Cartoon Power

Our planet has been set on fire by cartoonists. Amazing power they have. Here's my insignificant take on the matter:

On the cartoon showing the severely injured American soldier..

First, to understand whether it's good or bad we need to understand what Rumsfeld said. Here's what he said:

'This armed force is enormously capable,'' Rumsfeld said at a Pentagon briefing. ''In addition, it's battle hardened. It's not a peacetime force that has been in barracks or garrisons.''

Use of the term 'battle hardened' has never been thought of as a slur through the years. Our forces have been engaged in the WoT since 2001--of course they are battle hardened. Therefore, I don't see any particular offense in what Rummy said.

The cartoonist obviously did. He probably wanted to drive the point home that using such a term ignores our troops maimed for "a lie". It's stock Bushitler liberalism.

No doubt the cartoon itself is insensitive to military families, especially those who've suffered losses. But of several soldiers I saw interviewed yesterday, they indicated it wasn't overly insulting, and that it represented a reason why they fight. The cartoon soldier was drawn almost symbolically, so I'm pretty sure the cartoonist was using it to point out Rumsfeld's gross insensitivity, not to disparage troops.

But for me the cartoon is simple moonbattery, akin to showing Rice as Aunt Jemima or Bush as a chimp. I think editors should carefully review such cartoons, but showing them actually helps expose the silliness that masquerades as political positions on the far left.

As to the Muhammed cartoons..

If the cartoons mock religious icons, and that's usually pretty clear for anyone to determine, then the newspaper editors should back off and apologize. Religious icons SHOULD NOT be mocked in cartoons. One reason is we don't know what most of them actually looked like, therefore drawing them requires use of stereotypes. Second, I don't care for viewing disparaging cartoons of Jesus.

Censorship? Sorta, but it already exists. Newspapers have standards, and cartoonists are already banned from showing naked figures, sexual acts, racial epithets, etc. The editors should apply the same standard if they believe cartoonists are crossing the line with religious icons.

MORE INSANITY

Ok, so what do we do about this depiction of bin Laden as Christ, seen in an art show in New York City? Art shows might be a different venue than newspapers, but my thoughts above apply--I don't think people should mess with religious icons.

Amidst the yelps of "freedom of expression", let's try this analogy. Since this was a black artists forum, what reaction would a painting of David Duke or Mark Fuhrman as Christ receive? Or, pressing freedom and tolerance even further, how about Martin Luther King depicted as a nazi?

Odds, anyone?

GOOD HEAVENS

More religious controversy, this time involving Britney Spears and NBC, with their plans for some spicy hot "Cruci-fixins".

Of course, NBC execs have no reason to fear losing their heads over this. Wonder what the State Department thinks?