Site New Answers Search Boards ILM ILE Answers New Question New Questions New Poll Blog View Register Login

racial puppetry in right-wing comics

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
so of course one of the many, many things conservative funnies love to hate on is affirmative action, the radical idea that a proportion of minorities should be represented in white-run institutions like academia, politics or workplaces paying more than minimum wage. but in strips by white conservatives and republicans often choose black characters to represent right wing talking points usually heard in real life coming from mayonnaise ass whiteys like scott mclellan and ann coulter. and yeah its clear why they do, so we dont need to discuss that, but im interested in how much of a trend its become. heres 3 examples-

http://images.ucomics.com/images/uclick/prc_icon180.gif
heres the star of "prickly city", a wack calvin & hobbes rip-off with a coyote instead of a tiger and a big-lipped black girl instead of a big-haired white kid

http://images.amuniversal.com/ups/features/pricklycity/samples/stantis_80.jpg
heres scott stantis, the creator of "prickly city", former editorial cartoonist in the late 90s responsible for cartoons like this
http://reason.com/9510/stantis.gif

remember in c&h how sometimes they would discuss philosophical issues while careening around detailed montana/grand canyon landscapes in calvin's wagon? stantis basically steals that every day, but with jokes like this
http://www.illinoisfamily.org/content/img/f22737/Prickly%20City.gif

now, mallard fillmore is just a duck. but bruce tinsley, the white man who draws it, frequently turns to black, asian, or latino characters to parrot republican talking points. for example, black people support racial profiling-
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/mallard/2000/MFT50910.jpg
you wont ever see a black democrat in mallard fillmore, unless its jesse jackson or al sharpton. liberals are white, frizzy-haired professors or balding ex-hippie drug casualties.
http://jewishworldreview.com/strips/mallard/2000/MFT40505.jpg

(kinda unrelated sidenote but these mallard fillmore strips come from the site jewishworldreview.com despite repeated use of hooknosed anti-semitic caricatures in the strip, like jon stewart and this tv exec

heres a picture of bruce tinsley
http://www.indianacartoonists.com/images/mallard_au.gif

the last one yall might not see too much cuz its not in newspapers or any of that, but as far as webcomics go its one of the biggest with republicans and gets passed around more email forwards than most lefty strips. as weak as the prickly city draughtmanship is (tho i actually like tinsleys art, as lazy and/or ugly as it sometimes is), chris muir's "day by day" is without a doubt one of the ugliest comic strips ive ever seen.
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Cartoons/09-06-2005.gif

theres 4 characters, no backgrounds, 2 or 3 poses for each with different heads photoshopped on for each panel. the lead character is damon, a hip conservative software entreupenuer who resents that liberals think he should care about racism and poverty simply because he's black
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Cartoons/11-04-2002.gif

the others are a white guy who has the same glasses and cool dude hair as damon, his spicy redhead girlfriend, and the ditzy liberal woman seen here
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Cartoons/01-05-2003.gif
having a black protagonist means, much like prickly city, muir isnt afraid to take on organizations like the NAACP

also like prickly city, the style of the strip is ripped off entirely from another comic, this time doonesbury
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/cartoons/02-09-2003.gif

but muir is not really on trudeau's level as an artist, even on basic skills like perspective
http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/cartoons/02-04-2003.gif

theres also some shitty software jokes i dont get

here's muir talking about damon's race in an interview with mensnewsdaily.com:

BC: Was your choice in having two women and two men as your main characters in “Day by Day� a deliberate device for you to address gender issues along with the battle of the sexes? Also, having characters in both their twenties and in their forties gives you a unique opportunity to explore intergenerational relationships. Was this also intentional on your part?

CM: Definitely a deliberate device, both generational and gender. You may note that Jan is extremely political and focused. Damon is the same, and a high IQ type. These characteristics steer them clear of typical generational issues-issues which, as a 45 year old man, I can never really do justice to; I can never be thought 'cool' by their generation. But, perhaps, I can relate to them as Americans, as people, as fellow citizens. Also note that Damon is an orphan, raised without close relatives. I am white. Damon is black. But we are both Americans.

BC: Damon, to me, is the star of your comic. He has the best punch lines and he’s a wonderful foil for the non-reflective liberalism which surrounds him, but have you received criticism for making a black conservative the star of your series? What types of venomous responses have been thrown your way?

CM: There has been, in total, over 2000 comments concerning “Day by Day�, and only one negative comment on Damon. I am frequently asked if I am African-American (not to mention if I am a Christian). There is so much more that unites Americans than divides us.

so, these 3 comic strips use black folks as a mouthpiece for a white man's political views, opinions which a majority of black folks dont actually support. i usually disagree with charges of tokenism aimed at real life black conservatives, from colin powell to j.c. watts (the less said about condi rice/rod paige/alan keyes the better), and the white left bitching about 'house negroes' or 'uncle toms' is 100% stupid and racist. these are adults who have made their own political decisions. sometimes these decisions are then exploited by republicans seeking diversity in their party, but theyre still actual decisions. but now, this trend in comics seems alot more insidious to me, the invention of false black republicans in the absence of any truly popular real ones, and i havent really seen stantis, tinsley or muir get called out for it. is there any way to defend your opposition to the NAACP and affirmative action thru reliance on a fictional black spokesman for your ideals? would someone please interview these fuckers and ask them this?? can don weiner, roger adultry or a nairn (forget if hes a republican or just a batshit creationist) stand up for this?? i turn it over to yall now....

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 00:35 (twenty years ago)

b-b-but certainly "Prickly City" rips off "Outland" more than C&H?

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 26 September 2005 00:42 (twenty years ago)

Wait, they gave the dude who draws "The Buckets" another strip? What the shit?

― disco violence (disco violence), Monday, 26 September 2005 00:43 (twenty years ago)

the mallard fillmore dude also likes to make fun of asians -- he recently did a cartoon of the chinese prime minister that looked like charlie chan circa 1935.

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Monday, 26 September 2005 00:45 (twenty years ago)

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/prc/2005/prc050918.gif
yeah theres some bloom county in there but cmon this is a direct c&h bite

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 00:49 (twenty years ago)

http://www.alabamabound.org/images/Stantis.JPG
"i am a six year old black girl"

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 00:49 (twenty years ago)

Damon is the same, and a high IQ type

i'd like to see the head measurements to prove it

― vahid (vahid), Monday, 26 September 2005 00:50 (twenty years ago)

i want a pic of chris muir!

― vahid (vahid), Monday, 26 September 2005 00:51 (twenty years ago)

also it's funny, goatee/glasses guy w/ the coffee (in the "whining liberals" strip) looks like he should be a liberal?

― vahid (vahid), Monday, 26 September 2005 00:52 (twenty years ago)

i would also like to discuss "state of the union"

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 26 September 2005 00:53 (twenty years ago)

http://www.comics.com/creators/union/archive/images/union2005091356624.gif
what the fuck

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 00:55 (twenty years ago)

chinese premier hu jintao, mallard fillmore style:

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/Fillmore_HuJintao-729116.jpg

hu jintao, in real life:

http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/HuJintao-759734.jpg

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Monday, 26 September 2005 00:55 (twenty years ago)

mallard fillmore creator bruce tinsley apologizes for the drawing: "ah.. me so solly!!"

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 00:59 (twenty years ago)

so is this "blackface"? is there a historical precedent for it?

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 01:01 (twenty years ago)

heavy research here, very nice.

― geoff (gcannon), Monday, 26 September 2005 01:04 (twenty years ago)

ethan, didn't you used to rag on me for making fun of clarence thomas?!?

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Monday, 26 September 2005 01:10 (twenty years ago)

no tad i "ragged" on you for calling him a house nigger and an uncle tom just because you disagreed with his politics

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 01:15 (twenty years ago)

i'm more offended by how shitty his drawing skills are.

― amon (eman), Monday, 26 September 2005 01:16 (twenty years ago)

the puppetry i think is based, unconsciously, in the same logic of identity that underpins all the multi-culti stuff that these guys hate.

i think there's a masochistic tendency to wish that your enemies were all like you, that certian poltical fights didn't have to be done anymore, that (in this case) the now-inarguable history of black suffering could somehow be used toward their own notion of good, that it wasn't a permanent affront to their project.

(see also, liberals enamored of george soros [who has the benefit of being real i guess], ie a maybe vain hope that somewhere there is a billionaire capitalist who is not a scaife or a murdoch) (see also the west wing, where prez bartlett is a nobel laureate in economics & a new dealer, yeah right)

― geoff (gcannon), Monday, 26 September 2005 01:18 (twenty years ago)

i just remembered that Oliver's dad in Bloom County was a republican, but never actually mouthed the talking points. In fact, Breathed once made a joke about how he was the only one.

