I really didn't care for your cover on this issue. There is such a thing as freedom of the press, but I think this was tasteless. For those of you who don't like it here, you are free to go to Iraq or any other country of your choosing. However, I wonder what would happen to you if you were to put a cover like that denouncing the head of or policies of that country! (Note: The cover in question had signs visible that read "Impeach Bush", "Bring The Guard Home", and "Get Out Of Iraq") You and I both know you probably wouldn't live to put out another issue! -Signed, Some Yutz (Real name withheld)I hear this sort of thing a lot. It is a popular conservative gambit. If you don't like it here, then leave. Let's logically dissect this: This person says she doesn't like their cover photo because it shows people protesting U.S. policies. Her solution is for the editors (and I'll assume the protesters as well) to move somewhere without freedom of the press. What the fuck kind of sense does that make? We're the ones that like the freedom of the press. We celebrate it along with all the other freedoms granted us. She, on the other hand, seems resentful of this freedom. Sounds to me like she's the one who needs to move to a more repressive country. She'd fit right it! Conservatives love to boast about all the freedoms we have here in the U.S. until people start to want to exercise them.
The REAL Freedom Haters...
There is a free weekly newpaper out of Traverse City that I read. It's along the lines of the Chicago Reader, but with much less content. I noticed a letter to the editor that typifies an argument I've heard many times from conservatives. It regards a cover photo from a previous issue featuring a peace march across the Mackinac Bridge. It's entitled "Baghdad Express?" (the name of the weekly is the Northern Express, how fucking clever.) Here it is in its entirety: