Tom Toles Wins the Internet, Again

Part of Toles metaphor, that's implied, is that Obama has not received any "honeymoon" by the GOP. The party is committed to destruction - of Obama, of the US, and as Toles puts so well, of themselves.

Update:

The GOP, and the "journalists" (which includes political cartoonists) who slavishly carry their water, are trying to maintain the culture of falsehood and aggression that was successful from 1994-2006. In some ways it still worked from 2006-2008, but since Rove as out of a job, and following Katrina, the press rebelled slightly. They resisted some of the gross falsehoods yet happily swallowing most. We saw this in the 2008 Election when the press largely gave McCain's clear falsehoods a pass and only choked a bit when they needed to swallow Sarah "W2" Palin.

So this is why the GOP has fought Obama from the git-go. Even when Obama gave them concessions - specifically large tax-cuts - the GOP voted unanimously against his bill. Let me repeat the crucial point: the Republicans unanimously voted against a tax cut. That's the level of intensity of their aggression.

Gary Varvel is one of the more craven of GOP cartoonist lackeys, as we see in the accompanying cartoon. He depicts Obama happily accepting only Democratic ideas while the GOP ideas are put in the trash. Har. Except, of course, that it's pure falsehood. Does Varvel know it's false? Does he *believe* the GOP's press releases and just ignores the facts, or does he know the truth and is willing to print slander in order to make sure his "team" wins?

Most of these Right Wing Cartoonists have the latter attitude; especially because they are often single issue voters: abortion. Glenn McCoy, a bad artist and worse thinker, is a good case in point (as the third cartoon attests). He likely hates the Democrats, and Obama, because of abortion and as a result needs to destroy everything his opponants do even if it's not related to abortion.

Whatever their reasons, the Vast Right Wing Idiocracy is desperate to extend their bullying of the truth because were the press to report accurately, and the American people to be better informed, then the GOP will be in deep trouble. But an aggressive, oppositional, defense is all the GOP has right now. And while Obama was referring to Islamic terrorists when he talked about those who destroy rather than build, it is also a good description of the GOP.

Top 3 Cartoons

The Win goes to Tom Toles (who has consistently done awesome work):


Silver to David Horsey (also consistently good):


And the Bronze to newcomer Clay Bennett:


Honorable mentions:
Ben Sargent (whose art and politics are excellent):


And Paul Szep (whose art is terrible, but politics on the money):

Don't Try to Be Funny

As I've mentioned before, I read dozens of daily poltiical cartoons (they come to my e-mailbox as a paid service from Gocomics.com). There's a trend I've noticed where political cartoonists basically use their space to write a joke. Which is entirely not what their job description demands. There are 'funny' cartoons and then political cartoons. To mix the two basically makes for a waste of space. Poltiical cartoonists have a serious, and consequential job (only slightly taken over by the late night talk show hosts, no kidding).

Anyway, this is an example from Bruce Beattie from a few weeks ago that just broke the camels back [click to enlarge]

What is his point? It's not even funny. It's stupid. And considering the dire situation the US is in, and the need to galvanize the electorate, why choose a stale joke-like-substance?

Ramirez and the Pulitzer

Michael Ramirez, political cartoonist for some Texas backwater rag, won the Pulitzer Prize last year. He's the scumbag who lost his job from the LA Times for his bigoted "Hate" cartoon about the Arab-Israeli conflict. This is odd, because most right wing morons are pro-Israel. Not Ramirez. Maybe he's one of those mythical all-around idiots that I keep worrying about.

Anyway, his cartoon from the other day (see below) shows the twisted weirdness of the Right Wing commentariat. For those without images, the picture depicts Obama as the successor for Herbert Hoover because, somehow, Obama/Democratic policies are similar to Hoovers.

Look, this is just strange. The only person alive who can be plausibly be compared to Hoover would be George W. Bush with John McCain a close second (deregulate and stand aside while everything goes kablooie).


This is classic crazy from the Right Wing: depict the enemy (which could be Democrats, liberals, Jews - evidently) as guilty of the crimes only associated with Republicans.

Does Ramirez know how stupid this is? I don't know.

What it does bring up, to me, is the issue of why should newspapers employ cartoonists/columnists who represent not only a very small part of the population (pro-Bushites, hovering at around 30%) and specifically a part of the population that is uninformed. A newspaper should combat ignorance, not perpetuate it! And I'm not being pollyannish - if a newspaper does not try to inform the public, then it's a sad abuse of the "freedom of the press."

Here's another example:


Sarah Palin is somehow just as qualified as Teddy Roosevelt. Yeah. Sure. Let's leave aside that he was a sitting VP when he took over the presidency (he was only in office a few months), and that his 'two years' as a governor was of *New Freakin' York* and not some moose-ridden backwater, he was Asst Scty of the Navy before that (interrupted by military service as head of the 'Rough Riders', head of the NYC Police before that, head of the Federal Civil Service for 6 years before that, etc. Teddy was also a magna cum laude graduate of Harvard (which means he didn't just attend to get a pedigree, he actually stayed to learn something).

