Ted Rall Canned: Right Move, Ironic Reason
Dean
So. The Washington Post finally dropped Ted Rall. This time for a cartoon displaying America as a profoundly retarded, drooling freak.
To which I can only say: so repeatedly drawing cartoons comparing America to Nazi Germany, accusing the late Pat Tillman of being a bloodthirsty racist, 9/11 widows as being money-grubbing opportunists--this was not enough?
Why do I suspect that the only reason the Washington Post really acted finally was not because Rall is vile and hateful, but because he made fun of the mentally handicapped?
The Washington Post may be America's best and most honest left-leaning paper--and I really do think it's an excellent paper, by the way, maybe the best in the country when it comes to domestic issues--but their solidly "blue state" editorial culture shines through pretty well here, doesn't it?
(To be clear, dropping this hateful, vulgar little man's comics was the right thing to do. I just can't get over the irony of the reasoning.)
They AGREE with Rall.
Problem, is when this little pile of filth put out this most recent outrage itheir spaces, the readership started turning up the heat.
So how to remove the problem, without appearing to disagree with the man?
"Hey, the Retarded are PC, right?", goes hte reasoning... and the rest follows.
Does this guy even read the editorial pages these days?
I'm not saying whether or not I believe they're telling an accurate or complete story, but merely repeating what I read at E&P.