Comments on: Cartoon Chickenhawk http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/2346.html Poise! Poise! Fri, 10 Feb 2012 07:57:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: ats http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/2346.html#comment-6399 ats Tue, 14 Feb 2006 07:03:54 +0000 http://sadlyno.com/wordpress/archives/002346.html#comment-6399 The Pope says that printing the cartoons gave needless offense. So did Pat Buchanan. This is the first time I have agreed with either. All this free speech crap is just an excuse to whip the rancid masses into a high-toned frenzy. If neocons (like Flemming Rose) aren't behind it for this reason, they ought to be. The Pope says that printing the cartoons gave needless offense. So did Pat Buchanan.

This is the first time I have agreed with either.

All this free speech crap is just an excuse to whip the rancid masses into a high-toned frenzy. If neocons (like Flemming Rose) aren’t behind it for this reason, they ought to be.

]]> By: Jim http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/2346.html#comment-6398 Jim Tue, 14 Feb 2006 03:04:56 +0000 http://sadlyno.com/wordpress/archives/002346.html#comment-6398 I also don't understand why Reynolds doesn't just host the cartoons? They are, after all, completely harmless, way less provocative than everyday editorial cartoons, and as can be seen for example on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_cartoons they fall completely under "fair-use". It's not as if they were actually offensive, as one could easily get the impression. I also don’t understand why Reynolds doesn’t just host the cartoons? They are, after all, completely harmless, way less provocative than everyday editorial cartoons, and as can be seen for example on

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_cartoons

they fall completely under “fair-use”. It’s not as if they were actually offensive, as one could easily get the impression.

]]> By: Demogenes Aristophanes http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/2346.html#comment-6397 Demogenes Aristophanes Mon, 13 Feb 2006 14:09:58 +0000 http://sadlyno.com/wordpress/archives/002346.html#comment-6397 What a total fucking WEASEL. And the right is saying lefties are being all cowardly over not printing or linking to the cartoons. Of course, that's because we think - AND SAY - they're provocative, offensive, and worst of all, utterly stupid, and so it's an ACTIVE CHOICE not to do so. But Instaweasel tries to squirm out of "DEFENDING FREE SPEECH!!!" for copyright considerations? You know, you could hitch the rolling office you've dubbed "The Shystermobile", shooting business cards out of the tailpipe, to the back of an ambulance ... and still be less of a punchline than Glenn Reynolds. What a total fucking WEASEL. And the right is saying lefties are being all cowardly over not printing or linking to the cartoons. Of course, that’s because we think – AND SAY – they’re provocative, offensive, and worst of all, utterly stupid, and so it’s an ACTIVE CHOICE not to do so.

But Instaweasel tries to squirm out of “DEFENDING FREE SPEECH!!!” for copyright considerations? You know, you could hitch the rolling office you’ve dubbed “The Shystermobile”, shooting business cards out of the tailpipe, to the back of an ambulance … and still be less of a punchline than Glenn Reynolds.

]]> By: Andrew A. Gill, SLS http://www.sadlyno.com/archives/2346.html#comment-6396 Andrew A. Gill, SLS Mon, 13 Feb 2006 03:36:57 +0000 http://sadlyno.com/wordpress/archives/002346.html#comment-6396 This isn't about free speech--nobody's censoring these cartoons, and nobody's going to. This isn’t about free speech–nobody’s censoring these cartoons, and nobody’s going to.

]]>