This is what we're fighting for

[pecunium]

The Iconoclast, the paper in Crawford, Texas where, Our Fearless Leader, keeps his Vacation Home, recently endorsed Kerry. They said, in light of the present situation (economy, terrorism, international goodwill) Kerry would be a better choice for president.

Honestly, my reaction (apart from a certain schadenfruede, that Bush's hometown paper came out against him) was, mostly, so what. It's a small town paper. It's in Bush Country, and I count that as all to the good... but it ain't gonna cause Bush to lose in Texas.

Then I saw this editorial

It seems that having the, "wrong," opinion matters.

We expected that perhaps a few readers might cancel subscriptions, and maybe even ads, but have been amazed at a few of the more intense communications, some of which bordered on outright personal attacks and uncalled-for harassment.

We have been told by several avid Bush supporters that the days when newspapers publish editorials without personal repercussions are over. As publishers, we have printed editorials for decades, and have endorsed candidates, both Republican and Democrat. When Bush was endorsed four years ago, the Gore supporters did not respond with threats, nor did Democrats when we endorsed Reagan twice....

The new mode of operation, I am told, is that when a newspaper prints an editorial of which some sectors might disagree, the focus is now upon how to run the newspaper out of business. Out the window are the contributions the newspaper has made to the community in the past and the newspaper’s extensive investment in the community.

We do understand peoples’ rights to pull subscriptions and ads, and to express a differing opinion, but we have some trouble understanding threats and payback since in politics there are often a variety of options. For the publishers to herald one of the options should be no cause for persecution....

Unfortunately, for the Iconoclast and its publishers there have been threats — big ones including physical harm.

It goes on. They have published some 700 pieces of e-mail, pro and con, on their web-site Iconoclast, and I am going to head that way and read them.

This is bad... very bad.

Comments

[zoje-george.livejournal.com]

All the more reason for people to check out Ornicus and Dave's chilling series on The Rise of Pseudo Fascism (Part II and Part III). He's not done yet either.

As you and I have both linked to in the past couple of days. Gotta do what we can to point out how UN-American this sort of shit is.

[zoje-george.livejournal.com]

Dammit, I'm coming down with a headcold, and all my spelling abilities flee! It should be "Orcinus."

Sheesh.

[wcg.livejournal.com]

It is bad, but it's also good. It's good because it puts this out in the open. Furthermore, it's bound to rankle with a whole lot of independent minded Texans for whom "Don't Mess With Texas" is more than a slogan.

Trying to harrass a newspaper for printing an editorial is, by traditional Texas thinking, an affront against the basic rights Texans have fought for ever since Moses Austin led the first colonists across the Red River. It's something you might expect in New York, but Texans can speak their minds. (I say, channeling the many native Texans I've known, including my dear wife.)

He says God speaks to him

[royeh.livejournal.com]

I don't know, ya know,
there's lottsa folks
think 'W' is God sent,

including Texans.

[don-fitch.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's not all that bad -- small-town newspapers notoriously get some violent (or at least Extremely Vigorously Expressed, which is a Texas custom) letters whenever they take a political position. I read through a couple of pages of the letters at that site and (though I was too lazy to tabulate) I think about half were supportive of the position the paper took, and most of the rest just disagreed with it in an acceptably non-violent way. I think you may be under-estimating the traditional practice of small-town Americans to use highly-emotional & extreme rhetoric on emotionally-charged matters. Not that I think such an emotional approach is good, mind you, but it seems rarely to be translated into harmful action. Rhetoric is the name of the game.

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Having worked on small papers... I don't think so. I've had my share of personal hate mail, and a few pieces of really irate pieces of generic mail, but nothing was ever so strong, nor so voluminous as to merit a follow up editorial describing the responses.

That speaks volumes. I also noticed that a lot of the positive responses were out of area, in repsonse to that editorial getting national play. The local stuff was tilted against (which was to be expected, not only because Bush lives there, but because of the strong support he has, overall, in Texas).

TK

[jennae.livejournal.com]

Violations of the Free Speech clause in the Bill of Rights by the Bush administration doesn't surprise me one bit, however, it does seriously infuriate me as much as the Patriot Act. As you suggested in a recent comment reply to me, I shall be writing more often to my legislatures.