THIS IS NOT AN ANTI-SEMITIC POST


but it does criticize two jews.

I was gonna let the first one pass.

It was the middle of the week, I had better things to do, and, despite the sheer, offensive lunacy of it all, I was feeling charitable. So I slipped yesterday's Post-Gazette letter to the editor from Cyril H. Wecht, M.D., J.D. (that's Medical Doctor, Jackass Dilettante) into the been-there, ignored-that file at TWM headquarters, fought through the piercing headache it produced, and simply went about the business of my day.

But when this morning's PG produced a second, equally loony, even more offensive letter to the editor by Ben Wecht, son of Cyril and bastard father of imbecilic anti-Semitism claims, I knew I couldn't take any more. And I knew I couldn't let either one of them pass. The piercing headache returned, my head came dangerously close to exploding, and, somewhere in the deepest recesses of my freshly sputtering brain, I could hear the guttural roars of Al Pacino, first as Michael Corleone (Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!) and then as Shylock (I am not bound to please thee with my answer!), urging me to action.

And so here we are, beginning with a brief bit of context: a political cartoon from the brilliant Rob Rogers that appeared in Monday's edition of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. If you haven't already seen it, take a look at it. See if you can spot the great, inflammatory indignities allegedly heaped upon our esteemed -- which is to say, our indicted -- former coroner and eternal blowhard. Then look even more closely. Really closely. I mean, really, really closely. So really really really closely, in fact, that the lines on your monitor cross and blur and fade until you can see nothing of form or substance at all, and so are free to reassemble and imagine them as you wish, Rohrshach-race-card-like, to see whatever offense you think will best suit, or perhaps most inflame, our letter writers' already overworked egos and underdeveloped senses of perspective.

Got that? Good. Because so does Dr. Wecht, as he proves right from the sniveling start of his slime-trail-leaving letter...

I can't help but wonder if your defamatory cartoon (Sept. 17) was not timed as a special gift for my wife, children and grandchildren during the Jewish High Holy Days.

This is so good -- by which I mean insidious; by which I mean, evil -- I don't know where to begin.

But I'll try. If only because it establishes the rancid theme that will coarse through every last untoward word of both these letters: Rob Rogers and the PG aren't merely using the new Bodies exhibition to poke fun at Dr. Wecht -- after all, how could they possibly do that? the man is clearly above reproach. and beneath humor. -- but to attack his honor, assault the delicate sensibilities of his family, and inflict a chilling, (dare I say?) Nazi-esque reproach upon this noble and notable public servant. Because they don't like him.

Oh, yeah. And because he's Jewish.

(You'd think someone this bat-shit paranoid would also subscribe to the theory that all mainstream media outlets are controlled by those nasty Jews and would therefore be incapable of injudiciously attacking their own. But I suppose personal manias outweigh the public. And, anyway, I digress.)

Now, let's be clear about something: Dr. Wecht is not accusing the PG of this. Oh, no. He's only wondering. You know, just thinking. Not saying. Implying. But not declaring. No, he's too dignified for that.

But not, apparently, too dignified -- or, for that matter, sane -- to suggest that Rob Rogers and the PG have launched an attack not just on him, but upon his family, his faith, and, for all we know, his soul. All with this one cartoon they held back and waited to unleash until the time was right: when good, paranoid, self-absorbed Jews are celebrating their High Holy Days. And are therefore most susceptible to the slings and cadavers of outrageous cartoons.

But let's look at that one too.

Rosh Hashanah began at sundown last Wednesday and lasted through Thursday. Yom Kippur begins at sundown this Friday and lasts through Saturday. The cartoon appeared on Monday morning, four days after Rosh Hashanah and four days before the start of Yom Kippur. I know the High Holy Days extend from one day to the other, but you'd think that if the folks at the PG really wanted to inflict some anti-Semitic pain on the Wecht family, they wouldn't have dropped the bomb on what is essentially halftime of the High Holy Days. If they really wanted to do some damage, they would have dropped that sucker last Thursday morning, or maybe waited until this Saturday.

I'd like to think that if it really were an anti-Semitic, High-Holy-Day attack, the timing would have been much better. I'd also like to think that sometime in these ten days of penitence, Dr. Wecht might spend some time thinking about the sins of pride and ego and bearing of false witness against his neighbor. But I somehow doubt that he will.

This is not paranoia on my part,...

Oh, no. Not at all. Because the folks at the PG really are anti-Semites. (Not, of course, that you use that phrase. Even as it informs every last letter of your letter.) And they really did want to inflict psychic pain on your poor, Jewish family. With a silly cartoon.

