Replies to post #42026 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[F6]

A CASE OF HISTORY ABUSE: BUSH, RUMSFELD AND FASCISM

by Randolph T. Holhut
http://www.opednews.com
September 5, 2006 at 09:34:27

DUMMERSTON, Vt. - The Bush administration picked last week's 88th annual American Legion National Convention in Salt Lake City to roll out its new propaganda theme - this nation is fighting against "Islamic fascism" and critics of the so-called war on terror are "appeasers."

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld compared those who oppose this nation's ongoing debacle in Iraq to those who did not take Adolf Hitler seriously in the 1930s.

"It was a time when a certain amount of cynicism and moral confusion set in among Western democracies, when those who warned about a coming crisis, the rise of fascism and Nazism, were ridiculed and ignored," said Rumsfeld of the 1930s. "Indeed, in the decades before World War II, a great many argued that the fascist threat was exaggerated, or that it was someone else's problem. ... I recount this history because once again we face the same kind of challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism."

President Bush followed Rumsfeld by stating that "the war we fight today is more than a military conflict. It is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century," and that "the security of the civilized world depends on victory in the war on terror, and that depends on victory in Iraq."

Oh, and by the way, he said that "the world now faces a grave threat from the radical regime in Iran," and that "it is time for Iran to make a choice." Any similarities between these words and the word directed at Saddam Hussein and Iraq in the fall of 2002 are purely coincidental, right?

Let us leave aside for now the absurdity of Rumsfeld and Bush conflating Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida and the "war on terror" with Hitler, Nazi Germany and World War II. Instead, let us look at Bush and Rumsfeld's interpretation of history and the Bush administration's attempt to direct the familiar old cry of "appeasement" to today's critics of the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq.

In the 1930s, when Hitler and Benito Mussolini rose to power, it was the Republican Party who pushed for appeasement. While Franklin Roosevelt and his fellow internationalists in the Democratic Party sounded the first alarms about fascism, conservative Republican leaders like Robert Taft and Arthur Vandenburg maintained their isolationism right up until the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941.

After the Munich Pact in September 1938, where France and Britain handed over Czechoslovakia to Nazi Germany, it was Roosevelt who pushed for an arms embargo against Germany and Japan over the objections of the isolationists. It was Roosevelt who pushed for increased aid to Britain after World War II began and who had to fight the isolationists who opposed it.

The people - mostly liberals - who did speak up against fascism before Pearl Harbor, and in the case of those who went to Spain to fight fascism in the Spanish Civil War of 1936-39, were smeared as communists by conservatives.

In 1940 and 1941, when it was growing clear that the United States was eventually going to fight the Axis, 80 percent of Americans still opposed any declaration of war. Many supported the America First Committee, a isolationist group that opposed American involvement in the war.

Even the American Legion itself, formed after World War I, never spoke up against fascism until the United States entered World War II. It even offered Mussolini an honorary membership. The Legion sided with the major corporations and industrialists which aided the fascist cause up to and, in some cases, well after Pearl Harbor.

Henry Ford supported Hitler and lent the Nazis money from the early 1920s until the start of the war. The House of Morgan fronted Mussolini $100 million to keep his government from going bankrupt. Many other American bankers - including Prescott Bush, grandfather of George W. Bush - lent money to Nazis. The Hearst newspapers published columns by Josef Goebbels and other Nazi luminaries and many major newspapers and magazines lauded Hitler and Mussolini right up to Pearl Harbor.

Standard Oil (Esso then, Exxon now) and Texaco both sold gasoline and other petroleum products to Francisco Franco's army in Spain and to the German and Italian military forces up to and after Pearl Harbor. Esso was a member of the same industrial cartel as I.G. Farben and shared patents with the Germans for making high octane aviation fuel and synthetic rubber. Other U.S. corporations which were members of Nazi cartels included Alcoa, General Electric, General Motors and Du Pont.

GM's Opel subsidiary in Germany built the planes and tanks for the Panzer divisions all the while GM dragged its heels at home about building equipment for the U.S. military. Pratt & Whitney, Curtiss-Wright and Douglas Aircraft all sold aircraft parts to Hitler. Curtiss-Wright salesmen demonstrated the then-secret technique of dive bombing to the Germans in order to sell planes.

The histories of the "Good War" tend to gloss over this stuff, but all of the corporate involvement on the Nazi side was documented by the late muckraking journalist George Seldes in his 1943 book, "Facts and Fascism."

The myth persists in the minds of today's conservatives that they bravely stood up to fascism in World War II while liberals cowered in fear. They always trot out the Munich Pact and cry "appeasement" whenever they need to win an election, even though the forefathers of today's conservatives were the appeasers. And just as corporate America and their conservative political allies aided fascism in the 1930s, they did the same in Iraq in the 1980s and 1990s.

Remember that 12,000-page report that Iraq presented to the United Nations in December 2002 that outlined its alleged stockpiles of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons? The report that the Bush administration found so embarrassing, it edited out 8,000 pages before it presented the report to the 10 non-permanent members of the UN Security Council?

What was the Bush administration trying to hide? The list of U.S. companies that helped to arm Iraq.

A 2002 report by the German newspaper Die Tageszeitung listed 24 major U.S. companies named in the Iraqi report that illegally aided that nation's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs in the 1980s. Some of the familiar names on their list included Hewlett Packard, Honeywell, Du Pont, Rockwell, Eastman Kodak, Bechtel and Unisys.

In addition, Die Tageszeitung reported that the U.S. government itself offered plenty of assistance to Saddam Hussein's weapons programs. The Departments of Energy, Defense, Commerce and Agriculture all covertly assisted Iraq's weapons programs in the 1980s.

When Iraq used chemical weapons during its 1980-88 war with Iran, the U.S. looked the other way since the U.S. was hoping Iraq would destroy Iran, or even better, both sides would destroy each other. Even the Livermore, Los Alamos and Sandia nuclear weapons laboratories pitched in by training Iraqi nuclear scientists and giving them non-fissile material for construction of a nuclear bomb.

This history was forgotten in the Persian Gulf War of 1990-91 and it was forgotten in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Many of the people that talked up the dangers that Saddam and Iraq posed to the world had profited from building up his arsenal.

And so the circle stays unbroken, aided by an ahistorical nation that is constantly getting fooled by its leaders.

That's why conservatives accused the Democrats of treason during the McCarthy era. That's why conservatives still blame the Democrats for "losing" the Vietnam War - even though 21,000 American deaths came during the Nixon administration. And that's why the Bush administration is attacking the people who honestly believe that what is happening in Iraq is an unmitigated disaster for our nation.

Randolph T. Holhut has been a journalist in New England for more than 25 years. He edited "The George Seldes Reader" (Barricade Books). He can be reached at [e-mail].

Copyright © OpEdNews, 2006 (emphasis added)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_randolph_060905_a_case_of_history_ab.htm

[F6 note -- in addition to (items linked in) the post to which this post is a reply and (the many) preceding (and any other following), see also in particular (items linked in):
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13126419 (and any following); and
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13102128 and preceding (and any following)]

[F6]

The Fox in Winter



Roger Ailes, Fox News’ Luciferian TV Genius, Happy at Last—Made Rupert Murdoch Billions, Whacked American Politics—What Would Have Happened If His Dad Had Caught Him?


Roger Ailes.
Fox

By: Rebecca Dana
[Issue] Date: 10/9/2006
Page: 1

“‘I’ll hug you,” said Roger Ailes. “I’ll hug you even though you’re a journalist.”

He emerged, slowly, from behind the large corner desk in his giant second-floor office at the News Corporation headquarters on Sixth Avenue and 48th Street.

“A journalist,” he repeated mid-embrace, as if tasting bile.

