Fighting Words: 10/27/08 Cartoon...

"Karate Kid, Part V"...

Fighting Words: 10/13/08 Cartoon...

"Period Piece"...


Tryin' something a little different with this one... no animation yet, but I'm sure I'll come back to it at some point this week and pick at it.

Veepin'

I'll call that a successful prediction... Palin didn't sound quite as stupid as she had the potential to (aside from her bizarrely exaggerated folksiness), and yet not a word escaped her lips that might indicate that she has the capacity to formulate independent thoughts on most important issues.  She was clearly coached to steer the topics toward answers that she had already rehearsed ahead of time.

Most prescient pre-debate editorial cartoon:

(click here to view)

Clay Bennett Chattanooga Times Free Press Oct 1, 2008 EditorialCartoonists.com

Palin debate ramp up

As is often the case, I'm reminded of a quote from the West Wing:

C.J.
Toby, I'm absolutely terrified we're going to lose the expectations game. I can't believe how many times I get asked what would be a win in the debates. At this point I feel like if -- and only if -- Ritchie accidentally lights his podium on fire does the President have a fighting chance.

TOBY
I disagree.

C.J.
Disagree all you want, but I'm right.

TOBY
These two men are going to be side by side on the stage, answering questions. That's the ball game.

C.J.
If the whole thing is, he can't tie his shoelaces and it turns out he can, then that is the ball game.

TOBY
And I believe he'll have to do more than tie his shoelaces.

C.J.
Not much more.

I think everyone needs to cool it a little on the predictions that Palin will have a total meltdown in her debate. If it turns out she sounds just slightly less dumb than Tina Fey's caricature, then we'll be treated to a mudslide of claims that she "won" the debate... when she still hasn't actually said anything of substance.

Fighting Words: 9/29/08 Cartoon...

"Fuzzy Campaign"...

Even more debate thoughts...

I'm going to be hammering on McCain some more in the next 'toon, so I'll document here what's bothering me about Obama's performance last night.

What we have here is a tale of two Obamas. First, we have the Obama who is an electrifying presence and a dynamic public speaker, who energizes his base and motivates people to vote for him because he is Barack Obama. This is the guy we saw during the DNC.

Then we have the Obama who stumbles through his arguments and gets weighed down by figures, who kow-tows to the far right in an effort to ingratiate himself some mythical Democratic notion of the "reg'lar Amer'can," and who makes proud independents ultimately not trust him and feel ambivalent about their choice since they don't really see any difference between the two candidates. This, of course, is the Obama we saw last night, for the most part (congratulating John McCain for his stance on torture? What?! The same guy who voted against the ban on waterboarding?).

This second guy is the type who merely motivates people to vote for him just because... well, he's not quite as bad as the other guy. Ask John Kerry how this guy does in elections that should, by all accounts, be easily winnable.

Personally, I'd like to see the first Obama in the next debate.

Debate "whaaaaaa?"

Did McCain just try to compare Obama to Bush on Iraq at the end there?

That's an impressive little bit of hypocritical bullshit jujitsu to make that argument...



MORE THOUGHTS: Don't get me wrong, here... I wasn't entirely blown away by Obama's performance tonight.

But I did think he landed the zinger of the night when he finally came back at McCain's deranged mocking of the concept of international diplomacy with, "Look, nobody is saying we're gonna sit down and have TEA with these people, you disingenuous piece of shit!!!!"

Obviously, I added a bit there...

More on the Palin image...

Stuff for this week's 'toon:

• This cracks me up:
  

  Robert Kagan, a foreign policy adviser to McCain, derided criticisms of Palin as elitist.
  “I don’t take this elite foreign policy view that only this anointed class knows everything about the world," he said. "I’m not generally impressed that they are better judges of American foreign policy experience than those who have Palin’s experience.”
  One top conservative foreign policy wonk who declined to be named said he believed some of the questions surrounding Palin’s experience are sexist.

  So many things to say here... but most of them would be better saved for another cartoon. Stay tuned...
  
  
• Juan Cole:
  

  She knows nothing about how Iran is run, or about Pakistan, or about al-Qaeda, and even is ignorant of the Bush doctrine of preemptive warfare. It was a shockingly bad performance.__She had the hubris to suggest that her lack of knowledge and experience is a virtue. Why Americans, practical people, would fall for this line is beyond me. Would you want your car to be worked on by an inexperienced and ignorant mechanic? Would you want a plumber messing around with your pipes who did not know his way around wrenches?

• Don Hazen:
  

  And who is left out of the idyllic, nonexistent vision of "America" so adored by conservatives? Huge numbers of Americans: city dwellers, people of color (who represent 26 percent of eligible voters -- but that's not important to Republicans. As the Washington Post reported, the Republican convention was the whitest in 40 years), homosexuals, millions of creative people whose lifestyles are not in the Palin world view, and of course single people, particularly single women.

