Cartoonist defends cartoon that offended widows The strip in question: Thoughts? Agree with the dispersal of monies or not, I believe this to be a pretty dumb thing to publish.
maybe their was a widow that got interviewed who seemed only interested in the money? anyone know if this happened?
I think the strip is insensitive, too, but I do know what Rall is responding to -- it is weird to see these bereaved relatives popping up on one TV talk show after another. And our bizarre media's determination to milk tragedy by making these people celebrities is worth lampooning (even if I don't know how you do that tastefully). What I'd ask Rall, though, is what he expects these relatives to do. One option that I'm sure many choose is to tell the media to leave them the hell alone. But suppose they do think that maybe there's some value to answering questions and sharing some aspect of their experience. Are they supposed to sob on demand every time the camera goes on? Would that really make them seem more "sincere" to you, Mr. Rall? Even when someone close to you has died, you can't walk around with a black cloud over your head every moment for the rest of your life. Maybe Rall should take another look at the Mary Tyler Moore "Chuckles the Clown" episode.
This part is pretty funny, but the timing is a too soon, especially if you had any connection to victims at all. "I keep waiting for Kevin to come home, but I know he never will," the character says. "Fortunately, the $3.2 million I collected from the Red Cross keeps me warm at night."
Of the 3000+ families of the victims of 9/11, how many do you think actually feel this way? Here's his cartoon from 9/13/01, his FIRST after the attacks: no gestures of shock, sympathy, patriotism; nope, the best Ted can come up with is "blame America". F**k him. http://www.ucomics.com/tedrall/viewtr.cfm?uc_full_date=20010913&uc_comic=tr&uc_daction=X
It's America. He can print whatever he wants. Personally, I wish more people could make a social or political commentary and not get beat over the head about it. It pisses me off more when people make a fuss over something like this than the fact that it was published. With the way people get offended over cartoons so easily, it's a wonder that we still have free speech in this country. You know, I think good for him. There are so many people outragd over these people trying to collect all this money and he's one of the few not afraid to say something about it. Sure it was insensitive, most many political cartoons are. George W. Bush doesn't cry every time he's made fun of in one or two or a million. If they don't want the money, why do we see so many on TV talking about not getting enough help, asking for government assistance and suing everyone they can think of? Nothing can bring their husbands back. It doesn't mean no one cares about thier loss. But many people lose loved ones and move on with their lives. You know, I don't agree with the whole "blame America" thing, and it was a little soon to be publishing that one. At the same time though, did he really lie about anything in his cartoons? It's America. He can print what he wants to. I don't see that he lied about anything (although he exaggerated some, which is part of cartoons). The women say money isn't important and the just want to move on, but they take all this money and go on talk shows and news programs (which they're also probably getting money to appear on). They can choose to move on. The women who aren't collecting all this money and who aren't becoming famous over it are the ones who have a right to be mad over this. They're being lumped together with a group of people whose actions they don't approve of. However, the cartoon is not talking about these women. And if it's not making fun of you, why get offended? It's making fun of the ones who are making money and becoming famous. And if the women making money off of this are mad about it, then it's partly their fault for coming across the way they do. Blame him for the cartoon? Blame yourself for acting the way you are. Was the cartoon insensitive? Probably. I think it's insensitive to profit from your husband's death and a national tragedy.
Uh, yeah, it's America, so he can draw whatever the hell he wants to, but we can also say his strips are ****ing stupid...
Zero. That wasn't the point. He was lampooning how the Red Cross got millions of dollars in relief funds and the scandal that occurred when they mismanaged it.
I would agree and say zero. But some of them are coming across this way. BGM, no one is arguing with your right to call him or his strip "****ing stupid." Why should someone always have to apologize for offending someone else? Would you apologize if calling him stupid offended him?
Princess, what exactly is your point? That Ted doesn't have to apologize? Did you really need to post that for us to all know that he can't be forced to apologize? I don't see anyone in this thread saying he has to apologize. It's America, gee, thanks for pointing that out...
