The Corporate Brush-Off

This triggered a rather sharp reaction from John Aravosis at Americablog :

"You know it's only a matter of hours before the Republican Swift Boating of Rev. Lowery and Coretta's funeral begins. How dare a black man not know his place at a funeral, they'll say. As if the Republican party and its surrogates have any right whatsoever to speak on behalf of Mrs. King, to tell black America what they can and cannot do to honor one of their most revered leaders. "A party that doesn't have a single African-American member of Congress has no right lecturing black people about knowing their place."

Maybe this won't be such a great year for the Dems, the New York Times suggests:

"Democrats are heading into this year's elections in a position weaker than they had hoped for, party leaders say, stirring concern that they are letting pass an opportunity to exploit what they see as widespread Republican vulnerabilities. . . .

"Democrats described a growing sense that they had failed to take full advantage of the troubles that have plagued Mr. Bush and his party since the middle of last year, driving down the president's approval ratings, opening divisions among Republicans in Congress over policy and potentially putting control of the House and Senate into play in November."

Andrew Sullivan has little sympathy for the Muslim cartoon rioters:

"Muslim leaders say the cartoons are not just offensive. They're blasphemy -- the mother of all offenses. That's because Islam forbids any visual depiction of the Prophet, even benign ones. Should non-Muslims respect this taboo? I see no reason why. You can respect a religion without honoring its taboos. I eat pork, and I'm not an anti-Semite. As a Catholic, I don't expect atheists to genuflect before an altar. If violating a taboo is necessary to illustrate a political point, then the call is an easy one. Freedom means learning to deal with being offended.

"Blasphemy, after all, is commonplace in the West. In America, Christians have become accustomed to artists' offending their religious symbols. They can protest, and cut off public funding -- but the right of the individual to say or depict offensive messages or symbols is not really in dispute. Blasphemy, moreover, is common in the Muslim world, and sanctioned by Arab governments. The Arab media run cartoons depicting Jews and the symbols of the Jewish faith with imagery indistinguishable from that used in the Third Reich. But I have yet to see Jews or Israelis threaten the lives of Muslims because of it."

Why have most American media outlets refused to run the offending cartoons? That's what Harry Shearer wants to know on HuffPost:

"Was it two years ago? Janet Jackson and what's-his-name did that cute little halftime number (the same slot that got the Rolling Stones censored this year: 'You make a dead man -- uhhhh'), and then she had her wardrobe malfunction. American religionists of a certain flavor were outraged, and for at least two weeks it seemed as if no newspaper, website, or television news or newsertainment program could be produced that didn't include a healthy serving of the malfunction.

"Sometimes the offending nipple was pixilated, sometimes not, but any news media outlet that refused to jump on that bandwagon is most likely read only by academics or is out of business.

"Flash forward, and religionists of a certain flavor overseas are outraged about some cartoons solicited as illustrations for a book on Islam. A Danish newspaper published them first, then other papers in Europe followed in solidarity against the slowly rising protest. By the time this story got on the American radar screen, embassies were being burned, and editors and cartoonists were getting death threats. And how many American media outlets let us see what the fuss was about? On his program Monday night, Tucker Carlson quizzed the M.E. of the Chicago Tribune about the latter's decision not to run the offending drawings. Carlson admirably started by acknowledging his own network's similar refusal. For many newspapers, the decision was made for them by the AP. Here's that service's explanation to the SF Chronicle: