A Vet Emails: Editorial Cartoonist Over The Top On McCain

I had to look this up after a brother, a retired Vet, emailed me about it. While not a fan of McCain's Presidential bid, I have to agree and I think Mike Peters owes the Senator an apology.

I was wondering if you saw the cartoon by Mike Peters. It shows Sen. John McCain when he was a POW  in the Hanoi Hilton. And comparing that to his faltering presidential Campaign. I think this is very insensitive and repugnant. No one can possibly fathom the horrors of that imprisonment and torture while in the service of this nation.

Mike Peters draws the comic strip Mother Goose and Grimm and also does syndicated editorial cartoons, at one point winning a Pulitzer Prize for same. He does editorial cartoons for the Dayton Daily News. The image I've posted which I may have to pull if challenged was his editorial cartoon dated 7/10/2007.

Comments

[moldy]

A while back there was an incident where a Danish cartoonist poked fun at the Muslim religion. Some people thought it was insensitive and wanted an apology. This blog was pretty adamant that free speech should prevail and no apology was needed.

Why does this situation warrant an apology if the other didn't?

[Dan Riehl]

If you can't figure that out, you're a moron.

[J .B.R.]

SPEECH THE, POWER, OR MANNER OF SPEAKING , NOT A CARTOON look it up in the dictionary.

[moldy]

If you can't explain it in a few concise sentences, maybe you're a hypocrite.

[Dan Riehl]

Maybe, but notice I didn't equivocate when calling you a moron. Some things are clearer than others, I guess.

[southdakotaboy]

While I agree this cartoon is insensative I have to say we need to be consistent. We condem the islamic world for being intolerent about cartoons against old what's his name we need to just shrug this crap off (same goes for that Rall guy).
And Moldy notice none of us on the right has been screaming for this guys death nor have we killed anyone.

[moldy]

Notice that I have never attempted to justify the actions taken by Islamic fanatics after the Danish cartoon.

[Dan Riehl]

Look, Moldy - I'll splain it to you. I may not like some of the things I've seen regarding Christ, or the Cross - but they are, among other things, icons - symbols. And we should be able to address icons and symbols as such. McCain's time in the Hanoi Hilton was a personal experience of great hardship in service to this country. He sat there for seven years because he was member of the very thing that fights and sometimes dies so an asshole like this Peters can express himself. He should show some got-damned respect for it in the person of McCain, while beiong free to criticize the "institution" of the military if the asshat must. Tell me this - Edwards gets knocked out of the race, you think a cartoon that says "Oh, my wife's b----- and now this? is Okay? I don't. Her cancer is a personal experience, I dont think it should be use to make fun of her, just as I find this with McCain repugnant and beneath preofessional commentary.

[moldy]

You can drop the verbage around the McCain cartoon. I respect the fact that it bothers you and a lot of others and I would agree that an apology is in order. But I don't need all the pageantry.

I understand where you are trying to go with the whole "just an inanimate icon" thing. If you are just making fun of an icon, thats different than making fun of an actual person's tragedy, yada, yada, yada.

However, everybody knows that the Danish cartoon was a jab at the Islamic religion, and I see little difference between making fun of a mans personal experience and making fun of a mans religion.

[moldy]

If you're just tuning in ....

A while back there was an incident where a Danish cartoonist poked fun at the Muslim religion. Some people thought it was insensitive and wanted an apology. This blog was pretty adamant that free speech should prevail and no apology was needed.

Why does the McCain cartoon warrant an apology if the Danish one didn't? Or are apologies necessary in both cases? Neither case?

[seekeronos]

I don't see that Peters "needs" to make an apology. If he values the opinions and feelings of some of his readership and perhaps that of the public, perhaps he "should" apologize. But in no wise is does he "need" to do so.

That cartoon reflects his *_opinion_* of McCain, and contrasts his being deserted by (some of) his staff with his POW experience.

That said, where Peters may be regarded as making that cartoon in an editorial capacity, I think Peters has crossed a certain line of respect for a soldier's personal sacrifice on behalf of this nation. He is free to do so, but I am (and others are) also free to believe that he (Peters) has spoken in very poor judgment for punching below the belt at McCain's POW experience.

[seekeronos]

And as an aside - I respecfully submit, Dan, that I think you were a tad harsh to "moldy" in your answer to his first comment. On the principle of our cherished right to free speech, moldy raised a valid question in light of a similar issue with an editorial cartoon (the Danish cartoons criticizing Islam).

I reckon that his question is an uncomfortable one, along with so many un-American expressions and speech that attack our sensibilities regarding our troops, POWs, or flag burning, &etc. -- but if we make allowance for "speech in poor taste or judgment" for any of the other cases, then we should not do so for yet another example of poor taste.

[seekeronos]

EDIT: "-- but if we make allowance for "speech in poor taste or judgment" for any of the other cases, then we *_must_* do so for yet another example of poor taste."

[syn]

Six years ago, at the age of 40, I finally grew up and learned that liberalism had died the day JKF was shot down. Having been a former lib myself these days I simply do not understand how moderate, middle-of the-road voters could possibly consider supporting anything as illiberal as today's 'free speech for me but not for thee' Liberal.

American Liberals are not Liberal they're cultural Marxists in sheep's clothing.

[nowingker]

Oy.

The cartoon was in bad taste, duh. Should he apologize? Its his personal choice, upon reflection does he think making fun of a POW/torture situation was a good idea?

I would say it depends on what Senator McCain thinks of the cartoon, if he has no problem with it, sees it as part and parcel of being in the public eye, then so be it, if he was offended, then an apology is in order.

[Phoenix]

An American did not draw up the Allah cartoons, so they don't factor in this.

And this isn't a free-speech issue. Why do people keep bringing that up as if it makes insult palatable.

The cartoon is disgusting. Worse, it's sad. It makes me sad. So does thinking any American might find it amusing.

[Bill Adkins]

WHere were you when the liar Ted Sampley, a low life scumbag pig if ever there was one, was calling McCain 'Manchurian Candidate' and 'traitor' and 'collaborator?'