EditorandPublisher.com - Information Authority for the Newspaper Industry: "Rall said in the cartoon that Tillman -- who gave up a $3.6-million National Football League contract to join the military and then died last month -- 'falsely believed Bush's wars against Iraq and Afghanistan had something to do with 9/11. Actually, he was a cog in a low-rent occupation Army that shot more innocent civilians than terrorists to prop up puppet rulers and exploit gas and oil resources. So when Tillman got killed by the Afghan resistance, one word naturally came to mind: 'Uh -- idiot' [says one person in the cartoon's final panel]. 'Sad' [says another]. 'Hero!' [says an editor].'"

Yeah, I really hate this. Nothing is gained by this approach, and the criticism that Bush and his administration deserves, gets lost in the stupidity of badmouthing a guy who died for his country. Say what you will about the cause, but the guy put his life on the line for his country. That has to be recognized. Was he a hero? I don't know. I have had an interesting ongoing discussion with a former military man who raises the question of why our heroes are all victims. Jessica Lynch, now Tillman--either captured or dead, while acts of heroism happen every day--people putting their lives on the line and saving themselves and their mission. I think there is also kind of a kneejerk move to annoint someone hero. I remember when that pilot was shot down over Bosnia and escaped. He was branded a hero. Maybe we really don't know what a hero is, so anyone who shows up, the media and American people turn and shout "there's one!"

There is another interesting thread here, though, and that is the ferocity of the response. People suggesting he relocate to France, or hoping he dies--all part of the outpouring of emotion. And why? Why is it when 99.9% of America is behind something that the .01% who might not be is vilified? Barbara Lee casts the one vote against giving Bush carte blanche and she gets death threats. Everyone else voted for it--why denounce the one who didn't? A female basketball player turns her back on the pledge. Every other female college player is supportive or at least not opposing--why focus on the one? Is our discussion of dissent and free speech and individuality that shallow that we really want unanimity and complete conformity? That strikes me as scary. Unfortunately, I see little from this White House to suggest a better approach.

One of the things that many morons don't understand, is that the opposite of love is not hate--it is apathy. You want to show your utter disdain for someone's speech--just ignore it.