Linda Eddy (Freeper IPWGOP) cartoonist censored by Minneapolis Star Tribune editor Jim Boyd!

You get more viewers of your work on FR than on that rag newspaper!

You are right about that one! I'd like to reach the independent folks, too, though. That's why I keep submitting my work to other places as well. Here's an email from a wife and husband I got just today that exemplifies my motivation:

"Thank you very much for your site [www.iowapresidentialwatch.com]. We are Independent voters and we finally have decided that we are going to vote for President Bush this time. We have been studying as much as we can, (especially on the Internet) of both candidates. I think what has really pushed us towards President Bush more than anything else is the unfair news coverage. The press really screamed about President Bush's records and yet no one seems to be asking or even cares about seeing Mr. Kerry's records. Something just does not smell right when the press will not demand that Kerry release his records. And after all of our own investigation into all of this, we feel very bad that no one is bothering to mention the poor South Vietnamese people who were slaughtered after we pulled out (mostly thanks to Mr. Kerry and Jane Fonda and ABC, NBC, & CBS). We think that part of the reason that ABC, NBC & CBS are backing Mr. Kerry and not demanding his records is due in part that they may have to admit publicly of their part in the deaths of so many, Veterans and South Vietnamese. We also found where Mr. Kerry was responsible, single-handedly, in 2001 of trashing the Human Rights legislation for the people of Vietnam. Mr. Kerry not only stabbed his fellow Veterans in the back in 1971, he also did the same to the Vietnamese who were helping our soldiers over there.

Here is what I wrote to the deputy Editor.

B. James Boyd,

Sir, it has come to my attention that you have banned the political cartoonist Linda Eddy who was drawing anti-Kerry drawings. You stated that John Kerry's statements made in 1971 were to "appeal on behalf of veterans". That sir, is an outright lie! I am a veteran of the Vietnam Era and Kerrys lies before Congress tarred all of us with the same brush whether we served in combat, or not. Whether we served in Vietnam, or not. His lies made us the subect of scorn and hatred of the American public. His comments caused many, if not all of us who honorably served our country to be ashamed to wear our uniforms.

For myself, I was in High School ROTC at that time and still was subjected to the epithets when wearing my uniform. I went to active duty in 1974 and was still subjected to being treated like a pariah when home on leave.

His testimony ratcheted up the suffering of the POW's by their captors (the Norht Vietnamese), and now I quote sir, a North Vietnamese General, who in a meeting (in 1987) with a Vietnam Veteran by the name of Don Lester stated " After 1968 he and his army had emotionally quit." "The only thing that gave them hope and kept them fighting was the Anti-War movement back here in the U.S." So please enlighten me how the prolonged suffereing caused to so many veterans by Kerry's lies were "an appeal on our behalf"?

Plus lets look at his record while in Congress as a United States Senator while we're at it. How come he has voted anti - military on pretty much every thing military that comes up? here's a short list of things he's voted against -
Bradley Fighting Vehicles , M1 Abrams Tanks, AH-64 Apache Helicopter, B-1 Bomber, B-2 Stealth Bomber, F-15 Fighter Jets, F-16 Fighter Jets, F-18 Fighter Jets, Patriot Missiles, Cruise Missiles.
He himself said " I would like to see the Untied States military deployed only at the directive of the United Nations." The UN being mostly anti-American and run with the objective of the last 20 years being the dissolution of the U.S. Constitution and US sovereignty. Now he is saying he "cares about the defense of America" - unfortunately his actions speak louder than his words to most veterans. He flip flops worse than a fish on the beach. Unfortunately some people like you are naieve and believe what the leftist liars like John Kerry and Jane Fonda say.

Lastly on behalf of Miss or Mrs Eddy I would like to state that I didn't serve 20 years in defense of the Constitution so that an elite few could have their say and the rest of the "people" be muzzled. What you are doing is putting a muzzle on another voice by not letting her post her drawings in your "rag". John Kerry has come out against the Swift Boat veterans trying to muzzle them the same way he has tried to silence the rest of us veterans. Look at his record, then look at what he says. If it looks like sh*t, and smells like sh*t, then it must be sh*t - right?

By the way, I served for 20 years in the US Navy. I had "broken service" and was honorably retired a few years ago. In case you're wondering how I got to be a Vietnam Era Veteran.
Sincerely,

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, do ya think I was too harsh on him?

Linda makes interesting graphics and her chosen media is uniquely hers.....but her commentary is weak; unappealing to a large audience. This cutesy image of Kerry, lifted from his infamous testifying pose, crushing the head of a vet? I know it's sposed to be a play on the suit against the SwiftVets, but every undecided folk I've talked to finds it repulsive and thinks it's an unfair attack on sKerry...

If this material was good, this editor would grab it and spread her word without realizing the anti-Kerry message.

But this is the first time I've said anything negative about her work.....and I expect to be flamed for having such an opinion.....but whining about being censored is ludicrous.

Yeah. I was afraid you'd do that! It's a good point, but it does not answer the editor's request. You claimed that Kerry was silencing vets. (You're correct.) You sent a response that Kerry impugned his fellow vets. (also true.)

But the TWO ARE NOT THE SAME ISSUE!

The editor now gets to think he's right, and dealing with a buncha incoherent nincompoops.

The answer to the editor's question is (should be) related to the FEC complaint demanding SwiftVets remove their ads recently. This has nothing to do with the Kerry 71 testimony!

Which is why the editor was put off by your cartoon....it's not internally coherent....close....but no cigar!!! (It is nice graphics, I'll certainly give you that.)

Again, this is NOT censorship....frankly....in this particular case...it's good editing.....hate to admit it.

From another thread posted on FR (search: swift) - an interview with O'Neil.

I thought you would be interested: (begin quote)

O’Neill: Let me give you an example. Just picking one incident, there was this terrible tragedy on January 20, 1969 in which Kerry’s boat, under Kerry’s command, opened up on a sampan, and the sampan had a father, a mother, a baby, and a child. The father and the child were killed. What clearly happened is the sampan got too close to the swift boat, the crew member - at least one of them believes Kerry was not watching the radar and says Kerry was not around at all - they reached a split-second decision and fired, they thought, to save themselves.

FPM: Now you say, “They.” You mean the subordinate reached the decision?

O’Neill: Yes, the young gunners mate was the only one left because Kerry wasn’t around. It was Kerry’s job to be around.

FPM: Where was he? These boats aren’t that big?

O’Neill: I don’t know. He wasn’t there. Maybe he was asleep. But he clearly was not where he should have been. They killed a father and a son and rescued a mother and baby out of the sampan. In the course of war things like this happen, but what happened next was truly unbelievable. What I did was go to the Navy archives and obtain the report that Kerry actually filed on this incident. And by the way, as to the fact there was only a mother, a baby, and then the father and child were killed, Kerry’s autobiography says that, Tour. So there is no question there were four people in that…one family. In the Navy archives I obtained the actual report that he filed on this incident on January 20, 1969 in the name of PCF 44, his boat. What he reported to the Navy, and by the way he said that the face of the child he killed would be with him forever, and so on. When I got the actual report, what he reported to the Navy was that a squad of Viet Cong were there, 5 Viet Cong, that he’d killed all of them. The child who was killed disappeared from the report. The mother and the baby became 2 Viet Cong, captured in action. Even the little details, like there was 1,000 pounds of rice on the sampan, it got elevated to 5,000 pounds of rice. This report went to the Navy and went up the chain of command. Everyone said, “Kerry ‘Bravo Zulus’ Congratulations, congratulations” over what was in fact a terrible human tragedy, not a victory. And it was listed as one of the great accomplishments of our squadron in the first quarter of 1969. This is a victory that he achieved only with a pen and paper. He did it to stop people from asking, "Where were you?” “How did this happen?” “How did this kid get killed?” “Why weren’t you watching the radar?” “What occurred?” That was sort of typical of the thing that I found with Kerry.

(end quote)

Good for you! Seriously, I wish you good fortune. As a sculptor, I know how difficult it is to present one's art to the public and face their reactions.

I'm trying to tell you that people like me that had problems with your work for the reasons I've listed DON'T say anything to you for exactly that reason.

But claims that some private citizen or newspaper editor was censoring you, or that somehow getting on FR and grandstanding about it instead of responding coherently was what I responded to. Now, in addition, you can choose to advance your work mindful of constructive criticism, or you can ignore it. Yer choice.

Good luck! Really! I wish you well.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.