Your editorial ”The flag and the thought we hate” was a calm, intelligent reflection on the recent Supreme Court decision regarding flag-burning. By an untypically configured 5-4 vote, the court reaffirmed that our tradition of free speech includes symbolic speech and offensively dumb opinion.
Interestingly, the MacNelly cartoon just above your editorial provided a handy example of the offensively dumb. It showed an American flag burning beneath the Supreme Court bench, from which five sticks were held out roasting marshmallows.
The cartoon`s derisive snort at the five justices suggested, ”Anyone who`s for that flag-burner fellow sure doesn`t respect Old Glory.”
What could have inspired a Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist to produce a comment so witless (in both senses of the word)?
Or was he actually trying not to criticize the malignant side of free speech but to exemplify it?