  
  ...and he makes this hilarious point earlier:
  

  The biggest blow to the idyllic scene was the small fact that her teenage daughter was pregnant and was going to get herself married to the guy right away, even if he doesn't want kids and prefers to be "fuckin' chillin," according to his MySpace page.

  
  
• David Talbot:
  

  "Her campaign locked her in a closet during the governor's race in 2006 -- and they're doing the same thing now," said one longtime Democratic consultant here, who like many others asked to remain anonymous because "it's a small state and Sarah takes names and numbers."
  "They're setting a trap for the country," he continued. "Keep her away from the press, while they set up these phony 'tests' for her. The first test was her speech before the Republican convention. They spread all this nervous chatter about her -- is she ready for prime time, can she pull it off?

  
  
  

Fighting Words: 9/15/08 Cartoon...

"The Joy of Painting With John McCain"...



You may also notice that I've changed the title design, both on the cartoon and on the website pages. I was getting a little tired of the old one, and also I've been seeing that Copperplate font EVERYWHERE these days... businesses, advertisements, websites, television, stadiums (it's the font plastered all over the Seahawks' stadium)...

More on Palin, RNC...

A couple of things for this week's 'toon:

• A typically outstanding piece by George Lakoff:
  

  [T]he Palin nomination changes the game. The initial response has been to try to keep the focus on external realities, the "issues," and differences on the issues. But the Palin nomination is not basically about external realities and what Democrats call "issues," but about the symbolic mechanisms of the political mind -- the worldviews, frames, metaphors, cultural narratives, and stereotypes. The Republicans can't win on realities.
  ...
  Just arguing the realities, the issues, the hard truths should be enough in times this bad, but the political mind and its response to symbolism cannot be ignored. The initial Democratic response to Palin -- the response based on realities alone -- indicates that many Democrats have not learned the lessons of the Reagan and Bush years.

• Paul Krugman:
  

  [F]undamentalist Christians are sincerely dismayed by Roe v. Wade and evolution in the curriculum. What struck me as I watched the convention speeches, however, is how much of the anger on the right is based not on the claim that Democrats have done bad things, but on the perception — generally based on no evidence whatsoever — that Democrats look down their noses at regular people.
  Thus Mr. Giuliani asserted that Wasilla, Alaska, isn’t “flashy enough” for Mr. Obama, who never said any such thing. And Ms. Palin asserted that Democrats “look down” on small-town mayors — again, without any evidence.
  What the G.O.P. is selling, in other words, is the pure politics of resentment; you’re supposed to vote Republican to stick it to an elite that thinks it’s better than you.

Fighting Words: 9/8/08 Cartoon...

"Memories of the 2008 Republican Pep Rally"...

More on McCain Foreign Policy...

For this week's 'toon, I was gonna do something in advance of Obama's VP choice and the Dem convention, but I decided to let the events play out first. My prediction is Obama will pick Bayh... because that's the one that would piss off his base the most and possibly lose the election for him. That seems to be the Obama campaign's standard operating procedure up to this point.

By the way, the joke in the last frame is a reference to obnoxious people who like to quote lines in movies before the characters on the screen actually have a chance to say them. I have a buddy who loves to do this, especially with Dumb and Dumber... hence, "kick his ass, Seabass." Not saying he's like Dubya or anything, but it's still pretty obnoxious...

Articles n' stuff:

• McCain's pearls of wisdom on the Russia/Georgia conflict:
  

  "In the 21st Century, nations don’t invade other nations."

  "[The Georgia-Russia war is] the first serious crisis internationally since the end of the Cold War.”

  Dan Eggen and Robert Barnes:
  

  McCain and his aides say his tough rhetoric on the Georgia crisis, along with his personal familiarity with the region, underscores the foreign policy expertise he would bring to the White House.

  Really, if you're harboring any thoughts at all about voting for McCain, for the love of God watch this compilation of his finest moments on the campaign trail.
  
  
• Paul Rosenberg on McCain "fanning the flames" with the Russia situation:
  

  Because the neocon adventure in Iraq has turned out so disasterously, most people fail to appreciate that Iraq was supposed to be a cakewalk, and that the neocon's real primary targets are China and Russia. Although not strictly a neocon-his attitudes derive more from the imperialist naval doctrine that animated the birth of America's "Great White Fleet" 100 years ago-McCain has been a neocon darling since 1999-2000 campaign, when he was their favorite far more than George W. Bush.