It was 1:15 p.m. on Sept. 28. Mr. Ailes was immaculately ensembled in a crisp blue dress shirt, red tie, suit trousers, black slip-on loafers, black socks and shiny cufflinks the size of walnuts. A smile cut through his fleshy cheeks. At 66, the president of the Fox News Channel is neither thin nor vivacious, but, up close, he does give off a healthy glow.

“I love the news business,” he said later, from a beige chenille armchair in the far corner of his drearily appointed office, a room that is sunny and impersonal, “because I think America is in trouble. I don’t think my job as a journalist is to destroy America or tear down America, nor is it my job to promote America and not find its flaws.”

The office mimics the design aesthetic of a Radisson. The carpet is green, flecked with beige. There is a small, round table with four swiveling desk chairs done in an earthy pattern with beige undertones. The walls are sparse, filled “because they would look empty otherwise” with awards that Mr. Ailes called “mostly just stupid stuff.” There is a citation from the Marines—“some dumb thing they give”—and a plaque from the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences, the organization that hands out Emmys. Mr. Ailes recently renounced his membership because he thinks the voting process rewards liberalism and finds the ceremony itself obnoxious.

“Our people actually have jobs, so they can’t go to the hotel and try to get lucky and eat the bagels and do stuff and chase each other up and down the halls,” he said. He recently issued an edict—something he does from time to time—that any Fox employee who received a journalism award would be terminated on the spot “because that means you sold out,” he said. “It means you’re not making any waves and you’re not doing anything that nobody else has ever done. And our job is to stir things up.”

This year, the Radio-Television News Directors Foundation, an organization for which Mr. Ailes reserves special contempt, asked if he would accept their First Amendment award. “I said, ‘Why me? You guys hate me, and you’ve really not been very nice to Fox News.’ They said, ‘The truth is, you’ve made a difference in the business and you’ve stuck by your guns.’” He will accept it, he said, “for my journalists.”

It is one of the ironies of his extreme success over the 10 years of the Fox News Channel that Roger Ailes hates journalists, manages them, and counts himself among their ranks.

One exception to Mr. Ailes’ otherwise bleak decorating sensibility is a large, bright, modernist, color-block oil painting that hangs above his desk. “Her name was Bigelow,” he said of the artist. “I bought it in 1969. As I recall, I paid $400 for it—which was pretty expensive in those days, when I was poor.” He clarified that. “I wasn’t really poor.”

Then, he had just moved to New York with hopes of producing and directing plays, which he’d done in high school and as a fine-arts student at Ohio University. “I needed something for the wall,” he said, “and I looked at it and I liked it and I purchased it. I just thought, ‘Well, it’s pretty.’”

Around this time, Mr. Ailes met a one-legged man named Kermit Bloomgarden, the second in a series of older mentors who shepherded him through his many careers. Bloomgarden was a Broadway producer and manager whose credits included Equus and The Diary of Anne Frank. “I was a kid from television,” Mr. Ailes said, “and he was in his 70’s and in the theater, and we got to be good friends.” Bloomgarden helped his young charge mount a production of Hot L Baltimore—about a hotel so scrubby the “e” had burned out—in a small space on West End Avenue.

“By then, Kermit was at the end of his career,” Mr. Ailes said. “He had his leg cut off because he had gotten some bad blood, had some blood poisoning, but he hobbled up three flights of stairs on crutches, watched the production, and said, ‘Eh, you got great taste, kid—we’ll move it to Broadway.’”

Hot L Baltimore won several Obies and was named Best American Play of 1973.

“One day he called me and he said, ‘Kid, come on over.’ He lived up on Central Park West, had a penthouse apartment,” Mr. Ailes said. “So I got in a cab, went over to his apartment, sat down, and he said, ‘I’m gonna die. I’ve got brain cancer, and I’m saying goodbye to my friends.’

“I said, ‘When are you gonna die?’ And he said, ‘Soon, soon, and I’m not gonna have a funeral.’”

