The Toles Cartoon…Update

Share with: Everybody. Sharing is caring, ya know.



The one the joint chiefs wrote to complain about.

“While you or some of your readers may not agree with the war or its conduct, we believe you owe the men and women and their families who so selflessly serve our country the decency to not make light of their tremendous physical sacrifices.”

Here’s an update on the flap.

Tell ’em where you saw it. Http://www.victoriataft.com

Share with: Everybody. Sharing is caring, ya know.


14 thoughts on “The Toles Cartoon…Update

  1. Tasteless, mindless and cruel. Perhaps the victims of Saddam’s rape rooms are also “battle hardened.” It is only from the viewpoint of “moral equivalency” that the media feels justified in this nonsense. To me, this purposeful attempt to undermine our troops’ morale is treasonous.

  2. Very very poor taste. Using such a rash depiction not only backfired in getting the author’s metaphor across, but also (sad to say) gives all those crowing about how much “liberals” hate the troops some fodder.

    Shame shame, Tom Toles.

  3. …I can agree (and think I did).

    However I would qualify my agreement only in that there are “some” people who call or identify themselves as “liberal,” that indeed have a distaste towards the military and/or our troops.

    I can just as easily say there are “some” people that identify themselves as “conservative,” and are racist. But I would never claim “conservatives are racist.”

  4. …under the rules of logic generalizations are normally false. Sometimes it is best not to give ammunition to those who could use it to bash one self.

  5. “under the rules of logic generalizations are normally false.”

    Spread the good word, kodiak! Everyone would do better to think about that once everyday.

  6. When we see your party leader Cindy Sheehan renouncing the liberals’ hate-the-troops mantra, then your pretense of representing logic may become more credible. Until then, it’s not a generalization. Well said, Hadas aguilar.

  7. Cindy Sheehan = activist
    activist = liberal

    liberal = hate the troops
    Cindy Sheehan = alpha liberal

    Hmm, you may be on to something there bear…and thanks for clearing up in your response to making generalizations with a generalization, that it’s not a generalization…? Maybe a generalization closer to home to illustrate the problem with your (and many others) generalizations?

    bear = hates liberals
    liberals = Americans
    Americans = freedom of speech to debate and disagree

    bear = hates Americans
    bear = hates freedoms for fellow Americans who debate and disagree with him

    bear = conservative
    conservatives = hate Americans and freedoms for their fellow citizens

    Any problems with that?

  8. well, eric, you got the first four lines right, but the rest falls apart pretty quickly. Cindy sheehan has the right to say anything she wants. the dog that isn’t barking is the outcry from the left telling her to stop calling our troops nazis and gestapo. she and harry belafonte getting kissy-face with chavez doesn’t proclaim the lefties love for freedom, or love of our country. your left-handed comment about tom toles only shows disappointment at his tactics, not his message. shame, shame, eric. please understand that myself and others are begging the left to speak loudly and clearly about what you believe. that’s how republicans win elections. when the left pretends to be moral, strong on national defense, pro-family, against big government and tolerant of religion you blow your own cover. we don’t hide our views, eric, why do you? just come out and say that islamic terrorists are morally equivalent to their victims. just say that our neighbors who serve are nazis and torturers. julian bond has not been castigated by the left for claiming that our president would have the nazi flag hanging alongside our flag on the whitehouse. why do you think that is, eric? ohhh, i know, love of country. haaaaahaaha

  9. bear, first off, thanks for qualifying my outline of your thought process (first four lines of my previous post).

    Wouldn’t the left telling Cindy Sheehan to stop doing something she has the freedom to do, be undermining those freedoms? Should they take an approach towards her view(s) such as the White House has with Pat Robertson? Maybe. I think it would be responsible for the Democratic leadership (in unison) to applaud her right and freedom to dissent, but make clear that she does not represent them. I would agree with you that the Democratic party (I’ll constrain your “left” to a majority party) is floundering without one cohesive voice, that the Republicans of today have perfected. However, how do you expect a message from the left side to be heard, when your (and fellow types) first reaction to anything said in contrary to what you believe, is to attack, discredit, demoralize, and generalize whether warranted or not? Based on your actions and reactions, it’s clear that the only voice or viewpoint to be heard is your own. So I’m not sure you can say with much merit that the right is begging for the left to speak loudly.

    As to my comments on the cartoon. Why don’t you tell me what the message was. Because looking past the tasteless imagery, I saw a criticism of Donald Rumsfeld.

    Lastly, your clear statements about “my” views, are both incorrect and unfounded. Stick to speaking for yourself.

  10. eric, discrediting the left is good fun, and necessary, because so much anti-american propaganda and falsehood is spread by you guys (nyt, cindy sheehan, michael moore, julian bond, murtha, kennedy, schumer, clinton, belafonte, streisand, l.a. times, ray schoolbus nagin, mary landreaux, ABS, CBS, NBS, alCNNjezeira, harry reed, dan rather,…well, the list seems all inclusive, doesn’t it?) The reason the left has no cohesive voice is because you guys have to have a meeting each day to decide what you believe in, today. These meetings are always inconclusive. Every time someone espouses the actual liberal position on an issue, you lose credibility, and votes. Please state your views. don’t change the subject, quibble over form, or obfuscate. I state my views with confidence because I believe them to be correct and defensible. Why do you refuse to denounce the anti-american propaganda of your leftie leadership? You are clearly refusing to state that you don’t believe it. Eric, you are a coward for not standing up for your beliefs, and a liar for refusing to articulate them. the “cartoon” speaks for itself, for the anti-american who drew it, and for those who refuse to acknowledge their own part in inspiring him to think it was o.k.

  11. eric:
    Well, you seem to have drawn Bear’s fire with full force. Frankly, I think your comments are quite accurate. First of all, of the Toles cartoon, I think it goes beyond the bounds of good taste. I do disagree with many of Secretary Rumsfeld’s policies, but this caricature of him as an insensitive brute is unfair and tasteless. But you’ve said that, and I don’t see quite how Bear accuses you of insincerity. As for Tom Toles being part of some “leftie leadership,” I have to ask: what? I am not sure I have ever heard of Tom Toles before seeing this caricature, and I could hardly acknowledge him as a “leader” of much of anything. Like you, I do not endorse his cartoon. As far as inspiring it, I’m not sure how you (eric) or anyone inspried Toles to draw this.

    But Bear insists that the cartoon is “treasonous.” Well, I think your comments about Bear’s views are quite apt: he seems to believe that anything that does not align with his views is treasonous. My, by that standpoint, Jehovah’s Witnesses are traitors: they do not believe in military service. Quakers are traitors: they are pacifists — and just think, that makes Richard Nixon a traitor. Buddhists are traitors. And of course, Bear has given what he acknowledges to be an “all-inclusive” list of people he would group under this heading.

    As far as the Democrats having a meeting every day, well, I have no yet been invited to the meeting. I did hear Julian Bond one time, delivering a very moving sermon at the Episcopal Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York City, but that is about as close to any of the people Bear names as I have come.

    Sad. This nation was founded by people like Madison and Jefferson, Franklin and Washington, who believed that open public discussion was the best way to shape the views of the nation as a whole. The founding fathers believed that views should be stated firmly, but i think they also believed in respect for those with whom we disagree. Would that we could return to those days of more civil discussion.

Comments are closed.