So the author of the second cartoon, Steve Breen, who surprise surprise won a Pulitzer in 1998, is either purposefully stupid or ideologically trying to obfuscate and in that sense *harm* the reader.

I know that Bush is still in power, Lieberman has hijacked the Senate, and so Fox News and Associated Gooper Idiots still are considered legitimate 'news' agencies. But, seriously, we shouldn't have to take this anymore. Breen, Ramirez, etc are jokes and an insult to the 'news' business.

Glenn McCoy - Voice of the Wingnuts

Political cartoonist Glenn McCoy not only can't draw that well (or at least he makes his figures purposefully disquieting) but he has one of the lowest common denominator minds of the idiot Right Wing. For a quick primer in what the wingnuts are thinking (or, a better term for right-wing nut: freeper), just read Glenn "W is God" McCoy.

These cartoons are from September 2007, but McCoy is as persistent as all small minds, so what holds back then, still holds for today.

Exhibit 1 (Aug 14 2007)

Exhibit 2 (Aug 8 2007)

Exhibit 3 (July 26 2007)


Exhibit 1: A standard Freeper view is that the media is unabashedly liberal. I disproved that canard here, - and it's pretty obviously a lie to anyone who pays attention - yet it's a rock solid axiom of the right wing.

Exhibit 2: Heh heh heh. Up until she actually left the race in June, the freepers believed with absolute certainty that Hillary was going to be the democratic nominee. It came from two coincident axioms: (1) The Clintons were unbeatable (proven by the fact that they hadn't been beaten) and (2) that the Democrats were so stupid, venal, evil that they would naturally choose Hillary.

Exhibit 3: Same with #2. Extra points for making Hillary look monstrous.

Summary: The key question is does Glenn - and by extension the rest of his freaky-right-winger ilk - actually believe this narrischkeit? Yeah, they're convinced, like most radicals, that the press is against them. The secret truth, that the press is on their own side, doesn't penetrate (but that's a different screed). But about Hillary? Or are they just trying to stack the deck in favor of who they think is the worse candidate, Hillary? This is what Rush Limbaugh did, with his Operation Chaos, and I at least give him credit for knowing that he's on the side of evil (same with Rove). So I guess the real question is: is Glenn in on Rush/Rove's joke?

Backpost, started 9/4/07, finished 2009-12-07.

Ted Rall Loses It

As I've mentioned before (here and here), the cartoonist Ted Rall is the worst mainstream leftie political cartoonist. For an example of his moral myopia, see today's toon where he decries our war in Afganistan. Now, if you're anything but a pacifict scumbag, our war in Afganistan is just. They attacked us on 9/11, if you recall, and the war actually toppled the evil regime. Sure, war is bad, but it's sometimes necessary and it takes a puny mind to deny that. Exhibit A: Rall.

Why McCain's Age Matters

Bob Gorrell, one of the more heinous of idiots to work a political cartooning pen has this 'toon up to decry a media double-standard:
Styx Commentary: The whole point behind racism and sexism is that they MAKE NO SENSE. There's no behavioral difference from being dark or light skinned. And while there may be significant differences between how men and women think, stand up comedians have long established that it's mainly in the realm of asking directions. But age?? Only a partisan hack will deny that age doesn't matter (or just in this case). It's as chronic a condition as any illness.

Backpost finished 2009-12-06.

Comic Watch: Prickly City

In addition to my daily political cartoon intake, I have a monthly/bi-monthly regular ol' cartoon intake. Politics I need to follow every day, Garfield can wait for a 6x year binge. By waiting a buncha weeks, the storylines make more sense anyway.

My subscription is "Mycomicspage.com" and over the years (I've subscribed on and off since 2000) some of the best 'toons have left. Some of the new ones are very good (probably the best new one is "Cul De Sac"), but others not so much. Usually the cruddy ones don't make it on my subscription page, but there are a few I keep under 'watch,' which brings us to Prickly City.

This is a pathetic attempt to be a Republican Bloom County. As with GOP sponsored comedy, the sense of humor is shrill and insulting; the messages are actually much stupider than the comic medium is assumed to be.

The main characters are a black Republican girl (chyeah, those are common) and a Democratic yellow dog. The girl is the voice of reason and intelligence, the dog is a stand-in for idiotic liberals. Or whatever. Here's a great example (from April 24,2008) of the "political relevance" as Da City takes on the myth of global warming:



Things to emphasize: how every argument about global warming from the GOP devolves into a hissy fit about Al Gore. No matter what Bush and his slack-jawed lackeys say, it REALLY bothers them that Al got a Nobel Prize.