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 01:25 (twenty years ago)

xpost geoff sort of OTM

i think there's a masochistic tendency to wish that your enemies were all like you, that certian poltical fights didn't have to be done anymore

i think this is a human thing, not merely restricted to any one pole of any one dimension along the broad political spectrum ... i have been thinking about that damon character for a minute now and the closest i can see it is sort of like the "good afghan" or "good iraqi" characters in a lot of right-wing cartoons, which are close to the "gunga din" stories people like to tell in support of the war effort ... "gunga din" is about 150 years old, right? and i certainly wouldn't call "gunga din" blackface ... more i guess an urge to write the apparent racial components out of political and social conflicts?

― vahid (vahid), Monday, 26 September 2005 01:32 (twenty years ago)

Generic clip-art cartooning styles. Tendentious, unfunny punchlines aimed at a target audience that sees humor solely as a means to an end. Case studies in Not Getting It, but otherwise not worth the time it takes to read them.

― M. V. (M.V.), Monday, 26 September 2005 01:32 (twenty years ago)

wow i had never seen any of these before (aside from mallard filmore, obv)...that state of the union cartoon...i mean...its...wow.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 01:50 (twenty years ago)

Wow, putting Jesse Jackson in a Klan robe is crossing the line a little, dontcha think? Doesn't seem much different than drawing a big-nosed rabbi with a swastika on his shawl.

― Hurting (Hurting), Monday, 26 September 2005 02:11 (twenty years ago)

as barry brunner (where did he go?) likes to point out, that happens all the time in the foreign press

― vahid (vahid), Monday, 26 September 2005 02:16 (twenty years ago)

Barry's around! Or else I keep stumbling across old posts of his or something.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 26 September 2005 02:17 (twenty years ago)

wow, i used to think mallard fillmore was as bad as it got, but prickly city is way worse. combining would-be C&H sweetness and awful obvious reactionary jokes is a lot more insidious than MF's plain old straightforward obnoxiousness. at least tinsley is fun to hate on.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 26 September 2005 03:10 (twenty years ago)

the state of the union one is the only legitmately funny one.

― geoff (gcannon), Monday, 26 September 2005 03:24 (twenty years ago)

funny "peculiar" or funny "oh god no"?

it doesn't do the weird race-foregrounding-yet-effacing ventreloquism ethan's talking about, at least not directly.. it just puppets everybody at hand, indiscriminately, i think.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 26 September 2005 03:30 (twenty years ago)

this is a quality exposé, more of this shit please

― mike h. (mike h.), Monday, 26 September 2005 04:04 (twenty years ago)

http://www.alabamabound.org/images/Stantis.JPG

I wonder how many newspapers would offer me a job as a conservative op-ed writer on the spot if I walked in wearing a suit and bowtie. Six?

― a picture of a fat girl hugging Rick Perry, awesome (Matt Chesnut), Monday, 26 September 2005 04:05 (twenty years ago)

I was thinking the exact same thing.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Monday, 26 September 2005 04:24 (twenty years ago)

Every once in a while you'll read something about conservative comedians and humorists, and why there aren't more of them, etc., and I think they're in the same boat as the cartoonists here, which is that they conceive of political humor in a much more explicitly and purposefully partisan way than liberal/lefty humorists do. That is, they see it primarily as a means to a political end, rather than as a way to make people laugh. I think it goes to the heart of what "political humor" is really about, which is telling jokes, getting giggles, and specifically getting giggles at the expense of people in power. Just like racial humor is about getting giggles at the expense of people who look different, political humor's traditional role has been to generate laughs by ridiculing the powerful. For example, the idea that the court jester was the only one in the kingdom allowed to make fun of the king and nobles (although I'm sure there were limits to that particular license).

But so, since part of liberal/lefty ideology is a sort of built-in suspicion of power and its corrupting influence, not to mention sanctimony of all kinds, lefty humorists tend to be bipartisan and ecumenical in their targets. See, e.g., Doonesbury's treatment of Clinton. You could argue, convincingly, that Trudeau is harder on Republicans, but he still made plenty of fun of the Clinton White House, in a way that something like Mallard Fillmore never will of Republicans. There are genuinely comedic right-leaning writers (P.J. O'Rourke, Christopher Buckley), who seem to care about jokes more than propping up some party line, but not very many. None of the cartoonists above would seem to qualify, since none of them -- from available evidence -- are funny. They're just regurgitating talk-radio talking points in cartoon balloons. However political Trudeau or Breathed might get, I never doubted that their primary objective was to entertain me. I get no sense of that from these guys.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 26 September 2005 04:37 (twenty years ago)

specifically getting giggles at the expense of people in power.

yeah, that's part of it. when much of humor is built around anti-authoritarianism, it doesn't work as well when employed by folks who're all about maintaining authority.

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 07:14 (twenty years ago)

Well, to make it work, they and their audience have to engage in the pretense that they are standing up to authority themselves (specifically, the dweeby academics, wacky environmentalists and radical feminists who apparently exert great control over the world and oppress right-thinking people of common sense and good will). But it's a shaky pretense, and they know it, which gives a certain lack of conviction to the whole exercise.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 26 September 2005 07:19 (twenty years ago)

dude does poke "fun" at bush:

http://www.daybydaycartoon.com/Cartoons/09-14-2005.gif

for example.

i'm more curious to read the dynamics of the less-political of his cartoons, which seem to all be about gender and just slightly.. off. also he has gags about liberals being old. wtf! also there's this tight smug blogosphere shoutout deal to the whole thing, which only underlines the insularity. all the media gags, etc. -- a strange mirror of the "left" blogosphere too, the distrust of mainstream coverage, almost a certain camradre in some of the cartoons between the conservatives and liberals like ok the other side is completely deluded by still they have something in common by virtue of being 'net using blogreader etcs.

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Monday, 26 September 2005 07:45 (twenty years ago)

on a related note - its not a right wing comic, but a sub-sub-sub-south park animated show in the UK that makes me feel uncomfortable in the way it trades off racial and cultural stereotypes under the guise of cutting-edge-humour. i'm not entirely convinced that the writers or indeed voice talent are of the cultures they are (poorly) imitating and, perhaps, lampooning, though if i am mistaken i apologise.

http://www.channel4.com/entertainment/tv/microsites/B/bromwell_high/bromwellhigh.html

seriously, the characterisations (both in terms of the writing and the voice acting) seem pretty unevolved and offensive.

― foxy boxer (stevie), Monday, 26 September 2005 08:27 (twenty years ago)

This seems obvious, but it doesn't seem to be mentioned here: it's easier for people not on the right to dismiss right-wing views presented by pompous white plutocrats or Southern rednecks, for instance, than it is if they are offered by cool-looking, intelligent young black men. This is reinforced if people assume that the cartoonist is a smart young black guy, and this is asserted to happen and I don't doubt it - because who other than black people create black protagonists, generally? There's also the desire not to merely preach to the converted, to try to reach out to the kind of audience that might not already be permanently right wing, the attempt to make the right seem cooler (thus old, balding liberals).

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Monday, 26 September 2005 08:49 (twenty years ago)

alien puppets, clearly funnier.

― JKex (JKex), Monday, 26 September 2005 09:32 (twenty years ago)

That thread-starter was the most interesting reading of my week so far, just narrowly edging out Ben Marcus in Harpers! And then umm I'm not sure I have a complex response to it except to say that I think it's just a form of wish-fulfillment -- right-wing cartoonists, maybe already a little conflicted about the idea of conservative politics in an ostensibly "young" / "hip" (and thus implied liberal) field, creating the ultimates in people they'd like to see exist. E.g.: putting your thoughts in the mouth of a child is a long-running way for people with any set of ideas to make them seem ultra-real and common-sensical and gut-level. For one of those cartoonists, putting conservative opinions in the mouth of a "hip" young black man looks like a way of protecting the right wing's long imagination of itself as suffering and oppressed -- i.e., putting those opinions into one of few milieus where it's sometimes out of place; on the other hand, it's also a way for a conservative white guy who really does think of himself as hip and oppressed ("I was a cartoonist in college but everyone on campus was so liberal") to give himself an avatar that communicates to everyone how hip and modern he otherwise thinks he is. Comics like these can actually give a pretty good sense of whose views are actually kind of vital and/or genuinely set up against something -- liberal cartoons right now have a wide range of public government figures to turn on, whereas cartoons like these have to turn to strawmen (one of them even admits it's a strawman, with the imaginary Air America viewer!) or figures like Jesse Jackson (well past prime and not exactly a giant threatening force in this country).

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 26 September 2005 14:39 (twenty years ago)

I don't really have anything to add to this thread beyond thinking that the original thread question should be worked into an op-ed essay immediately.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Monday, 26 September 2005 14:41 (twenty years ago)

Ha, actually, me with conservatives and Jesse Jackson is kind of like E's "I can't imagine why anyone would hate Puff Daddy except if they were racist" -- some conservatives can get creepily vehement about Jesse, years after he's done anything of particular significance, and despite the fact that the dude basically just talks a little, and has at no point held any office that exercises any real power over the country. Elements of the right have just always been super-irritated by the mere fact of hearing him even say stuff about various issues -- a lot of which may be down to pulpit envy, but still.