• Robert Parry:
  

  ...the larger reality should be clear: McCain is a hard-line neoconservative who buys into Bush’s “preemptive war” theories abroad and his concept of an all-powerful “unitary executive” at home.
  From McCain’s pre-Iraq invasion speeches to his campaign’s recent embrace of Bush’s imperial presidency, American voters should realize that if they choose John McCain, they will be locking in at least four more years of war with much of the Islamic world while selling out the Founders’ vision of a democratic Republic where no one is above the law.

• Another McCain "senior moment" on Iraq:
  

  In a dramatic error yesterday, John McCain told Katie Couric that it’s “just a matter of history” that Bush’s “surge” policy “began the Anbar awakening.” That, of course, is backwards.
  Today, thanks to some efforts by the Obama campaign, the media started picking up on McCain’s bizarre confusion on his signature national security issue, most notably with coverage from the AP and CNN.
  As of this earlier afternoon, the best the McCain campaign could come up with was this: “Democrats can debate whether the awakening would have survived without the surge … but that is nothing more than a transparent effort to minimize the role of our commanders and our troops in defeating the enemy.”
  Got that? If you think 2006 came before 2007, you’re somehow showing disrespect for the troops.

Fighting Words: 8/18/08 Cartoon...

"Advancements in Psychopathology, Cont."...

Previous episode:

Sound familiar?

From my current reading, a snippet that probably won't make it into my "more on" post... Robert Parry takes us back to the good old days of 1992, back before the Clintons had completely lost their minds:

The Clintons had a different perspective, too, when the insinuations about a person’s lack of patriotism were about Bill Clinton in fall 1992. As that campaign heated up, President George H.W. Bush unleashed his subordinates to dig up whatever dirt they could to impugn Clinton’s loyalty to his country.

Some of Bush’s political appointees rifled through Clinton’s passport file looking for an apocryphal letter from his student days in which Clinton supposedly sought to renounce his citizenship.

Though no such a letter was ever found, Bush exploited the mystery around Clinton’s passport files to raise questions about Clinton’s 1970 student trips to the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia, where he allegedly stayed with Communist friends.

With his patriotism challenged, Clinton saw his once-formidable lead shrink. Panic spread through the Clinton campaign. Ironically, one of the nervous Clinton’s aides who contacted congressional Democrats seeking their help in countering the Republican smears was George Stephanopoulos.

Bush's allies also put out another suspicion, that Clinton might have been a KGB “agent of influence.” Rev. Sun Myung Moon’s Washington Times headlined that allegation on Oct. 5, 1992, a story that attracted President Bush’s personal interest.

“Now there are stories that Clinton … may have gone to Moscow as [a] guest of the KGB,” Bush wrote in his diary that day. [For the fullest account of the 1992 Passportgate case, see Robert Parry’s Secrecy & Privilege.]

...

Sensing that the loyalty theme was hurting Clinton, President Bush kept stoking the fire. On CNN’s “Larry King Live” on Oct. 7, 1992, Bush suggested anew that there was something sinister about a possible Clinton friend maybe removing the apocryphal renunciation letter from Clinton’s passport file.

...

“I just think it’s wrong. I – that – maybe – they say, ‘well, it was a youthful indiscretion.’ I was 19 or 20 flying off an aircraft carrier and that shaped me to be commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and – I’m sorry but demonstrating – it’s not a question of patriotism, it’s a question of character and judgment.”

Clinton countered by challenging Bush directly.

“You have questioned my patriotism,” the Democrat shot back. Clinton then unloaded his own zinger: “When Joe McCarthy went around this country attacking people’s patriotism, he was wrong. He was wrong, and a senator from Connecticut stood up to him, named Prescott Bush. Your father was right to stand up to Joe McCarthy. You were wrong to attack my patriotism.”

Many observers rated Clinton’s negative comparison of Bush to his father as Bush’s worst moment in the debate. An unsettled Bush didn’t regain the initiative for the remainder of the evening.

More on the media & the '08 election...

There's obviously a ton of stuff I could link to for this week's 'toon, but I only have time to do one quick one that caught my eye:

• Check out Cass Sunstein's "The Obama I Know"... he and Obama were colleagues at the University of Chicago Law School:
  

  On this occasion, he had an important topic to discuss: the controversy over President George W. Bush's warrantless surveillance of international telephone calls between Americans and suspected terrorists. I had written a short essay suggesting that the surveillance might be lawful. Before taking a public position, Obama wanted to talk the problem through.
  
  In the space of about 20 minutes, he and I investigated the legal details. He asked me to explore all sorts of issues: the President's power as commander-in-chief, the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the Authorization for Use of Military Force and more.
  
  Obama wanted to consider the best possible defence of what Bush had done. To every argument I made, he listened and offered a counter-argument. After the issue had been exhausted, Obama said that he thought the programme was illegal, but now had a better understanding of both sides. He thanked me for my time.
  
