; not since FDR has a Democrat–and FDR deserved the disdain for, among other things, running for a third term and trying to stack the Supreme Court.
Sean wrote:
I’ve decided to provide you some feedback on your OP/ED (Confessions of a Cultural Elitist) since I am one of the “Spectacularly Stupid” who supported president Bush. I’m not expecting a reply from you, only to provide you with another opinion.I live and work around the very blue city of Portland Oregon, so there is no shortage of people around here who would agree with your lefter equals smarter attitude. My support of George Bush was based 75% on common values and 25% on my impression of John Kerry’s arrogance, weakness on defense, as well as his position on issues.
Come on. John Kerry MORE arrogant than Bush? Weak on defense? Surely you didn’t believe those silly “John Kerry voted against defense systems 14,510 times” ads?
In light of our invasion of Iraq, I realize the idea Saddam had stockpiles of WMD’s or an active nuclear program was a mistaken one, but you’ll have to admit that George Bush was in good company on that assumption. Regarding Al Qaeda, I don’t think I ever needed to have a case made to me for collusion on 9/11 to support Bush’s decision on Iraq. The fact that Saddam allowed notorious terrorists in his country and provided support to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers was enough to know where he stood on terrorism.
Actually, the CIA told Bush before the war that there was zero evidence that Saddam still had WMDs, much less nukes. And terrorism is a tactic–one commonly used by outgunned combatants against a superior force, like the American revolutionaries against Britain in 1776–not an ideology. Saddam supported the Palestinians, that’s true. But there was no evidence that he ever intended to, or could have, brought harm to the United States. And Bush knew that.
Bobby wrote:
As I read your article this morning, I was stunned by your apparent hatred of those of us that voted for President Bush. I can understand you supporting your candidate. I can understand discussion, debates, and even arguments about who is better suited to run our country. But, what I cannot understand is how you can insult, belittle, and demean such a large segment of the population for exercising their right to vote.
Let me make it simple. 59 million Americans with access to 100 channels and all of the world’s news outlets online at their local public library, voted for a neofascist over the standard-issue American politician the Democrats put up. They voted for Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, the torture and murder of children by US troops in Afghanistan and the systematic genocide of more than 100,000 Iraqis for the sole purpose of securing access to cheap Middle Eastern oil. Not since Classic vs. New Coke has there been a more obvious choice, a simpler decision, a bigger no-brainer. But they chose, with eyes open, the absolutely dead wrong choice. It only seems natural for those of us who aren’t that fucking stupid, mean and ignorant to say so.
Just because we do not agree with your assessment of Mr. Bush does not mean that we are uneducated. Personally, I chose who I thought to be the lesser of two evils.I believe that Mr. Bush is a detriment to our economy and to health care and the environment. But I firmly believe that he will do a better job of keeping this country safe from those that mean to do her harm. I believe that Mr. Kerry wanted to revamp health care, schools, and protect the environment. But at what costs? I firmly believe that we would have had higher taxes under Mr. Kerry. I also believe, that within the first year of his administration, we would have been targeted for another terrorist attack.
Dude: Dole vs. Clinton was a lesser of two evils choice. This was Dr. Evil vs. Wanker Man. Not the same thing.
Anyway, you obviously are ignorant–uneducated–on the issues and current political system. Faced with the certainty of a Republican Congress, Kerry would never have gotten healthcare reform or environmental protection enacted, nor increased aid to education. Taxes? Look at your tax bill now–it’s already gone up when you add up local, state, and federal. That $10 trillion projected deficit over 10 years has to get paid off somehow…plus compound interest. As for terrorism–are you saying that Bush’s close friendship with the bin Ladens would have protected us from another 9/11? Let’s wait another five years and then we’ll be able to judge whether Al Qaeda or its allies have been somewhat neutralized.
Mike writes:
I do admire your willingness to admit and defend the whole “we ARE smarter and superior and better and …….” Dem mindset. Most of the Dems I know are not willing to admit this to people outside of their inner circle. LIBERALS Smarter? NO. Perhaps better educated? Maybe, but there are many variables to the education equation since education extends well beyond the classroom instruction. Are Liberals educated beyond their intelligence? Likely.
Accept it and move on, or better yet, move out of this country. This country is and has been rejecting the Democratic “progressive” movement for a while now. Population movement and their electoral votes are “progressing” to the RED STATES. Objective WISDOM wins again. Long may it reign.
Sometimes the majority is right. Other times it is wrong. There is no relationship between winning and moral rectitude.
Jennifer writes:
I just read your article “Confessions of a Cultural Elitist” and I want to thank you for putting into words all the thoughts I’ve been having for the past several days. Why is the middle of the country supposed to be more American than those of us on the sides? Why did all the major cities, the ones that will probably be bombed first by Osama bin Laden, go for Kerry while all the flat middle of nowhere culturally bereft areas of the US–you know, the parts where no one would notice if it were annihilated–vote for Bush? And how presumptuous to think that people who use God in the name of political advancement are more morally accurate than the rest of us who choose to keep our relationships with God a private matter. Did the Puritans really leave England to escape oppression only so generations later we could live in country where we oppress ourselves? What morons we look like to the rest of the world, we fat-assed spoiled Americans shopping at Wal-Mart, drinking our 64 ounce Big Gulps, staying up all night playing Play
Station, making sure we know more about Paris Hilton than about Paris, France. It’s an embarrassment to be an American these days, no matter who you voted for. The only difference is that the blue parts of the country are embarrassed to be attached to the red bits, and the red bits are too stupid to know any different. Anyway, thanks for revealing your disgust–it’s good to not feel so alone in our loss.