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 26 September 2005 14:43 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, seriously, Dan! Actually, you know how Slate does those slide-show pieces? Seriously, seriously: pitch them!

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 26 September 2005 14:44 (twenty years ago)

What's telling about the dishonesty of this is that knee-jerk liberalism isn't a difficult target. A writer like O'Rourke or Peter Bagge (when he was good, which might be a minority of his output) is capable of poking holes in unreflective right-on-ism without creating right-on puppets of their own to protect themselves.

― Don King of the Mountain (noodle vague), Monday, 26 September 2005 14:51 (twenty years ago)

on a similar topic:

Liberality for All : "FINALLY, A CONSERVATIVE COMIC BOOK!"

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:08 (twenty years ago)

I agree with everybody who says that the original post is an excellent, incisive, fucking compelling read

also, the observation that comedy is historically about taking down the king-of-the-mountain, not propping up the power structure, is OTM, which is why these cartoons seem kinda alternate-universe: even dead-baby/retard jokes have as their actual target the power structure ("you musn't think this/laugh at this, it's wrong to do so"), not the ostensible butts of the jokes. Righty cartoonists rely on a steady diet of kick-'em-while-they're-down - grim, joyless stuff

(nb not all rightist humor is like this of course, but the cartoonists do seem of one mine)

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:11 (twenty years ago)

duhh MIND not mine

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:13 (twenty years ago)

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20050918/lprc050919.gif

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 26 September 2005 16:14 (twenty years ago)

I agree with everybody who says that the original post is an excellent, incisive, fucking compelling read

Damn straight.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:16 (twenty years ago)

I don't buy the whole "the right is less funny than the left" thing, that I saw, up there. Although I do agree that anti-authoritarian jokes are generally funnier than anything else

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:30 (twenty years ago)

That "dustdevil" strip TMMRI (AKA Curtis) just posted is fucking abominable.

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:31 (twenty years ago)

haha: http://www.shrubville.com/

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 26 September 2005 16:37 (twenty years ago)

Difficult for me to find any examples of P.C. today other than those posted here. Short comment on my end points to lack of character development, which is something even a 'political strip' like Doonesbury does and did VERY quickly. The two stylistically similar strips, Calvin y Hobbes & Bloom County, started with nonsense stories and allowed the characters to find their voice gradually, which may also have been a reflection of the times (20 years ago??!!). Did find this Ask-The-Editor column,

http://www.spokesmanreview.com/blogs/editors/archives/2004/08/11whats_the_deal_.asp

which suggests a depth in the initial strips (10-ish, probably) that was abandoned once it was picked up. Not to suggest conspiracy or anything.... I wanted to kind of tie this into what Mothra said upthread about why there aren't more conservative comedians/comic strips out there... it's like the entire sub-genre missed the boat on how to make culture stick.

― Jimmy Mod Loves Alan Canseco (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:37 (twenty years ago)

[xpost]

And what Gypsy said is probably what I'd say: both sides can be equally didactic and topically unfunny, but (at least based on what's being talked about here) message comes before any type of "entertainment". Unless you're entertained by folks playing Whack-A-Mole w/ the news of the day.

For me, the most irksome / upsetting thing about that dustdevil strip (& the other Prickly City strips, esp. in comparison to the other two turdlets discussed) is that the strip, removed from the topic matter, is actually competent. I guess Mallard is "competent" as well, but it also reminds me of Mother Goose & Grimm, which is just shittay. (& it's also a strip by a guy that's done editorial cartoons.)

Are there example of liberal strips (of some renown) that use this sort of puppetry - like someone having a overall-wearing MORAN question the War On Terror, or something like that?

Also: does Johnny Hart enter this discussion @ all w/ his evangelical racial stereotyping in B.C.?

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:45 (twenty years ago)

Get Your War On to thread!

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)

But there's cussing in that comic!

― Jimmy Mod Loves Alan Canseco (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:52 (twenty years ago)

Are there example of liberal strips (of some renown) that use this sort of puppetry - like someone having a overall-wearing MORAN question the War On Terror, or something like that?

There's an old Bloom County strip where a "redneck" with a trucker hat rants against nuclear war and a hippie-looking guy screams "America: Love it or leave it, you pinko punk!" But that's just one strip and it covers both sides.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 26 September 2005 16:52 (twenty years ago)

And hip-hop tropes! And clip art kitsch!

― Jimmy Mod Loves Alan Canseco (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:52 (twenty years ago)

And it kind of doesn't fit the thread at all, sorry. I just hate that strip.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:54 (twenty years ago)

You're making it very personal. The culture war shouldn't be personal.

― Jimmy Mod Loves Alan Canseco (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:56 (twenty years ago)

dan you hate Get Your War On?

― The Obligatory Sourpuss (Begs2Differ), Monday, 26 September 2005 16:57 (twenty years ago)

Dan hates getting his war on.

― Jimmy Mod Loves Alan Canseco (The Famous Jimmy Mod), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:03 (twenty years ago)

Bagge's politics are eclectically libertarian, it would seem, and not the same as mine, but there's no way his (often-brilliant) stuff deserves to get grouped with the rightusdetritus that's the subject of this thread.

I am wondering all of a sudden, though, what form a mainstream syndicated strip produced by Bagge might take. Four-panel Buddy. Hmm.

― M. V. (M.V.), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:03 (twenty years ago)

also Cerberus to thread, unfortunately

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:08 (twenty years ago)

[xpost]

Even though Dan never-minded GYWO, what the fuck:

I don't know that GYWO uses stereotypes so much as it uses ciphers - blank Joe Blow office drones (of various types; i.e. there's a black girl!) from How To Administer CPR pamphlets that don't really carry any sort of baggage. Of course, GYWO (IIRC) presents a unified front re: the characters - no real dissenting opinions. Varying shades of "WTF?", but no one saying "TREASON".

Also, GYWO is pissed off as all hell, and that's evident in the strips (and it pushes the commentary & gags beyond rote call-and-response stump-speechifying). These other strips, tho, are just mildly perturbed, if that - they can't really be bothered to get too worked up over Those Crazy Liberals, tho gosh darn it they have some nerve rising above their place to talk about us! And that sort of smug asshattery comes through loud & clear, too. (Granted, I might be a bit biased.)

Oh god Cerberus.

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:10 (twenty years ago)

I think if Bagge had to pare down his observations to four panels a week, the politics might become a serious stumbling block.

― Soukesian, Monday, 26 September 2005 17:11 (twenty years ago)

Have you seen Bagge's comics for Reason magazine? They're OK, but more topical and hence a little more didactic than his previous stuff. The one I remember was a mostly sincere defense of the glories of shopping malls.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:11 (twenty years ago)

I liked GYWO for about three weeks. Then I noticed it was the exact same ranting screed I could get from Lewis Black on The Daily Show with more cursing and fewer punchlines.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:13 (twenty years ago)

I dunno Dave, coming from somewhere which has zero tradition of right-wing comic strips (and hardly any political strips at all, as opposed to editorial cartoons), those examples all look kind of angry to me, a kind of contemptuous anger as opposed to a fiery one maybe.

Fantastic thread, btw.

― Tom (Groke), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:18 (twenty years ago)

I kind of hate GYWO, too.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:19 (twenty years ago)

Although when I saw Rees talk about the strip in person, I liked it a whole lot more.

― jaymc (jaymc), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:20 (twenty years ago)

Haven't seen Bagge's strips for Reason. I loved Hate, but a lot of the lefty-baiting stances he's struck in recent stuff gives me the feeling of a man flexing his knees for that final shark-jump. A well paid newspaper strip might be just the place to embrace red state values for good and all. Hope it doesn't happen.

― Soukesian, Monday, 26 September 2005 17:26 (twenty years ago)

People who are inclined to extremely lazy thinking in not being genuinely funny or creative Shocker.

― TOMBOT, Monday, 26 September 2005 17:29 (twenty years ago)

i think the biggest crime is that they're not funny. comic strips are supposed to be funny. (unless someone started a rex morgan/terry & the pirates-style strip starring battling dick cheney.) or maybe it's just that the style of humor just bounces off of me like a tennis ball, that kind of contemptuous, self-regarding "seeeee?" tom was talking about.

this is pretty much what i hate about get your war on as well. and tom tomorrow. and um, just about all of them.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:33 (twenty years ago)

I haven't ready GYWO in forever, but I guess my feelings towards it are similar to my feelings about The Daily Show - it's a grind to enjoy when either I or the commentators aren't "feeling it", but when there's something to sink your teeth into (cf. the Katrina response), then the mix of indignation and anger creates something that's definitely more, um, entertaining? Interesting, I guess.

And, yeah, Tom's assessment of the right-wing "anger" is more OTM than mine - I told you I was biased!

― David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:33 (twenty years ago)

i think the daily show's ballast--the more whimsical stuff--raises it above the "must bash X or Y this week" thing you get with the strips.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:35 (twenty years ago)

does Life in Hell fit into any of this?

