It's better in color online anyway-- the scarlet "A" really pops out. The irony here is that so many of the traditional comic strips just reek with sexist stereotyping and misogyny on a daily basis.

You must have linked to the wrong strip. What was so "heavy" about that?

I don't know -- but the O editors pulled it.

They are very sensitive people over there.

I highly recommend this piece on The O's decision to censor Doonesbury:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/doonesbury-abortion-strip-censored-7284948

I'm an Oregonian living in Idaho these days. Learned of the controversy when Idaho's conservative statewide paper (The Idaho Statesman) announced they WOULD publish the cartoons (as always, in the editorial section.)

I am strangely touched by the Statesman's editorial decision. The Editors know they'll get major grief from their readership (Idaho is as red as you've heard.) But as the Editors explained; "these cartoons belong in the public dialogue..." (and it's not their job to censor.) Considering this is (red-red-red) Idaho, a courageous decision indeed.

And as for the Oregonians decision, look at the comments on their own website. 180 comments as of tonight on the two articles announcing their censorship. (See the lions share at:)

http://blog.oregonlive.com/oregonianeditors/2012/03/doonesbury_editors_decide_not.html

I read thru them. Two support the decision, while 178 (!) lambast the decision.

I encourage everyone (I hope with BoJack's nod) to go to the Oregonian's website and leave their own 2¢ worth. They've got to get their head out of the sand and live up to their neighbors to the East.

PS: According to the Idaho Statesman, the cartoons will get explicit in the next few days, but as they also say: "Political cartoons are supposed to tackle these most sensitive issues. That's their function, and it's often an uncomfortable one."

Never mind, a tanker truck full of milk tipped over in Ontario. Hope the networks pick this story up! Not as glam as Samrand, but still news worthy.

Very sad about Bob Caldwell and the Oregonian's original cover up of the story (found in car when he actually had a heart attack while cheating on his wife with someone 40 years his junior). At least the Oregonian didn't run Doonesbury this week to protect its readers from anything uncomfortable in the paper.

Such hypocrisy from a paper that covered up the Goldschmidt affair with a 14 year old.

Isn't it great news that Oregon has hit an all time high of 800,000 food stamp users in January! One out of four Oregonians need assistance to continued anemic economy. Single party rule and weird is not working. We must do better.

How in the world is this NOT about the Caldwell story?

Always liked "Mallard Fillmore". But, it was at the other end of the political spectrum from Doonesbury and since it ridiculed the print news media, I could see why it was canceled.

Allan L, good question. Flog Bog's Blog.

I don't see how, or that, the Doonesbury story is the Bob Caldwell story. Additionally, that the information the paper first published changed a day later does not mean that there was a cover-up. It certainly wasn't much of one IF it it was any at all.

The Doonesbury story is inexplicable. The Caldwell story, sad. I hope his children can make their peace with it someday.

Oregonian cover ups of its senior staff's brushes with either the law or with questionable behavior.

I seem to recall that within the last 12 - 18 months a very senior Oregonian person was cited for DUII. Several other media outlets ran the story.

The silence from the Big Zero was deafening.

Very sad about Bob Caldwell and the Oregonian's original cover up of the story (found in car when he actually had a heart attack while cheating on his wife with someone 40 years his junior).

According to Willy Week, not just cheating . . . he was paying for sex.

I don't see what the big deal is here with the Doonesbury strip, anyway. I like the approach the Idaho paper took . . . that's well-reasoned. It's hilarious to see them printing it but the supposedly "liberal" O refraining from it.

"According to Willy Week, not just cheating . . . he was paying for sex."

Willamette Week's entire report was reporting what the Oregonian had reported. So it would be, "According to the Oregonian ...".

Bob had writing talent, but otherwise I considered him a creep till the end. Not that I wish to speak ill of the dead. We all do have our issues, but the editorial page was too long used to unduly manipulate public opinion under his tenure. May he rest in peace and may the Oregonian replace him with someone more objective. Interesting I read he was on some kind of bar/bench/press committee. Should these three entities be in collusion? Me thinketh not.

What good are editorials if they don't try to influence public opinion? They normally advocate a position. Otherwise why have them?