They talked for an hour. “And we got up and he hugged me and said, ‘You have great instincts, kid. Always go with your instincts.’ And, um, I got in the elevator and I never saw him again. It was a really interesting time in my life. Just never saw him again. I remember hugging him at the elevator, and that was the last thing he said to me, and he was dead in a few days.”

That was the end of Mr. Ailes’ theatrical career and the beginning of his life as a journalist.

But there is always the question of death. “As I told the staff this morning,” Mr. Ailes said, “in a state-of-the-business talk that I gave because they asked about being criticized recently for being too conservative or whatever: If you don’t want to be criticized, die. Because when you die, everybody says nice things, for some reason. I mean, every funeral I’ve ever been to, people say, ‘Oh, what a great guy he was.’ I don’t have any interest in getting compliments because I’m dead.”

Ten years from now, Mr. Ailes said, his network will be “the dominant news source for the world”—whether or not he’s still running things. “I have provided probably the fire and the drive to make it happen,” he said. “I hate to say this, but if I got run over by a bus today—and this will really irritate our detractors—it wouldn’t matter at all. There are enough good young people in place to keep this going forever and force the rest of the media to pay attention to fairness, and that’s all I ever wanted to do anyway. So we’ll be fine without me.

“I hate to talk about myself,” he said. He is considering offers to write a memoir, chiefly from News Corp.–owned publisher Harper Collins, but he generally finds the idea revolting. “A lot of people have told me that people say to them, ‘What’s Roger Ailes really like? Who is he?’ I don’t think anything that’s ever been written about me is accurate. But I’ve come to conclude that everybody on earth believes that, that nothing’s ever written about who they really are.”

How can one trust journalists when nothing written is ever accurate? When Roger Ailes was very young—he was born in 1940, in Warren, Ohio—about 5 or 6, the age his son is now, he was playing outside one afternoon, walking an imaginary tightrope on a tall brick wall behind his house. His father, an employee of the Packard Electric plant, came outside and playfully urged his boy to jump. “Come on, I’ll catch you,” the elder Mr. Ailes said, as his son remembered it, and motioned with his hands. “Come on, jump.” The boy took a breath and leapt off the wall, toward his father’s waiting arms. Mr. Ailes withdrew, letting his son fall to the ground.

“He picked me up,” Mr. Ailes said, “and he said: ‘Never assume, and don’t necessarily trust anybody.’

“This is where it had a searing impact on me,” he said. “Most people, when it’s not to their advantage, and when they see you in trouble, will run the other way. My dad said, ‘Don’t do that to people.’ And I think I’ve never done that.”

Lesson learned. Mr. Ailes became obsessed with righting wrongs. His journalistic sympathies extend to those he sees as being abused or isolated: unborn fetuses, religious Americans, President Bush—“I’ve never seen a guy as demonized,” he said.

Rupert Murdoch, Mr. Ailes’ boss, phoned the office. The ensuing 10-minute conversation included a discussion of politics and one slightly off-color joke.

“You know, people say, ‘Does he like you?’ And I guess he does,” Mr. Ailes said. “I mean, I see him all the time. And I like him a lot. He’s actually funnier and enjoys laughing more than anybody would ever expect. I can’t speak from his point of view, I can only speak from mine, which is: The guy’s brilliant. I don’t know where the hell he puts his papers; his desk is always clean; he seems to know what’s going on everywhere.”

Mr. Ailes and his wife had plans to host Mr. Murdoch and his wife for dinner two nights hence. The meal would be catered, Mr. Ailes said, and the menu was not yet set.

“Rupert—like all husbands, eat fish when their wives are present and hunt for other things when they’re not,” he said. “So, it’s—well, they’re usually hunting for a piece of beef or something else. I am not a very ceremonial guy. Anybody who knows me knows if they come to my house, it’s going to be comfortable. It’s not going to be a kind of formal-type situation. First thing I said was: ‘No ties.’ I stayed over at his house last Christmas. My wife and son and I stayed overnight at his house. So we have a very good working relationship, very comfortable personal relationship.”