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:40 (twenty years ago)

i think the daily show's ballast--the more whimsical stuff--raises it above the "must bash X or Y this week" thing you get with the strips.

Well, that and the fact that the jokes are actual JOKES and not pissed-off ranting screeds that are slightly less funny than having a root canal done through the back of your had without anesthesia.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:41 (twenty years ago)

Where a strip like "Pogo" was filled with lyrical dialogue, detailed drawing, and a subtlety that "Mallard Fillmore" has never come close to paralleling, MF's idea of a good joke is a crude caricature of Leon Panetta or somebody with a caption of "He would like mothers to kill their unborn children!".

Anyway. Every time I read this thread's headline, I think of this:

http://people.bu.edu/asimpson/FranklinAndGob.jpg

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:56 (twenty years ago)

why does Dirk Benedict have a talky doll?

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 17:58 (twenty years ago)

I'll rep for GYWO if nobody else will: it makes me laugh hard consistantly. It's mainly the tone of voice - the level of aggression, the I KNOW I'M SHOUTING I LIKE TO SHOUT timbre of it. Then again, this mirrors my musical tastes pretty well.

― Banana Nutrament (ghostface), Monday, 26 September 2005 18:10 (twenty years ago)

Although when I saw Rees talk about the strip in person, I liked it a whole lot more.

haha, when i met him he was a total dick and he made me hate the strip!

(also i think it's gotten a lot less funny)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 26 September 2005 18:27 (twenty years ago)

(also i know in THEORY that creator is a dick should not = i think less of his art, but too bad in this case i do!)

― s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 26 September 2005 18:27 (twenty years ago)

I agree w/ Banana on GYWO(although I don't read it regularly) and I'll rep for Tom Tomorrow; In his best moments his work resembles puppetry but more accurately involves taking right talking points to their (ill)logical conclusions, and (unless he's in a particularly shrill mood) he highlights the consequences of conservative policies(artfully juxtaposed against the talking point, a device he's perfected but that's admittedly well-worn) rather than attacking at the values of the "average nutball conservative" ala these right wing strips. His work has gotten less absurd and wide-ranging over time(the anti-consumerist critiques of his earliest work was priceless) but he's still doing some sharp stuff.

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Monday, 26 September 2005 19:25 (twenty years ago)

reading MF is a bit of a masochistic experience. always very painful in a variety of ways. yesterday he managed to use peter jenning's death from lung cancer to make some sort of weak statement about "liberal media." lovely stuff. nice work. ugh.

― andrew m. (andrewmorgan), Monday, 26 September 2005 19:37 (twenty years ago)

such fun:

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 19:43 (twenty years ago)

http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/8779/unfunny2sa.jpg

Um, is that why Senator Leahy is voting for Roberts? Go fuck yourself, Bruce.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Monday, 26 September 2005 19:47 (twenty years ago)

shit, that didn't load.

maybe this link will work: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/fun/mallard.asp?date=20050925

xpost

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 19:48 (twenty years ago)

er...isnt that tom tomorrow like, exactly the left wing analog to this stuff that someone upthread was searching for? hectoring, deeply unfunny, and poorly drawn?

― ambrose (ambrose), Monday, 26 September 2005 20:32 (twenty years ago)

yes, hence why i said:

this is pretty much what i hate about get your war on as well. and tom tomorrow. and um, just about all of them.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 20:40 (twenty years ago)

The point of my post is why I don't think it is, but uh, I guess you disagree xpost. I'm used to feeling invisible but this is kind of ridiculous.

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Monday, 26 September 2005 20:47 (twenty years ago)

did anyone just hear something?

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:06 (twenty years ago)

...

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:06 (twenty years ago)

weird.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:06 (twenty years ago)

sorry i didnt mean to word that as though i was the first to make such an observation, i guess i was just surprised that it seemed to match these examples so closely.

one of the biggest criticisms of the comics on here is their lack of humour, which although im not sure is the best thing to attack a comic for*, but personally i felt that the same way in which the comics here fail to amuse was the same way in which tom tomorrows comics failed to do so: by simply jettisoning attempts at humour for a direct hit on the target. you calld his stuff "sharp" but didnt mention "funny"

― ambrose (ambrose), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:07 (twenty years ago)

To be fair to Tom T., I think his comics belong more squarely to the realm of editorial cartoons than to the world of daily strips. Not that they shouldn't also be funny (I think he is funny, sometimes), but in editorial cartoons you expect the political point to be foregrounded.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:16 (twenty years ago)

i think a lot of people have gotten a lot less funny since the bush years. tom tomorrow was a lot funnier when he was picking on the specific foibles of the clinton years rather than just constantly on boil with righteous indignation.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:18 (twenty years ago)

tom the dancing bug i find pretty consistently funny.

― andrew m. (andrewmorgan), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:24 (twenty years ago)

too long; didn't read

― asshat, Monday, 26 September 2005 21:25 (twenty years ago)

i think a lot of people have gotten a lot less funny since the bush years

Yeah, maybe it's hard to be funny while your head's exploding. That's another thing that I think sets the best Daily Show stuff apart -- they treat the administration more like it's ridiculous than OUTRAGEOUS, and ridicule is more fun to listen to than outrage.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:28 (twenty years ago)

tom tomorrow has it's moments but it's batting below the mendoza line for sure. get your war on rules purely for the clipart, though the general tone of "WTF IS GOING ON - SERIOUSLY WTF" that to me is what this century's about as much as anything, "may you live in interesting times" etc.; there's plenty of lefty policomix that are awful (seriously between any of the above and ted rall i don't know who i pick), in general the lefty policomix that i like spend a good bit of time being something besides a lefty policomic - doonesbury, boondocks, TOM THE DANCING BUG (seriously - has rall or tomorrow or mark fiore or anybody come up with anything even remotely as inspired as lucky ducky?). and one thing that REALLY REALLY ANNOYS ME about the above (besides the consistent 'THEY PULLED NANCY FOR THIS SHIT?' reaction i get from prickly city) is that prickly city somehow gets to be in the normal comix pages but doonesbury and boondocks either get squeezed in somewhere odd or thrown on the editorial pages (which to be honest works out really well for boondocks since it means in the midst of op-eds you get a series of strips about a kid tricking his granpa into letting him get cornrows).

― j blount (papa la bas), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:30 (twenty years ago)

Prickly City is responsible for many atrocities. Supplanting "Nancy" is not one of them.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 26 September 2005 21:40 (twenty years ago)

YOU ARE A DAMN FOOL SIR! A DAMN FOOL! ME AND CHARLIE DANIELS WILL HAVE WORDS WITH YOU - COUNT ON IT!


i wish la cucaracha were better, alot better, but i'm definitely glad it's in there. is there a ripley's daily strip?

― j blount (papa la bas), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:43 (twenty years ago)

Off topic, but anyone remember Rall's thing in the Village Voice a few years ago about how Art Spiegelman was some kind of capo of the New York cartooning world? It seemed really bitter and petty.

― gypsy mothra (gypsy mothra), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:43 (twenty years ago)

I mean seriously anything that supports the cause of kicking G. Gilchrist's pervy-pseudo-furry-neocon-Charlie Daniels-lovin' ass off the comics page for good is okay by me

xxpost

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 26 September 2005 21:44 (twenty years ago)

CURTIS WHY DO YOU HATE ROCK N ROLL???

― j blount (papa la bas), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:51 (twenty years ago)

rall is a total cock. i saw him at a reading once, years ago, and he was just the smuggest prick. is he even leftie though? or maybe he just likes pricking the hand that feeds considering he is (was?) published in places like mrr. and yeah, that "i make real cartoons not brainfarts" strip was retarded.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:52 (twenty years ago)

OK blount I admit that's a whole lot funnier than anything on the comics page these days, but I'm not sure if that's for the right reasons

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 26 September 2005 21:53 (twenty years ago)

haha i feel really guilty for how incoherent i am after being at work all day. "rall sucks...he just...he totally sucks!!"

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:54 (twenty years ago)

They should just replace the entire comics page with 50 prints of "Curtis."

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 26 September 2005 21:56 (twenty years ago)

i interviewed art spiegelman for the local daily a few years back, talked to him for an hour and half - half an hour about RAW, maus, the new yorker, etc., one hour about garbage pail kids.

― j blount (papa la bas), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:57 (twenty years ago)

no wacky packages?

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 21:58 (twenty years ago)

haha they came up also! he was pretty cool about it too, not at all 'i am the spiegelman - how dare you ignore my Pulitzer winning art in favor of 'adam bomb' and 'marty gras'!'
rall's such a cock - he's talked shit about chris ware, specifically how 'bad' ware's art is (note: this is TED RALL dissing CHRIS WARE'S art).

― j blount (papa la bas), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:02 (twenty years ago)

i bet i still have his book at home. (i got it free.)

