Michael Ramirez, a cartoonist at the L.A. Times, drew a political cartoon involving Bush this past Sunday. Using as his model the famous Vietnam war photo showing a South Vietnamese police chief about to shoot a Viet Cong guerilla through the head, Ramirez pictured Bush standing in front of a cityscape labeled “Iraq”, while a figure labled “politics” points a pistol at his head. Mr. Ramirez says that the cartoon represents what he sees as “political assassination” of Bush by those people criticizing the uranium claim. The Secret Service is not amused, and is investigating the cartoon as a threat against the president.
Is it just me, or does this seem to be reaching just a little bit? I know that the Secret Service has to be concerned about the welfare of the President, and take any threats against him seriously, but this is just a political cartoon. Heck, it’s even a pro-Bush political cartoon.
Well, IIRC, it is against the law to threaten the life of the president. Personally, I think the cartoon is in extremely bad taste, but well short of any kind of actual physical threat. It was a cheap rip-off of a famously powerful photo from the Vietnam War. Let’s hope that the Secret Service investigation is obligatory, but harmless. Were I the editor of the paper, though, I’d cesure (note censor) the cartoonist strongly.
I take that back. Were I the Editor, I woud have both censored the cartoon (ie, not published it) and censured the cartoonist. Just really, really, bad taste.
I can certainly appreciate the Secret Service’s wish to discourage stuff that potentially puts ideas into peoples head, or helps the idea of shooting the President become commonplace. It doesn’t have to be “illegal” for them to feel legitimate concern.
Investigating even trivial threats is SOP for the Secret Service. I recall back when the Clintons were in office and Chelsea was off at Stanford, some guy at the Berkely newspaper wrote an editorial around the time of the Stanford-Berekely game that got him in trouble. Like most colleges with athletic rivalries, it’s a tradition for the school newspapers to run editorials ripping on the other school. That year’s editorial included a line about violent acts against a list of things at Stanford – a list that included Chelsea Clinton. Guess who got a visit from the Secret Service the next day?
I can’t blame the Secret Service. It’s their job. Regardless of whether or not they even LIKE the guy, or his family, regardless of how idiotic or insane the threat in question.
Neurotik and Dewey got it in one. (Two?) USSS will investigate it, put a note in the file to the effect of “not a threat” and move on. Pretty much what they did when they investigated Jesse Helms after he intimated that President Clinton would be poorly advised to visit North Carolina without extra bodyguards.
Well, I’m not saying that the Secret Service shouldn’t investigate threats to Bush (or Clinton, for that matter…I don’t mean to be partisan), but the Secret Service only has a limited manpower and budget, and each trivial threat they investigate means resources taken away from other threats. And what’s the likelihood that a political cartoon in major metropolitan newspaper (or a senator shooting his mouth off) represents an actual threat against the President?
As I said before, my guess is that the Secret Service doesn’t like the idea of threats against the president becoming commonplace or socially acceptable.
And don’t you think some wacko redneck in North Carolina might potentially take some inspiration for action after hearing his own state’s senator issuing a veiled threat like that?
Maybe so, but I’m sure they have the manpower to investigate just about every threat. Just because they are investigating doesn’t mean they are doing more than interviewing the guy for a bit and checking with his neighbors. Probably no more than half a day would be spent.
I’m sure the Secret Service knows what it is doing and how to distribute its resources just fine.
Not to distract from the topic, but I keep seeing the thread title and thinking of Celebrity Jeopardy! on SNL. “I’ll take The Penis Mightier for $200.”
it was in really bad taste and i dont like it, and i dont get the meaning of it. but i do belive strongly in free speech and i dont belive at all in censorship so im drawn completely down the middle on this. and i am as about as big of a bush inthusiest as u can get.
Yeah, we can tell by your spelling and grammar [JUST A JOKE, OK?]
IMO as the cartoon depicted a concept, “politics”, as the one with the gun the SS are out of line. Had it been a real figure I can see they would have had to have investigated the cartoonist.