...but simply a painful reminder of the deeply ingrained animosity toward me that exists at the Post-Gazette.

Well, you know the old saying, Dr. Wecht: just because you claim you're not paranoid, that doesn't mean they're out to get you. Or something like that.

In this same edition, there was no reference to the autopsies that I performed on the two North Huntingdon fire victims to determine cause of death and rule out homicide.

And, of course, there should have been. Because he's Dr. Cyril Wecht. Everything he does should be noted. And reported. And lauded. But never, ever criticized.

To get the PG back on track, I suggest this headline for tomorrow's paper: Wecht performs autopsy, drives home, takes really big shit.

And, needless to say, when I traveled to Louisiana at my own expense and did 30 pro-bono post-mortem examinations for the New Orleans parish coroner on Hurricane Katrina victims in September 2005, there was no mention of CHW's quest for "cadavers" in "One of America's Great Newspapers."

Probably because there were much bigger stories to report at the time. Or maybe because the PG's editors were attending a neo-Nazi rally at the time. It is, after all, hard to keep up on the news when you're busy practicing goose-steps and reading Mein Kampf.

It is evident that Post-Gazette editors have no sense of professional decency, ethical conduct and personal morality whatsoever.

Because you dare to poke fun at me, who, bearing two advanced degrees, possessing an inordinate sense of self, and also being a Jew, is obviously above all reproach, criticism, and even the occasional nasty thought.

Your paper continues to manifest a depth of journalistic depravity that makes national tabloids seem like literary pablum.

(Manifest? What is this, a cargo ship? Are we talking about depravity or destiny?)

Nice to see that ol' Wechtian tradition of mixing hyperbole with verbosity and hoping everyone will be suitably impressed -- or sufficiently dumbfounded -- is still at work. I guess you really can't teach on old Doc new tricks.

Once your heads have cleared, please note that Dr. Wecht is describing the publication of a harmless political cartoon -- and, of course, the lack of publication of a glowing feature about his tireless work in New Orleans and North Huntingdon -- as journalistic depravity. (Did I suggest the man lacks perspective? What was I thinking?)

Please note, also, that Dr. Wecht is so busy barking up the verbosity tree that his analogy doesn't even make sense. The PG's depravity is so bad that it makes the tabloids seem like trite, insipid, simplistic writing? It's so bad that it makes the tabloids seem bad? Huh?

In other words, the phrase literary pablum is so silly and contradictory that that it makes the phrase Wechtian sense seem like gospel truth.

Now that you have savaged Richard Scaife and Cyril Wecht, I wonder who your next victim will be.

First of all, Doc, it should be whom; if you're gonna bloviate like this, you should at least be grammatically correct.

Now: I'm not sure that reporting the messy -- and, let's face it, comically absurd -- facts of Richard Scaife's divorce, much less publishing a gently mocking political cartoon, qualify as savagery. At least not to anyone not named Scaife or Wecht. Which is to say, not to anyone with senses of reason or perspective.

But the true disappointment of this last line -- it's clear the good doctor is not at the top of his game; the Attack of the High Holy Days must have dulled his senses -- is that the inclusion of Richard Scaife, a defiant and unapologetic Christian, undercuts the slimy, anti-Semitic insinuation he'd been so long cultivating. Is the PG anti-Semitic or not? Is it anti-Christian too? Does it hate just conservative Christians and liberal Jews?

A scorecard would be helpful. You know, just to keep track of its biases. But in the meantime, perhaps Ben Wecht can clear things up for us...

Much as one oughtn't feed...

Hoo boy. Much as one oughtn't? He is his father's son.

It's only a matter of time before he butchers an analogy.

...a dog table scraps for fear of further stimulating its appetite,...

(See? What did I tell you?)

In this analogy, Ben, your words are the table scraps. I'm not going to argue with you, but I doubt that's what you intended.

...it has long been my public policy to ignore the Post-Gazette's chronic displays of animosity toward my father, Cyril Wecht.

In the Wechtian worldview, it seems, any form of questioning, criticism, or satirical commentary equals animosity.

Hmm. Animosity. Now where have I heard that word before? You don't suppose the Wechts compared notes and coordinated their responses, do you? If so, then you know that an insinuation -- or even an outright declaration -- of anti-Semitism is sure to follow. Stay tuned...

But Rob Rogers' Sept. 17 editorial cartoon depicting him as some sort of bloodthirsty ghoul...

Go back and look at the cartoon again. (It's alright. I'll wait.) Does Dr. Wecht look like a bloodthirsty ghoul in that drawing? Really? A bloodthirsty fool, perhaps. But a ghoul?

...lowers the level of public "discourse" to such an unprecedented depth that failing to comment on it would mean shirking my duties as a PG subscriber.

We have duties as PG subscribers? Why didn't I know this? I have friends who work for the PG -- why didn't they ever tell me I had duties? My God, I've been shirking them all this time. I feel so irresponsible. Is it possible that the list of those duties got lost in the mail with my copies of The Liberal Agenda?

Let's begin by understanding the purpose of an editorial cartoon,...

Gather round, kids! It's Lecture Time with Ben Wecht!

...which might be defined as commenting on matters of contemporary public import through the humorous application of illustration and words.

I believe political cartoons may comment on matters of public export too. But other than that, I'm with you.

Well, I ask, what's humorous about cannibalism, necrophilia or body snatching?

I'll ignore, for a moment, the fact that Rob Rogers' cartoon raises none of these subjects, and simply say...

...well, lots of things! Haven't you ever seen Re-Animator? How about Shaun of the Dead? Return of the Living Dead? Those movies cover those subjects, and they're funny as hell.

Maybe the problem here isn't just that the Wechts lack senses of perspective; maybe they lack senses of humor too. Which begs the question: do they always lack senses of humor, or do they just lack them during the High Holy Days? If they only lack them during the High Holy Days, well, then I can see that this depraved and nefarious attack was well-timed after all. I think I'm starting to see the light...

And assuming Mr. Rogers intended the last of these implications, on what is he "commenting" exactly?

Why do we have to bring Mr. Rogers into this? Let the poor man rest in peace.

Our oh-so-prestigious Department of Justice's fanciful allegation that my father engaged in the trading of cadavers for financial gain?

I was thinking it was just a timely joke to capitalize on the recent discussion of the Bodies Exhibition at the Carnegie Science Center. But now that you mention it...

Does it matter that this wholly untested charge bears no greater relationship to reality than, say, Shakespeare's Shylock, that money-grubbing, flesh-slicing monster of "Merchant of Venice" infamy?

Okay. Here we go.

Of all the analogies to choose for baseless criminal and political accusations, Mr. Wecht chooses... Shakespeare's characterization of Shylock. Yeah. I see the connection. But hey, what good is a connection -- to your analogy, to sense, to reason or reality -- when you can really push some buttons and score some points by raising a tired, fictional specter of anti-Semitisim.

(Told you we'd get there, didn't I? But hang on -- we're still not all the way there.)

And if Mr. Rogers' cartoon is neither funny nor germane to the news of the day,...

It's both, Ben. But go on...

...what business does it have appearing in a major metropolitan newspaper?

To torture your family during the High Holy Days! Sheesh. Haven't you been paying attention?

Might it be to sell more papers...

Oh, yes. The old sell more papers canard. The last refuge of the rhetorically lost and intellectually wandering. When in doubt, when you have nothing sensible to say or rational to argue, just whine that they're trying to sell more papers.

I know I spent a lot of time at home on Monday, but when I did go out, I don't remember hearing a single person say, Hey, Rob Rogers takes a great anti-Semitic swipe at Cyril Wecht in today's political cartoon! You should go buy a PG!

...by seeking to appeal to the lowest common denominator of the region's population?

Which is what, exactly? Necrophilia? Cannibalism? Anti-Semitism? Anti-Wechtism?

My fellow PG readers, I put the question directly to you: What do you think about your hometown paper treating you like an anti-Semitic, prosecutorially biased idiot?

First: prosecutorially biased? That sounds like an affliction for which I should be taking Paxil. Or maybe Cialis. (May cause priapism or anti-Semitism. If your erections or discriminations last more than four hours, you should see your doctor.)

Now: anti-semitic. Finally, we get it out in the open, where we can only hope it withers and dies on the vine of absurdity. Because, the fabrications, protestations, and misrepresentations of the Wechts aside, it is awfully difficult -- in fact, it's plainly irresponsible and wildly offensive -- to make a case that questioning or criticizing or poking fun at one man is tatamount to attacking or demeaning or discriminating against his faith, his ethnicity, his culture, or his family.

You'd think that someone with so many degrees -- and the son of someone with so many degrees -- would be smart enough to know that. But then you would also think that a guy with that much experience -- and the son of a guy with that much experience -- cutting up human bodies would understand the importance of having thick skin. And the value of letting some things, like silly cartoons or sardonic blog posts, roll right off your unbent, unbowed back.

Posted: Thu - September 20, 2007 at 01:01 PM          

©