Mr. Ailes is not as close with the Murdoch sons. He speaks occasionally on the phone with James; he and Lachlan have lunch when the latter is in town visiting. “I have a very good relationship, great respect for both of them,” Mr. Ailes said, “and I have no idea how they feel about me.”

Over the summer, they saw each other at Pebble Beach and had a nice meal with Bill Clinton and Nicole Kidman. Shortly after Lachlan left the company for Australia last spring, Mr. Ailes took over his responsibilities, and his office. So now he has two.

Putting aside the bluster of his public persona, close up, aside from an occasional stream of invective—easily provoked by labeling Fox “conservative” or invoking the name “Dan Rather”—Mr. Ailes may as well be Santa Claus. “The private Roger Ailes is really a teddy bear,” said Fox News anchor Brit Hume. “He has a warrior spirit, but a soft touch.”

It’s not too far between the lines, the softness. He discussed the on-air blow-up between Bill Clinton and Chris Wallace the other week. “I think politics goes after too much in terms of people’s personal lives,” Mr. Ailes said. “Because everybody has a personal life. And I don’t blame Clinton for being thin-skinned about that stuff, but, I think, on the political-issues side, you have to be able to answer all the questions, and, uh, you know, it’s, I guess I feel badly for Chris Wallace because he’s getting hammered so much on his thing, and I looked at it over and over just to see: Is there anything about Chris’ question or his demeanor that would have taken him outside of responsible journalism? The answer is no. I’m stunned that more journalists aren’t speaking up to defend him.”

It’s not impossible that Mr. Ailes can relate to Mr. Clinton as well. Had he ever had a midlife crisis of his own? “Oh, several!” he said. “When I passed the big 6-0, that was an ugly one. But the truth is, my mind still thinks I’m 25 or 30, so I don’t—days when the arthritis speaks, it’s a little tougher. And I realize I’d have a little more trouble in a bar fight than I did 30 years ago,” he said.

“I think generally you have to live fearlessly. And, um, I believe in God, and He’ll sort it out someday, maybe. But the one thing I’m certain is, He has a sense of humor, because otherwise there wouldn’t be so many ridiculous things I see all day.”

Eventually, it was time for the 2:30 story meeting. As he stood to go, Mr. Ailes extended just a hand. His manicure glinted in the sun.

copyright © 2006 the new york observer, L.P.

http://www.observer.com/20061009/20061009_Rebecca_Dana_pageone_nytv.asp

[F6]

Nuclear Blast on TV's '24' Causes Fallout for Fox


(FOX)

Critics Ask Whether the Show Is Feeding Terror Fears

By SUSAN DONALDSON JAMES
ABC NEWS

Jan. 15, 2007 — - "How much longer? I hear someone," says the nervous terrorist with a heavy Middle Eastern accent, just before U.S. agents storm a warehouse where a nuclear device is being assembled. Confusion reigns, drama builds, the device is detonated and a mushroom cloud looms over Los Angeles. Such is primetime television in the age of terrorism, or as some critics charge, has "24" gone too far?

"It's the closest television comes to roller coasters," said David Bianculli, television critic for the New York Daily News. "It works well dramatically, and as far as feeding fears, that's what '24' is all about."

Sut Jhally, producer and co-director of the film "Hijacking Catastrophe," says the dramatic action in the show creates a dangerous climate in which the public loses some of its perspective on what's real and what's not. Of course that may be a minority opinion given the show's enormous popularity.

"24" is taken seriously by some serious folks. Last June the conservative Heritage Foundation hosted a panel called, "'24' and America's Image in Fighting Terrorism: Fact, Fiction or Does It Matter?" Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff participated.

Josh Governale, spokesman for "24," refused to comment on tonight's episode.