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:04 (twenty years ago)

his MEMOIR, btw. not a comics collection.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:04 (twenty years ago)

old doonesbury >>>>>> boondocks > new doonesbury > tom tomorrow > GYWO >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ted Rall

― Sym Sym (sym), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:05 (twenty years ago)

trife and i were actually talking about how it's kind of amazing that trudeau has still got it after all these years.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:08 (twenty years ago)

i mean yeah not "got it" like 70-76 "got it," but still

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:08 (twenty years ago)

i remember thinking that last year reading the nyer profile of macgruder about how he's basically stopped caring about the strip (stopped drawing it awhile back, increasing phones in - literally - 'just draw huey sitting in front of a tv, i'll come up with something') and meanwhile here's trudeau in the midst of a pulitzer worthy year.

― j blount (papa la bas), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:15 (twenty years ago)

What happened to the MacGruder TV show in the works?
Ted Rall is an embassasment, the only time I saw him speak was on Politically Incorrect long ago and he came off like one of those doofus lefty strawmen in the comics above. Tom Tomorrow harps on certain shit sometimes to the detriment of the funeez but please nobody class him with Rall!

― tremendoid (tremendoid), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:32 (twenty years ago)

I saw a promo for the boondocks tv show so it's moving along.

― teeny (teeny), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:34 (twenty years ago)

i like where Trudeau's going with this one.

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:34 (twenty years ago)

Boondocks on TV…more here.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:35 (twenty years ago)

is Kudzu still around?

― CUT MY LIFE INTO PIZZAS ;_; (Adrian Langston), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:39 (twenty years ago)

It's gotta be on fucking Cartoon Network.

Because the networks (and this is generously counting UPN) kindly filled their quota for black series debuts with 'Everybody Hates Chris.' I mean, we get 18 variants of CSI, 3 alien conspiracy shows (Threshold, Surface, Supernatural, Invasion) a bunch of realities, some old-school legal shows (though Don Johnson's is already canned), two high-profile single-cam sitcoms (Earl & Kitchen Confidetial) and … like … that retarded Michael Rappaport shit.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:44 (twenty years ago)

But Boondocks goes on UP-fucking-N.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:44 (twenty years ago)

And I don't mean to sound bitter. I mean - hey! - at least us 41.3+ million Latino TV viewers can calm ourselves with the thought of Villaraigosa's October 5th cameo on the George Lopez show.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:49 (twenty years ago)

rall is unbelievably arrogant when it comes to ANY cartoonist more famous than him, not just spiegelman and ware. there's an interview i can't find right now where he expresses the following views: that the classic MAD artists couldn't draw, that carl barks was a "hack" because he worked for disney (tho he didn't), that krazy kat and little nemo are "meaningless," etc etc etc puke.

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:50 (twenty years ago)

But Boondocks goes on UP-fucking-N.
But Boondocks goes on Cartoon-fucking-Network.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:50 (twenty years ago)

Let's talk about racial puppetry in right wing comedians.


Upcoming episode of The War At Home
"Guess Who's Coming to the Barbecue

Dave isn't happy when Taye's family is invited over for a barbecue by Vicky, and has a hard time getting along with Taye's father, Omar. At the barbecue, Omar mistakes some of Dave's comments as racist, because he's a wealthy, African-American. However, when Vicky insists that he go apologize to him, Dave finds himself having a great time at Omar's country club…"

― Remy (x Jeremy), Monday, 26 September 2005 22:57 (twenty years ago)

Is Michael Rappaport really a right-winger? That's surprising. This show looks exactly like that terrible Donal Logue show that was on FOX a year ago.

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Monday, 26 September 2005 23:00 (twenty years ago)

grounded for life was classic, michael rapaport is classic and pretty far left if i remember right

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 23:01 (twenty years ago)

maybe you confused him w/ colin quinns dumb racist ass

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 23:01 (twenty years ago)

Maybe he's, personally, not…? The show's bias certainly is though. I came close to being offended at a few of the jokes in the first episode until I realized that they were just batarded button-pushing designed to flush-out undiscerning liberals like me.

― Remy (x Jeremy), Monday, 26 September 2005 23:05 (twenty years ago)

yeah the show looks weak

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 23:05 (twenty years ago)

http://www.cinefile.biz/bambooz3.jpg
"i have a black wife and two biracial kids! brother man, im blacker than you."

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 23:06 (twenty years ago)

rall's such a cock - he's talked shit about chris ware, specifically how 'bad' ware's art is

Hmmm. Kill him.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 26 September 2005 23:08 (twenty years ago)

http://untruenews.com/unimages/howardstern.jpghttp://us.movies1.yimg.com/movies.yahoo.com/images/hv/photo/movie_pix/usa_films/traffic/michael_rapaport/trafficpre.jpg
"so michael, are you a wigga?" "i am not A wigga. i am THE wigga."

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 23:12 (twenty years ago)

(100% real exchange!)

― _, Monday, 26 September 2005 23:12 (twenty years ago)

http://www.celebritywonder.com/img/movieposter/tn/1992_Zebrahead.jpg

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Monday, 26 September 2005 23:14 (twenty years ago)

doug marlette's still around, and his site links to a couple of kudzu cartoons. one refers to j lo's butt.

http://www.dougmarlette.com/politicals/img9.gif

― maura (maura), Monday, 26 September 2005 23:24 (twenty years ago)

Boondocks REALLY sucks these days and for the past several years.
Ted Rall is secretly a conservative; I will bet any amount.
Great post BTW.
Is everybody aware that the NYT just started an online Funny Pages with Ware as one of the premiere strip artists?

― Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 05:53 (twenty years ago)

so, these 3 comic strips use black folks as a mouthpiece for a white man's political views, opinions which a majority of black folks dont actually support.

Blacks Americans don't actually support racial preferences when hiring people.

http://www.cir-usa.org/articles/182.html

"A 1991 Gallup Poll found 83 percent of all respondents, and 69 percent of blacks, rejecting the statement that "to make up for past discrimination, women and members of minority groups should be given preferential treatment in getting jobs and places in college," and choosing instead the statement that "ability, as determined by test scores, should be the main consideration."

That's one of about a half-dozen other polls cited in the article that says more or less same the same thing. I don't know how black people feel about racial profiling at airports but I doubt they're for it in general.

― Cunga (Cunga), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 07:04 (twenty years ago)

I'm in favour of 'positive discrimination', but would oppose their phrasing there, so I think that's a bad survey and no evidence.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 09:07 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, I agree. Also, there are other arguments in favour of 'positive discrimination' besides "to make up for past discrimination".

― hd, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 09:17 (twenty years ago)

cunga you dickhead all the polls listed on that page that werent done by partisan interests and conservative law groups (accounting for the the notorious black radical stance of the CBS network) say that no more than 1/3 of african americans oppose affirmative action even when the pollsters use misleading terms like "racial preference in schools". any website called "center for individual rights" sets off the bullshit detector in any reasonable non-asshole so i poked around and- oops! theyre founded by the white supremecist special interest group the pioneer fund (source here: http://www.ferris.edu/isar/Institut/CIR/CIRgoals.htm ) but you dont gotta take my word for it tho, what about maybe ummm julian bond speaking for the NAACP-

"The very names of these groups – the Institute for Justice, the Center for Individual Rights, the American Civil Rights Institute – are fraudulent, and their aims are frightening.

Having stolen our vocabulary, they also want to steal the just spoils of our righteous war."

― _, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 10:57 (twenty years ago)

Can I note that this is the best dicussion of a serious subject I've read on ILE in quite a while. My faith had been fading some, kept alive by social events and excellent football threads, but we need lots more like this. The reason it's been so good is the initial post, which is magnificent and exemplary. So I know Ethan will be thrilled if I send big HUGGLEZ! his way for this.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 12:06 (twenty years ago)

haha thanx martin

― _, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 12:09 (twenty years ago)

I have a love-hate relationship with affirmative action. I hate the fact that a certain segment can use an existing policy to dismiss my achievements and capabilities but I love the fact that I can use this existing policy to sneak in underneath a racist's nose and make him look like a complete tool when I completely kick ass (I had a professional situation a few years ago where my direct manager acted incredulous that I had a Harvard degree in front of me and another coworker; said manager got fired for sucking ass and incompetently attempting to blame it on us shortly afterwards, ha).

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 13:14 (twenty years ago)

Not that E didn't just do the damn thing, but: isn't it also sketchy to point to a 14-year-old poll (or 11, in the case of the article) to prove a point? It's like pointing to a poll run in the 1950s to show that folks support making abortions illegal! (Or: insert analogy that doesn't suck here.)

I want to say something about the neo-con wackjobs being "covertly overt", as opposed to rad-lefties being "overtly covert", but I'm not sure if that comparison has any substance or it's just cutesy rhetorical dickplay.

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 13:37 (twenty years ago)

rather a novice on this board, but feel that the discussion so far really minds having its heart over some matters. also for bonus points it made my mother (with whom i unfortunately coexist) recede that much further to her side of the premesis. like an as yet unmedicated hairline.

― Miss Elizabeth Manners, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 14:46 (twenty years ago)

"Woah! I'm tripping my nutsack in frenzy of rhetorical dikplay"

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 14:50 (twenty years ago)

Jesus fuck, talk about "affirmative action" -- the increasing don't-call-us-liberal-media anxiety that a lot of papers are going through in the wake of the Great Blog Revolution (brought to you by the fine folx at the PowerLine) is probably the only thing keeping shit like Mallard Fillmore on newsprint. Don't infringe on civil rights fairness and balance; make a proactive effort to hire people of color unfunny Republicans.

Again, they gave the guy who draws The Buckets ANOTHER strip.

― disco violence (disco violence), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 15:10 (twenty years ago)

Yeah, I agree. Also, there are other arguments in favour of 'positive discrimination' besides "to make up for past discrimination".
-- hd (h...), September 27th, 2005 6:17 AM. (later) (link)

Like current discrimination? :D (Not actually looking to start an argument on discrimination, just seemed like a cute retort.)

Maybe I have too little faith in the artist(s), but I honestly think using a black character to espouse right-wing views is used just because "if a black person says it, it's not racist."

― Jessie the Monster (scarymonsterrr), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 15:20 (twenty years ago)

I hate it when conservatives use fetuses as their puppet mouthpieces.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:07 (twenty years ago)

It would be funny if they literally did.

― O'so Krispie (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:09 (twenty years ago)

Reading Ted Rall's disgusting op-ed on why giving to relief charities is bad http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ucru/20050914/cm_ucru/charitiesareforsuckers
makes me think that ForksCloveTofu's assessment that "Ted Rall is secretly a conservative; I will bet any amount" is OTM.

― jocelyn (Jocelyn), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:10 (twenty years ago)

It wouldn't surprise me.

― O'so Krispie (Ex Leon), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:12 (twenty years ago)

Style over substance with him -- I realize now that was always the case.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:15 (twenty years ago)

David Horsey, who's won a PULITZER (which has completely destroyed the aura of a Pulitzer for me, although maybe I was naive for believing there was an aura for this long), is one of the most offensively bad political cartoonists ever.. and he's a completely leftie. Interestingly enough, he pretty much qualifies just as much for racial puppetry:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/dayart/20050918/Cartoon20050918.gif

― donut hallivallerieburtonelli omg lol (donut), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:39 (twenty years ago)

As you can tell, this is just, um, so rofflicious.

― donut hallivallerieburtonelli omg lol (donut), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:40 (twenty years ago)

David Horsey = leftie Mike Ramirez

― donut hallivallerieburtonelli omg lol (donut), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:41 (twenty years ago)

I don't suppose anyone is imagining or suggesting that being a lefty makes you a great and funny cartoonist, but I'm interested in your claim that he is similarly guilty of racial puppetry, because I think what Ethan has constructed here isn't entirely easy to transfer to the left.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:46 (twenty years ago)

hmm. as in, a difference between using racial minority characters as props vs using racial minority characters as prop to reinforce talking points that no actual racial minority would actually say?

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)

David Horsey = leftie Mike Ramirez

Ouch. Cruel, if accurate.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:51 (twenty years ago)

Yes Kingfish, more or less.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 16:59 (twenty years ago)

I'm not claiming Horsey uses this device as a consistent mechanism similar to the conservative ones above, in as succinct and specific a way, either. I was pointing out that racial puppetry is often used by political cartoonists of the entire spectrum as props for generally self-axe grinding in general.

I mean, while the political aftermath from Hurricane Katrina had major racial overtones, obviously, the use of the black boy in the above strip just adds, IMHO, unnecessary fuel to a really tired axe, and comes off like a gratuitous "Ah, let's just 'subtely' suggest those right-wingers would be slave-owners in 2005, if they could, legally" (which you could argue is correct or not, but completely detracts from the major political implications of the hurricane, and is just a Tucker Carlson level potshot) and kinda damages and obfuscates the otherwise run-of-the-mill Horsey lefty snarkiness (which is hardly a great loss, granted.)

Had that been a kid of any other race, I think it would be slightly more powerful a statement (and I stress "I think" and "slightly".)

I don't want this thread to digress into discussing particularly shitty political cartoonists though.. so apologies. But I just wanted to point out that... while, yes, the racial puppetry that Ethan alludes to is very specific, racial puppetry is a common tool in political cartoons, no matter which side of the political spectrum.. both uses of which are often really nauseous IMHO.

― donut hallivallerieburtonelli omg lol (donut), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:00 (twenty years ago)

Interestingly enough, I think there's a good amount of racial puppetry going on in that Horsey comic... with the white people.

I find it interesting that the baseline position that's fueling this debate is "no minority would ever take this rhetorical stance", a thesis that I am not entirely convinced is true.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:26 (twenty years ago)

Well of course you're right, Dan; but it is nonetheless the case that the white cartoonists are using black mouthpieces to express views that are very rarely found in black people, and I think they are doing this for manipulative reasons that are connected to the characters' race.

― Martin Skidmore (Martin Skidmore), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:32 (twenty years ago)

yeah i mean i tried to draw the line up top but lefty cartoonists basically employ two black props, starving ghetto children and malevolent or incompetent caricatures of black republicans. i think theres some truth to the conservatives who claim that democrats undermine black success (or at least any black success thats not flattering to or provably a result of democrats social programs) but its still a case where despite some black folks agreeing w/ some republicans on social issues they still mostly dont, especially on issues directly impacting black ppl. and so for white democrats theres support lazily assumed support behind issues of poverty, affirmative action, racial profiling, etc that republicans simply dont have- my original question was really how come theres more fictional black republicans in the newspaper than real ones

― _, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:34 (twenty years ago)

i am still really amazed that no newspaper editor is vaguely uneasy by a white guy writing a polemical comic strip starring a black guy as his mouthpiece.

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:35 (twenty years ago)

well not no newspaper editors, but many

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:36 (twenty years ago)

Just curious: any place where numbers are available re: how many papers are picking up these strips?

― David R. (popshots75`), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:37 (twenty years ago)

xpost w/ martin who said the same thing basically! really tho i wanna clarify that i dont think left wing cartoonists are 'automatically funnier' than right wingers (ann coulter >>>>>>>>>> michael moore, jokewise) but i think when some lazy hack like ted rall uses some hillbilly crackers and midwest baptists as mouthpieces for homophobia or anti-muslim bullshit hes still an asshole but hes fictionalizing alot less than white republicans who invent black characters in defense of racial profiling and abu ghraib

― _, Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:38 (twenty years ago)

Really dark-skinned black people don't have a massive problem with 9/11-induced racial profiling because it primarily hits light-skinned black people!

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 17:46 (twenty years ago)

Arrrgfuck, basically this just reinforces that Boondocks is the best syndicated political cartoon out there, and McGruder isn't even trying to make politics the M.O. of Boondocks. Then again, I think Boondocks is the best modern syndicated comic strip, period (modern = after C&H/Peanuts ended.)

This also reinfornces that any politican cartoonist that primarily gets used in the "Commentary" sections of major papers is semi-grating at best. Conrad was my favorite political cartoonist in that regard, but I'd take even a really mediocre Doonesbury strip over the best of Conrad.

― donut hallivallerieburtonelli omg lol (donut), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 18:01 (twenty years ago)

"Boondocks" had so much potential.

http://images.ucomics.com/comics/bo/2005/bo050927.gif

In most cases, the artwork gets better as the strip matures. Not so here.

And there's way too many "Huey watches television and then looks at the reader in the third panel" strips.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 18:18 (twenty years ago)

That Boondocks cartoon is aggravating because there's a great punchline lurking just underneath what's presented; maybe ten more minutes of tinkering would have made that rofflicious as opposed to smirkworthy.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 18:26 (twenty years ago)

cunga you dickhead

I think we're getting off on the wrong fo...

all the polls listed on that page that werent done by partisan interests and conservative law groups (accounting for the the notorious black radical stance of the CBS network) say that no more than 1/3 of african americans oppose affirmative action even when the pollsters use misleading terms like "racial preference in schools".

Considering the ambiguousness of "affirmative action" I would think it'd be better to single out what you're talking about in polls. Affirmative action means "looking for qualified candidates" to some and "quotas" to others. The original meaning of the word has been twisted to mean many different things to many people.

I didn't know Gallop, Time, CBS, and Zogby were all a bunch of right-wing groups. Odd that the only one you didn't think was right-wing or partisan was the one that came the closest to supporting your own worldview.

any website called "center for individual rights" sets off the bullshit detector

O RLY?

i poked around and- oops! theyre founded by the white supremecist special interest group the pioneer fund (source here: http://www.ferris.edu/isar/Institut/CIR/CIRgoals.htm ) but you dont gotta take my word for it tho, what about maybe ummm julian bond speaking for the NAACP-

I'll ignore the fact your beef should be with the polls and studies posted on the page and not the motivations of the actual physical website that posted their findings.
First off, it says they're funded, not founded, by Pioneer. Second, you seem to speak about using eugenics as a birth control for black Americans like it's some sort of wicked abomination and that any group who receives money or endorsements from an organization that promoted that ideology back when eugenics was popular should be immediately denounced as racist and evil. I wouldn't do that if I were you. Planned Parenthood's original rhetoric alone-- and judging by recent lawsuits by black employees over discrimination, current rhetoric-- would sink about half of the Democratic party and similar left-leaning organizations from being used by you. You'll need many of their studies in the future and cutting your ties with them now would leave you with one hand tied behind your back.

― Cunga (Cunga), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:25 (twenty years ago)

The most frustrating thing about Cunga's post is that the tenable point re: Planned PArenthood is drowning amidst sea of mouth-breathing inane stupidity.

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:29 (twenty years ago)

, you seem to speak about using eugenics as a birth control for black Americans like it's some sort of wicked abomination and that any group who receives money or endorsements from an organization that promoted that ideology back when eugenics was popular should be immediately denounced as racist and evil.

http://goombas.org/images/1079/schwa.png

".....uhhhhh, what?"

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:32 (twenty years ago)

dude this is not "back when" -- pioneer is NOW!

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:32 (twenty years ago)

this whole thread just took a wicked turn towards crazy town

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:34 (twenty years ago)

IOW, another lovely Cunga post!

― The Ghost of Black Elegance (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:37 (twenty years ago)

http://us.ent2.yimg.com/musicfinder.yahoo.com/images/yahoo/columbia/crazy_town/crazytown2.jpg

― RJG (RJG), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:38 (twenty years ago)

haha i don't really know who cunga is, dan

― strng hlkngtn (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:38 (twenty years ago)

Just when I thought I forgot "Butterfly", somehow, it all comes back to me. Thanks. Thanks a lot.

― Alan Conceicao (Alan Conceicao), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:42 (twenty years ago)

The only #1 song ever co-written by the Red Hot Chili Peppers.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:49 (twenty years ago)

The last guitar based US #1 single as well, I believe.

― Dom Passantino (Dom Passantino), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:57 (twenty years ago)

'hey ya' was a hit over here

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:58 (twenty years ago)

and now we're back on topic wakka wakka

― j blount (papa la bas), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 20:59 (twenty years ago)

The pioneer fund is a little too complicated to just be called a "white supremecist special interest group"; that designation came mostly from the SPLC. I do think Rushton has a mostly pointless fixation on racial IQ differences though.

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 21:21 (twenty years ago)

I know at least 6 of the people featured on the "grantees" page on their website are actual top-notch research scientists. I'm not familiar with the rest.

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 21:24 (twenty years ago)

"pointless"

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 21:49 (twenty years ago)

You're right, "damaging" or something stronger would be more appropriate. The whole Bell Curve vs Mismeasure of Man thing is turtles all the way down, and several degrees of off-topic to this thread. Sorry about all that.

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 21:58 (twenty years ago)

Okay so I just thought of something that does relate to the thread which is Pat Oliphant's Condoleezza Rice parrot. In general Oliphant's my favorite still-working political cartoonist (does Feiffer still draw strips?), but the parrot caricature makes me uncomfortable sometimes, esp. since other people close to bush aren't given the same sort of treatment that I can tell.

― dan i. (Dan I.), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 23:36 (twenty years ago)

but I kind've think that a harsh caricature of an actual person might probably be less offensive than mythological characters in the strips that inspired this thread!

― dan i. (Dan I.), Tuesday, 27 September 2005 23:38 (twenty years ago)

*sigh* For responses I get the inevitable "ironic pop-culture pictures". WHAT YOU FOOLS DIDN'T FIGURE WAS THAT I WOULD ALSO HAVE MY OWN POP-CULTURE REFERENCES IN PICTURE FORM TO BE BROUGHT IN TO FIGHT FOR MY SIDE. THEY DONT RELATED AT ALL TO THE TOPIC AT HAND EITHER (OR SO IT SEEMS!!!).

http://img224.imageshack.us/img224/5548/whiplash4ke.jpg

http://img104.imageshack.us/img104/441/inga3qt.jpg

http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/7656/legendsofthehiddentempleassemb.jpg

― Cunga (Cunga), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 00:27 (twenty years ago)

Wait up now, there's still actual topics to be covered here.
How'd we skip over that Fetus cartoon so quickly?
Dig this for a genesis story:

" As soon as I saw the baby's face, the light bulb went off," Cangemi said. Cangemi proceeded to draw a dozen sample comic strips and soon realized his character needed a name. "I wanted a name that sounded heroic," he explained, "like Richard the Lionhearted, but I wanted it to be alliterative so I came up with ' _____ the Unborn.'"

At first, he was unable to come up with a "U" name until he remembered the name of an author he had recently read - Umberto Eco. "Umberto sounded too ethnic," [emphasis mine] Cangemi said. "So I knocked off the 'o,' and Umbert was conceived." "

― Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 06:15 (twenty years ago)

Forks, did you see the other thread where Umbert first made an appearance?

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 06:27 (twenty years ago)

x-post:
I thought it was a tribute to Humbert Humbert.

― nickn (nickn), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 06:36 (twenty years ago)

King, no where's it at?

― Forksclovetofu (Forksclovetofu), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 06:49 (twenty years ago)

in 1991, cartoonist Bruce Tinsley, then on staff at Charlottesville, Virginia's Daily Progress, was asked to create a mascot for the paper's new entertainment section, his first two tries were rejected on grounds of causing possible offense to certain specialized human types. The first, a big nose with a pair of glasses, was not only potentially offensive to anyone with a big nose (such as Jews and Arabs), but was also alleged to suggest a permissive attitude toward cocaine. (http://www.toonopedia.com/mallardf.htm)

― _, Wednesday, 28 September 2005 12:27 (twenty years ago)

The Chicago Tribune refused to run the February 7, 2005 strip, which inaccurately quoted Ted Kennedy.

Less than two months later The Seattle Times did the same for a series of strips about the Terri Schiavo case. On March 28, the series began with a scene of Carmen upset, after watching her team lose a tournament game on television. Winslow offers to "end her agony" by taking away her food. The strip scheduled for publication on March 31 illustrates the kind of comments that generated the controversy:

Carmen: Stop denying me food, Winslow!
Winslow: I'm doing it to stop your suffering, Carmen. Besides, suicide and euthanasia are cool now. Hunter Thompson, Million Dollar Baby. It's all the rage.
Carmen: But my parents want to take care of me. They love me and don't want me starved to death!
Winslow: Well, don't come whining to me because you're not a cool dead person.

― _, Wednesday, 28 September 2005 12:34 (twenty years ago)

racial puppetry in todays pat oliphant
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/po/2005/po050927.gif

― _, Wednesday, 28 September 2005 12:44 (twenty years ago)

Editor and Publisher reports that at least three newspapers pulled Monday's edition of The Boondocks, which suggested that President Bush "smoked [marijuana] to take the edge off the coke." The Chicago Tribune's explanation for killing the comic strip: It "presents inaccurate information as fact."

Drug reform advocate Pete Guiter of Drug War Rant opines that "the Tribune is wrong there. [The strip] presents accurate information as comic strip conjecture." Web developer Sam Buchanan of afongen "hopes that the editors of these papers hold their news reporters to a higher standard than the comics artists and take care when printing inaccurate statements from the Bush administration." On Jim Romenesko's letters page, Mark Remy advises the Tribune to clarify further confusion by printing the following additional corrections:

Snoopy was not a WWI flying ace. Nor did he ever engage the Red Baron, in aerial combat or otherwise.

Humans cannot read the thoughts of cats, as suggested in Garfield. Also, cats cannot eat an entire tray of lasagna in one sitting.

Mallard [Fillmore] is not funny. Ever.

― _, Wednesday, 28 September 2005 13:02 (twenty years ago)

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/mallard/2000/MFT50924.jpg
from september 2000!!!

― _, Wednesday, 28 September 2005 13:05 (twenty years ago)

So the four years is up, then.

― spontine (cis), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 13:16 (twenty years ago)

King, no where's it at?

in here, of all places:

Rush Limbaugh = totally screwed

i think PP's reaction sums it up best

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 28 September 2005 14:25 (twenty years ago)

for some reason this reminds me of something i saw in a LOT of '80s shows on american television, wherein a supporting (and the sole) black male character on the show would somehow get involved in some way with a guest star--also a black male--in some scheme or something, and the denouement would inevitably be along the lines of the supporting character realizing the guest star was bad news or something, and when the guest star would protest he'd say something like, "come on, brother, it's not like that at all!" and the supporting character would retort either with "you ain't my brother" or he'd say a final zinger line and at the end sarcastically emphasize the word "brother", and after that he'd return to his white pals. it would prove that not all black people are bad, just some!

― gear (gear), Thursday, 29 September 2005 05:31 (twenty years ago)

Or else, they would be raped by Gordon Jump.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Thursday, 29 September 2005 15:41 (twenty years ago)

right then, a week later, anything new?