Where are all these outraged people upset over families trying to get help? I've never seen any. The only things I've seen is families getting little help at all and celebrities getting trashed for not speaking out about the money they helped raise not being given to the families.
Thats a very heartless, sick carton right there. I mean it isnt even funny, Maybe if that guy lost someone in 9/11 he would'nt portray it as some sort of joke.
You're not looking for any. Families getting a "little help"? Please. Families are getting millions of dollars. I think the average is $1.8 million per family. Why do they get money from all these people because their spouse/parent died in a terrorist attack? It was tragic and unexpected, but their loss is no more than anyone elses. If my mom died tomorrow for any reason, all my brother and I would get is life insurance stuff and support from our friends. No celebrities. No red cross. I've seen women who are already getting millions of dollars going on talk shows to talk about their loss and their life now and they're getting PAID to be on the shows. Do they really need all that money? They say they just want to move on, but they're not. They're profitting from a national tragedy. And he's not portraying the loss as a joke. Some of these women/people are making their loss a joke. They're making it about profits.
Originally posted by Princess You're not looking for any. Well where are they? You made the statement so I'm asking you. If there are so many of them I probably should've heard of them by now considering I watch the news pretty regularly. All I see is the charities getting killed for not giving out the money, not families complaining that they only got a few million bucks. Families getting a "little help"? Where did I say a "little help"? I said getting help. If you're going to quote me at least do it accurately. Please. Families are getting millions of dollars. I think the average is $1.8 million per family. Why do they get money from all these people because their spouse/parent died in a terrorist attack? Which of your family members would you agree to have killed in exchange for $1.8 million? They get money from charities because that's what charities do and that's why money was donated. They get money from the government in exchange for not suing the hell out of the airlines. Pretty simple stuff really.
If you're going to quote yourself, at least to it accurately. I told you where I've seen them. On talk shows mostly. Good Morning America, 20/20, Today, Dateline just to name a few. They're not specifically asking for more money, but they're acting like what they're getting isn't enough. Money will not make it better and they do not deserve it anymore than anyone else does. Charities are fine. I'm glad we have them, except when they don't work, as was the case in Houston with Alison. The government should not have to give them money to keep them from suing. They shouldn't sue in the first place. Grieve for your loss and move on. Quit trying to blame everyone else for it. My dad will die shortly from lung cancer, no doubt. He's been smoking 2 packs a day since he was 15 (now 53). Should I sue the cigarette companies for killing him? No, it's his own fault. I won't blame anyone else for what happens in my life. Honestly, I would trade my father for $1.8 million. I'm sure you'll think it's heartless and greedy, but that's the truth. He is a complete ******* who is so mad at my mother for divorcing him 13 years ago that he has completely disowned me a my brother. He now blames us (my brother and me) for everything that has gone wrong in his life. I know it's different than the victims of 9/11, but you asked. $1.8 million would actually put us both through school and pay back all the child support he never gave my mother and the other debts he has to her.
Originally posted by Princess If you're going to quote yourself, at least to it accurately. Well I presumed you meant my first reference to help, not the context of the phrase getting little help at all. That's fine though. Honestly, I would trade my father for $1.8 million That honestly does not surprise me. You deride these families trying to get money from the loss of loved ones in a national tragedy and then admit you'd offer up your own father for $1.8 million. H y P o C r I t E?
I don't care if you're surprised or not. When my father dies, I will not receive a dime. When he decided he couldn't afford me and my brother, he got remarried and had another kid (doesn't sound like he has money problems). His money will go to them. I will not sue them for money that is not mine. I will not demand money from charities for my loss. I won't claim it's Philip Morris' fault that my father is dead. My father gave me and my brother up for money because "he couldn't afford us." I would give him up for money as well. He didn't do his duty as a father. However, all killing him would do is put me in jail and cost a lot in lawyer fees, so it won't happen. What I would go through would not be worth the money. So it's not really an issue. I will NOT take money for my father's death. So how exactly does that make me a hypocrite? (At least you admitted you "presumed" wrong. What a gesture. )