"This television show is very political, and it's no accident that it's on Fox," said Jhally, who directs the Media and Education Center and is professor of communications at University of Massachusetts. "Given their propaganda system, it doesn't surprise me."

In tonight's drama terrorists have put the country into a state of high alert -- and panic -- after a series of bombings have killed hundreds and injured thousands in cities around the country. Los Angeles, home of the Counter Terrorist Unit (CTU), is the latest place where suicide bombers have struck, and President Palmer -- that's Wayne Palmer, the brother of the late President David Palmer -- has made a deal with the Chinese government to release Jack Bauer.

The idea is not to get Jack working on bringing down the terrorists -- it's to hand him over to them in exchange for information that might stop the attacks.

Jack had been imprisoned and tortured by the Chinese in retaliation for an attack on the Chinese embassy in a previous season of the show. But anyone who has followed the nail-biting series knows that Bauer will escape so he can find -- and stop -- the bombers.

His search leads him to a warehouse on the outskirts of Los Angeles, where the terrorists are assembling a "suitcase" nuclear device that they plan to detonate at an unnamed location. But before they can move it, they are discovered by CTU -- and the bomb goes off, creating a giant mushroom cloud and an unearthly orange glow.

The show's devoted fans include Sen. John McCain, who appeared on the show -- in a cameo role -- last February. The senator, who has criticized the torture sequences on the series, joked to reporters that "I shoot one guy's kneecap off, only one ... A red-hot poker is planted in someone's chest, but other than that, there is no torture."

This is not the first time entertainment has caused fallout. In 1983 ABC aired the controversial TV movie "The Day After," which showed the horror of life after a nuclear attack. Parents recieved letters telling them not to let their children watched.

In 2002, White House officials questioned the timing and release of Paramount's action movie "Sum of All Fears" -- a film which depicts a nuclear bomb unleashed on an American sporting event.

But this fall, CBS debuted a series, "Jericho [F6 note -- see http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=13374229 (. . .)]," which also details what life would be like after a nuclear blast; though the show has gotten solid ratings, it's not caused much controversy.

But Jhally of the Media Education Center believes Hollywood's fascination with terrorism can have serious political consequences.

"Fear has been used to paralyze people's intellects," said Jhally. "If they can scare people, almost anything becomes possible. When people are afraid their brains shut off and it makes you confused and want easy solutions." [F6 note -- those statements are literally physiologically true -- being in fear causes a 'switch' in the brain (the reticular activating system) to turn off the cerebral cortex (the 'learning brain', i.e. intellect), leaving instinct (the 'lizard brain', or brain stem) and training (the 'leopard brain', or limbic system) in control -- . . .]

Television shows like '24' also reinforce stereotypes about Arabs, he said, and in this episode connections are drawn between terrorism, Arabs and nuclear war. With the U.S. wrestling with Iran over its nuclear capabilities, these associations are dangerous, he said.

"It fits into a mind set," Jhally said. "Iran is on the news about nuclear power, and now there is an American TV story on an Arab terrorist using nuclear power. It's dangerous because this present administration wants any excuse to attack an enemy. Fear is main enemy in our political culture and we have to cut through the fear to see the world clearly, and then we can find solutions to make the world safe."

Still, television critic Bianculli says the episode is fantasy and drama at its best. He says back in 2001 Fox showed corporate responsibility by cutting scenes of a plane exploding mid-air from one of the first episodes of "24," out of sensitivity to 9/11 victims.

And leave it to the TV critic to deliver the real zinger. Bianculli believes Fox is more manipulative with its product placement than anything else. "In CTU headquarters -- which is information central -- they are always watching Fox News," Biancilli said. "Now that is ridiculous."

Copyright © 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures (emphasis added)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2795969

[F6]

Delonas for Wednesday February 18, 2009



via http://www.nypost.com/delonas/delonas.htm [shows most recent; select '2009/February/18' below the cartoon]

strikes me that the criticisms of this one are tip-toeing around the obvious and far worse take, with the merely racist aspect being the least of it -- I see open incitement to the assassination of Obama, as the equivalent of and deserving of the same fate as a rampaging giant chimpanzee in the process of horribly mauling a woman ( http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/02/17/2009-02-17_911_tape_captures_chimpanzee_owners_horr-2.html )


==========


Loathsome: Ten Cartoons from Sean Delonas

By Hamilton Nolan, 1:34 PM on Wed Feb 18 2009

The outcry over New York Post cartoonist Sean Delonas' dead monkey cartoon today is growing louder. But he has such a rich history! We assembled ten of his all-time classics of hate.

Al Sharpton and Gov. David Paterson are criticizing Delonas' cartoon today, but Post editor Col Allan is backing up his favorite artiste, issuing this statement [ http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/chimp-stimulus-cartoon-raises-racism-concerns/ ]:

The cartoon is a clear parody of a current news event, to wit the shooting of a violent chimpanzee in Connecticut. It broadly mocks Washington's efforts to revive the economy. Again, Al Sharpton reveals himself as nothing more than a publicity opportunist.

Way to stay in character, Col. Unfortunately, we couldn't find Delonas' classic depiction of mayoral candidate Freddy Ferer "on his knees, kissing the rear end of a grotesquely obese Al Sharpton" anywhere online. [Update: A tipster mailed it in and we've added it below] But you can enjoy these blasts from the past. [Have more Delonas favorites? Email us!]


That pregnant transgender man—what are docs supposed to do with this freak? (This one was so clever he drew it twice [ http://gawker.com/5015048/the-joke-so-ill+advised-sean-delonas-made-it-multiple-times ; http://dailycartoonist.com/index.php/2008/06/17/sean-delonas-catches-flack-for-duplicating-self/ ])


A gay dude who married a woman [ http://gawker.com/255092/gay+friendly-post-cartoonist-continues-his-crusade-for-tolerance ]—what next?


Muslim terrorists love Democrats [ http://gawker.com/213891/sean-delonas-mixing-up-his-semitic-stereotypes ]. What else is new, huh?


Gays: Sheep fuckers [ http://gawker.com/210590/gay+hating-post-cartoonist-taking-baby-steps ].


Gays: Stereotypical prancing beacons of corruption [ http://gawker.com/205581/post-hack-to-get-with-my-gays-learn-about-sensitivity ].


Gays: They're destroying marriage, but at least they're not as bad as Liza Minnelli, who is a woman but nevertheless married David Gest, who is a prancing gay.


Women: Whores.


Gay pride [ http://gawker.com/205708/post-doodler-here-sincere ]? More like cross dressing freakazoids! Amirite?


Rosie O'Donnell is a fat butch lesbian. Haha.


Heather Mills has only one leg. Haha.


And Al Sharpton has a big ass. Which likes to be kissed.

http://gawker.com/5155855/ten-cartoons-from-sean-delonas

[StephanieVanbryce]

F6 ...what a fine history you have here of the press ..thank YOU .. it is so well researched and documented ..

I honestly think a college student could use this work, it's just that detailed . Yes, I read and
'glanced' at a bunch of 'preceding and following' .. ;) .....You have every thing there ....

....What a GREAT record of events.

[StephanieVanbryce]

fun stuff - Murdoch.









http://www.cagle.com/politicalcartoons/PCcartoons/ericlewis.asp ... (complete Nuz archive)

or, with Feature box teaser art here: [ http://www.animalnuz.blogspot.com/ ] - A weekly comic strip about a TV news show run by animals.

Catch breaking animal nuz on twitter: @ericlewis0 and/or @animalnuz

Animal Nuz appears weekly on Saturdays at 11am ET, only on Daily Kos.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/16/995263/-Animal-Nuz-#55?detail=hide

AND, It JUST couldn't have happened to a BIGGER COCK!..;)

[F6]

the article in the post to which this is a reply can currently be found at http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_richard__060829_killing_news.htm