― kingfish superman ice cream (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 4 October 2005 15:30 (twenty years ago)

one month passes...
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/prc/2005/prc051107.gif

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 01:13 (twenty years ago)

(posted for no reason other than the "WTF" factor, not because of racial puppetry or anything)

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 01:14 (twenty years ago)

doesn't that stupid kid have parents? what's she doing out in the middle of the fucking desert every day?

― J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 01:26 (twenty years ago)

Oh yeah, Parks' refusal to move eventually led to the Montgomery Butte Boycott

Scott Stantis = ew

― disco violence (disco violence), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 02:01 (twenty years ago)

that comic is kind of clear - 'Rosa Parks gave me the right to sit wherever I damn well please.'

― Are You Nomar? (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 02:14 (twenty years ago)

Yes, but also seems to define that right as 'totally useless'.

I'm sure it depends on how you read it, but as a meaningful cartoon it's not exactly laden with context

― Jason J, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 02:30 (twenty years ago)

xpost

alien puppets, clearly funnier

More links to online comics, please (ie ones that don't suck).

http://www.sungallery.org/Girls_to_Grrrlz/page109.jpg

Not political, or online, but still one of the best.

― viborgu, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 03:14 (twenty years ago)

http://www.alessonislearned.com/
not political but...

― Fetchboy (Felcher), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 03:17 (twenty years ago)

Whoa- incredibly badass art! Thanks.

― viborgu, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 03:43 (twenty years ago)

guys i think you may be missing the point of the thread.

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 03:44 (twenty years ago)

incredibly bad ass art tho, slocki!

― strongo hulkington's ghost (dubplatestyle), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 03:46 (twenty years ago)

Whoa!

― s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 03:59 (twenty years ago)

god forbid someone make an off-topic post on ilx.

― Fetchboy (Felcher), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 04:00 (twenty years ago)

http://www.projektfp.de/foto/nfk/nk082.jpg

― viborgu, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 05:07 (twenty years ago)

Cartoon characters are suppose to be exaggerations of real life people. When do those exagerations of a charcter of a minority race become offensive? Is it related to historical context, and if so how is that context let go?

― A Nairn (moretap), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 09:39 (twenty years ago)

Wow, that "Ape Sex" thing by Hernandez is so douchey!

― Matthew C Perpetua (inca), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 11:07 (twenty years ago)

Kiko's just a wanna-be Terry.

― Dan Selzer (Dan Selzer), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 12:48 (twenty years ago)

This may or may not fit the thread title.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 21:59 (twenty years ago)

holy shit

― _, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:29 (twenty years ago)

haha omg inside front cover dudes!

― Sterling Clover (s_clover), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:32 (twenty years ago)

i know!!!!! at first i thought it said BANANER OF DEMOCRACY

― _, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:36 (twenty years ago)

"Yes, Anna. Thank God! And thanks to President Reagan and our freedom-loving neighbors!"

― giboyeux (skowly), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:36 (twenty years ago)

ned where did you find this?? i am going to mention it in my article or whatever that i still need to write about this

― _, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:37 (twenty years ago)

Hahahah. I found it in a VERY familiar place...

GRENADA: THE COMIC BOOK [Jonah Goldberg ]
I love it!
Posted at 03:57 PM

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:40 (twenty years ago)

http://www.chick.com/tractimages12727/0900/0900_10.gif
http://www.chick.com/tractimages12727/0900/0900_11.gif
http://www.chick.com/tractimages12727/0900/0900_12.gif

― _, Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:42 (twenty years ago)

Hahaha

back cover: our soldiers being welcomed as liberators, with flowers and infants!

― kingfish orange creamsicle (kingfish 2.0), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:46 (twenty years ago)

infants?

― Jdubz (ex machina), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 22:52 (twenty years ago)

That second Jack Chick panel is killing me.

― Pleasant Plains /// (Pleasant Plains ///), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 23:18 (twenty years ago)

"All our countries are the communist hit list"

*guffaw*

― Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 8 November 2005 23:24 (twenty years ago)

ihttp://img262.imageshack.us/my.php?image=liberality01page140zt.jpg

― k t (matchstick), Wednesday, 9 November 2005 11:59 (twenty years ago)

http://img488.imageshack.us/img488/3418/mymanhannity7ry.gif

― k t (matchstick), Wednesday, 9 November 2005 12:08 (twenty years ago)

IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY!?!?

― _, Wednesday, 9 November 2005 12:54 (twenty years ago)

http://photos1.blogger.com/img/183/2098/640/Modern%20Day%20Blackface.jpg

― A Nairn (moretap), Wednesday, 9 November 2005 13:35 (twenty years ago)

That full page Liberality is great. "God taken off our money!" A big penny with "In Peace We Trust!" No Christian God we believed in would EVER be a God of Peace!

― kingfish orange creamsicle (kingfish 2.0), Wednesday, 9 November 2005 15:43 (twenty years ago)

PRESIDENT CHELSEA

AND HER AFFIRMATIVE & ACTIVE VEEP OMAROSA BARAKA

― David R. (popshots75`), Wednesday, 9 November 2005 16:02 (twenty years ago)

one year passes...
IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY!?!?

― and what, Friday, 6 April 2007 13:37 (nineteen years ago)

lol at "grenada"

― sleep, Friday, 6 April 2007 14:19 (nineteen years ago)

hahahahahahahahahahaha I was about to repost "IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY!?!?"

― HI DERE, Friday, 6 April 2007 14:53 (nineteen years ago)

any time im in my friends car and talk radio is on im like IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY??!

― and what, Friday, 6 April 2007 14:54 (nineteen years ago)

occasionally followed by the freedom rock ad 'well TURN IT UP!'

― and what, Friday, 6 April 2007 14:54 (nineteen years ago)

hahahahaha

― HI DERE, Friday, 6 April 2007 14:55 (nineteen years ago)

They've put out three more issues of that book, but who knows whether there's anything as entertaining as that bit.

― kingfish, Friday, 6 April 2007 15:12 (nineteen years ago)

eight months pass...

IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY!?!?

― and what, Thursday, 3 January 2008 05:10 (eighteen years ago)

six months pass...

IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY!?!?

― cankles, Thursday, 31 July 2008 18:50 (seventeen years ago)

IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY!?!?

― libcrypt, Thursday, 31 July 2008 18:58 (seventeen years ago)

Whoa- incredibly badass art! Thanks.

-- viborgu, Monday, November 7, 2005 10:43 PM (2 years ago) Bookmark Link

― and what, Thursday, 31 July 2008 19:00 (seventeen years ago)

two years pass...

IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY!?!?

― ☂ (max), Wednesday, 6 July 2011 23:01 (fourteen years ago)

thread is the number one google result for "my man hannity"

― mississippi delta law grad (Hurting 2), Thursday, 7 July 2011 00:09 (fourteen years ago)

what a great thread

― horseshoe, Thursday, 7 July 2011 00:12 (fourteen years ago)

IS THAT MY MAN HORSESHOE?!

― ☂ (max), Thursday, 7 July 2011 00:15 (fourteen years ago)

say what up to u mans and dem

― g++ (gbx), Thursday, 7 July 2011 00:18 (fourteen years ago)

Cartoon characters are suppose to be exaggerations of real life people. When do those exagerations of a charcter of a minority race become offensive? Is it related to historical context, and if so how is that context let go?
― A Nairn (moretap), Tuesday, November 8, 2005 3:39 AM (5 years ago) Bookmark

should've been here for the bottleopener thread, could've made some real quality insight

― g++ (gbx), Thursday, 7 July 2011 00:31 (fourteen years ago)

SHABOY B O-RIZZY, WHATUP TO BEN STIZZY

― mississippi delta law grad (Hurting 2), Thursday, 7 July 2011 00:37 (fourteen years ago)

shhhhh. quiet man. we're listenin'.

― death to ilx, long live the frogbs (strongo hulkington's ghost dad), Thursday, 7 July 2011 00:38 (fourteen years ago)

http://forums.somethingawful.com/attachment.php?postid=391526489

yes, the guy in the last panel is black.

― little mushroom person (abanana), Thursday, 7 July 2011 01:34 (fourteen years ago)

IS THAT MY MANATEE!?!?

― mississippi delta law grad (Hurting 2), Friday, 8 July 2011 00:00 (fourteen years ago)

Try finding cats in positions that look as if they have an 'invisible object'. Put a caption describing what is the 'invisible object'. A good (existing) example would be "invisible bike."

― mississippi delta law grad (Hurting 2), Friday, 8 July 2011 00:03 (fourteen years ago)

lol wrong thread sorry

― mississippi delta law grad (Hurting 2), Friday, 8 July 2011 00:03 (fourteen years ago)

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/128347380320000000conservativecat.jpg

― Wacky Way Lounge (Evan), Friday, 8 July 2011 13:42 (fourteen years ago)

nine months pass...

IS THAT MY MAN HANNITY!?!?

― Race Against Rockism (Myonga Vön Bontee), Tuesday, 1 May 2012 05:45 (fourteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.
Site New Answers Search Boards ILM ILE Answers New Question New Questions New Poll Blog View Register Login