Marlette Manipulation 12.0: "I Wanted to Finish Him OFF!!"

I manipulated Andy's attack cartoon on Mike Hill, above,  to better reflect the reality of the situation.  His article where he is talking to a chicken that he says is God, his previous cartoon mocking Jesus as an illegal alien, and now this cartoon from Saturday where Andy Marlette draws a disgraceful depiction of Jesus on the cross--Why does he continue to attack Christianity--In a Christian Community?

As I have done for over a decade now, in multiple instances and on a variety of his cartoons, I have once again taken one of Andy Marlette's lame cartoons and at least made it better and more reflective of reality.

Lately it feels like a sustained attack on Christianity--between his goofy editorials where he mocks God as a chicken, to the despicable cartoons where he depicts Jesus as a criminal in one, to being arrested for illegally crossing the boarder, to the one he did where he intimates Jesus is being crucified for being homosexual.  It is disgraceful and disrespectful.  Of course he and the PNJ enjoy the right of free speech, to mock Christians.  But why? Why mock  Jesus in this disrespectful manner--In a Christian community?

As I wrote in a blog post late last week, I recently was "invited" to sit for an "interview" with the 2-person editorial board of the PNJ (+ Jim Little).

It was a joke, a total set-up, ambush job.

Funny how the invitation I got came after I submitted an op-ed with which I know PNJ disagrees, and shortly after I manipulated their last "attack-cartoon" on Jesus.

Ok, so to summarize:  Based upon the attacks on conservatives and Republicans, God, and Christianity--it certainly appears as if the PNJ is deliberately trying to alienate their readers (customers).

I wonder what Gannet corporate thinks about this?

Getting Ahead of an Issue

Some might naively state  "If a memo is voluntarily published, what difference does it make if it was or was not a public record prior to such a voluntary release?"  Some might even say something really flippant like "What difference does that question make, if a memo is shared, that is the same as leaving the barn door open and letting the Horse out!"

Here's why asking the public record question is critically important:

If a memo is created by a public agency in the furtherance of its operation in the state of Florida--odds are that all or parts of it are a public record, either immediately or at some point in the very near future--except in some narrowly defined, very limited categories subject to exemption.

These things live forever.

If a memo is created and disseminated widely, and if it is a subject of contention or significant gnashing of teeth---odds are it will be revealed sooner rather than later.

So the feckless, ignorant, and utterly fetid assertion that such a record will not become a public record unless someone voluntarily releases it, or because someone voluntarily released it, is nothing but a ridiculous, naive,  red herring.

The real issue of importance, the real matter at issue,   is this:

Creation of memorandums that ultimately will become subjected to release under Florida's public records laws must be carefully considered, particularly if such memorandums might contain unseemly allegations, explosive claims, and/or potentially damaging or inaccurate conclusions.

So should such memos even be created at all, or under what dire circumstances should they be created?  Shouldn't the process of creating such records be re-worked, with a thoughtful decision matrix put into place delineating the when and if of such record creations?

Because under the current environment and protocols, apparently, nobody knows when they might be the recipient of such a memo.....

Ans so yes, sometimes being proactive in the face of an issue or a potential issue is an appropriate action to take; It is called getting ahead of a problem.  Intercepting and deflecting an attack. Contingency planning. Controlling spillage.

This is why it is not an uncommon practice among Bomb-Squads worldwide that encounter suspicious packages to blow up such potentially explosive items immediately.  Often, these bomb-squads proactively, purposely blow up bombs they find so they can render these devices inert or they can control detonations, minimizing and/or isolating the extent of damage caused by such devices.

Think about it.