Note, though, that Glenn McCoy, who writes one of the worst political cartoons, has a rather decent daily strip The Duplex. I want to give Glenn credit for both doing a daily strip and political cartoon (not easy) but keeping the politics out of the strip (which explains why it can be funny on occasion).

Political Cartoons Tell the Tale

Every day I receive, by paid subscription, 20 or so political cartoons (as well as daily 'funny cartoons, but that's another essay). I use the 'toons to keep up with the pulse of the bloviation. Like on TV, the inveterate right-wingers outnumber the left-wingers 5 to 1. The worst of the right wingers are Chuck Asay, Glenn McCoy, Lisa Benson. The worst of the left is Ted Rall (the Michael Moore of 'toons). The positive about the toonists is that while most of them are as stupid as the TV anchors (e.g. Russert, Matthews) there are a few balanced acts. Two of them are the estimable Tom Toles (who's been on such a role he deserves another Pulitzer) and the skeevy Pat Oliphant.

See below for today's pickin's from both. And note, Oliphant has been a critic of the Clintons back from the 90s, but his slapdown of Hillary is a telling marker that she's losing credibility capital:

Toles:

Oliphant:

Credit Where it's Due: Ted Rall

Ted Rall is a crazy left winger cartoonist. His normal mode of political discourse is shrieking overblown rhetoric at the top of his cartoon lungs. His art is bad and his logic is bad and, like Moveon.org, he ruins whatever decent point lies within the guano of his screed.

But, he actually had a decent, understated political cartoon the other day. So I will give him credit where it's due.

Because Shotgunning Puppies Takes Too Long

That's the answer to the question: Why does the Bush Administration persist in trying to take money away from a federal program to give poor children health insurance.

I mean, we cynics joke about how all politicians need to claim that they support mom, family, baseball, etc. But here we have a case of a president who actually hates children and wants them to die.

Sick.

Rules May Limit Health Program Aiding Children - New York Times:

"The Bush administration, continuing its fight to stop states from expanding the popular Children’s Health Insurance Program, has adopted new standards that would make it much more difficult for New York, California and others to extend coverage to children in middle-income families."

Aug 21 Update

I just saw this Aug 5 Tom Toles editorial cartoon that carries my point well.

Assault Weapons and CBS

Somewhere, when I wasn't looking, the second Amendment became more important than the first. The Assault Weapon Ban - a perfect thing to need renewing during a presidential election - real smart guys - is history. Not that it mattered much anyway, I mean, considering that we can't go on a plane with nail clippers, America is that much safer. And 9/11 would clearly have been prevented if we all had AK-47s.

Anyway, as an avid reader of political cartoons (both through my subscription services and through Slate), I have slowly become outraged at the cowardice of the Press. I've been a critic of the pusillanimous Press for years now and I'm so glad that I didn't enter the field because I'd have to retire from the shame of my colleagues.

And I'm not only talking about the shoddy journalism of CBS and Rather. Rather sucked the moment he sat in Cronkite's chair (and I'm not just saying that because Roger Mudd was my professor at Princeton). I'm talking about the total timidity of the press in the face of the type of government they were empowered to battle.

If you check the list of editorial cartoons about CBS and Rather you'll see that many 'toonists are claiming that CBS works for Kerry. One 'toon said that Rather's replacement will be Michael Moore.

Ahem.

In this age where Fox is de-facto owned by the RNC -- DENY IT, COME ON, DENY IT! -- and where the Press has let Bush, Cheney and Rove run amok with the truth, the concept that anyone critical of the President is loyal to Kerry is just disgusting. The Press is supposed to criticize the government, that's why the constitution protects it.

The Press played along in a shamefully slack-jawed, lazy, frightened manner with the 'Swift Boats for Rove' crapola. So if they go after a legitimate story - based on those black things on white things called "words" and "paper" - about the gaps in Bush's military record... gaps which can explain why he can't handle responsibility - why that is considered acting on Kerry's behalf?! I understand why Fox would assert that, but there are a half-dozen toons and counting. I can't wait till I see one which says Osama is behind it.

Look, Iran just successfully tested long-range missiles. North Korea is rattling nuclear sabres. Our army is being chewed up like yellow pencils in Iraq and we're roaming the sinkhole of Afghanistan looking for an Osama in a haystack. We've lost more soldiers per day in Iraq after the 'transfer of power' than before. Why would saying these things be considered partisan. IT'S THE TRUTH DUMMIES!

Oh, forget it. I can see we're going to get four more years of this pencil-neck and his beady-eyed thuggery. The GOP in Ohio has rejected the new registrations of voters (mostly Democrats) because they registered on the wrong weight of card-stock. How many elections can they steal and still call this America?

Sorry to say, this is no longer the Styx; we're entering Hell.

{2009 Pic Update: First from here, second from here.}