  This was a pretty amazing conversation, not only because of Obama's mastery of the legal details, but also because many prominent Democratic leaders had already blasted the Bush initiative as blatantly illegal. He did not want to take a public position until he had listened to, and explored, what might be said on the other side.
  

More on Hillary's "3 a.m." Ad...

In case you're wondering... yeah, in this week's cartoon, one of the dancing terrorists is doing the M.C. Hammer dance.

Tidbits:

• Perhaps the most objectionable thing about Hillary's fear-mongering here is her ad's lack of originality. Check out some oldies-but-scaries:
  
  LBJ's original red phone ad (and the creepy "Daisy" ad).
  
  Mondale's red phone ad.
  
  Reagan's scary communist bear.
  
  Bush Sr.'s infamous Willie Horton ad.
  
  Bush Jr.'s scary terrorist wolves from 2004.
  
  
• Todd Beeton:
  

  "I think that since we now know Sen. (John) McCain will be the nominee for the Republican Party, national security will be front and center in this election. We all know that. And I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold," the New York senator told reporters crowded into an infant's bedroom-sized hotel conference room in Washington.
  
  "I believe that I've done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you'll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy," she said.
  
  "Certainly Senator McCain has done that?" Really? How? By promising to continue the neo-con bully Bush doctrine for 4 more years? By escalating and perpetuating a tragic war?
  

  Rachel Maddow said on Keith Olbermann's show that she thinks Hillary is angling to be McCain's running mate.
  
  
• Glenn Greenwald:
  

  Slimy accusations that one is "soft on the Terrorists" or "unpatriotic" will be effective if people see the accused, in response, nervously trying to deny the accusations, trying to run away from one's own beliefs, defensively trying to comply with the demands of the accusers in order to make the accusations go away. By contrast, the accusations will be rendered worthless if the accused stands by one's own principles and convictions and aggressively seeks out the debate, turning the accusations around on the accusers.

• Juan Cole:
  

  ...let us take the name "Hussein." It is from the Semitic word hasan, meaning "good" or "handsome." Husayn is the diminutive, affectionate form.
  Barack Obama's middle name is in honor of his grandfather, Hussein, a secular resident of Nairobi, Kenya. Americans may think of Saddam Hussein when they hear the name, but that is like thinking of Stalin when you hear the name Joseph.
  
  

• Frank Rich:
  

  In desperation to land some knockout punch, some McCain supporters, following the precedent of Clinton surrogates, are already invoking Mr. Obama’s race, middle name and tourist snapshot in Somali dress to smear his patriotism. The idea is to make him a Manchurian candidate, a closet anti-Semitic jihadist trained in a madrassa run by, say, Louis Farrakhan.
  What repeatedly goes unrecognized by all of Mr. Obama’s opponents is that his political Kryptonite is the patriotism he offers in lieu of theirs. His upbeat notion of a yes-we-can national mobilization for the common good, however saccharine, speaks to the pride and idealism of Americans who are bone-weary of a patriotism defined exclusively by flag lapel pins, the fear of terrorism and the prospect of perpetual war.

• You've probably seen this on the news, but the little girl in the ad is actually now a high school senior in Bonney Lake, WA, who supports Obama.
  
  And, yes, Rep. Steve King says the terrorists will be "dancing in the streets" if Obama wins.

Fighting Words: 3/10/08 Cartoon...

"Scary Stories"...

More on Bush/Cheney Iran lies...

This week's 'toon may require you to have previously seen professional darts on TV to get the joke. Here's a couple of clips if you haven't had the pleasure. Funniest thing ever... a bunch of dumpy, sweaty guys playing a bar game, but the crowd and the announcers act like they're watching Michael Jordan in his prime. IT'S DARTS! I had a lot more British colloquialisms in the cartoon (as I understand them), but I had to weed them out because I didn't feel like the joke would translate well in written form.

Here are some articles:

• Seymour Hersh had it a year ago that Bush knew there was no conclusive evidence of a secret Iranian nuclear weapons program. If you don't want to believe a Pulitzer Prize winner, then take it from Bush's own NSA, Stephen Hadley, who says that senior members of the Bush administration were told "beginning in July" about the new intelligence. Bush's excuse (which some call "preposterous"), that DNI Mike McConnell told him "they had new information" but didn't tell him what it was, even if true, is meaningless. The entire administration bears responsibility for what comes out of Bush's mouth... does anybody think he comes up with a single thought himself? When Bush made threats in October about the coming of "World War III," it was a lie and they all knew it. Do they deserve any benefit of the doubt whatsoever after Iraq and WMD's? Bush on Dec. 5:
  

  "The Iranians have a strategic choice to make,” Bush said in Omaha, Nebraska. “They can come clean with the international community about the scope of their nuclear activities and fully accept the longstanding offer to suspend their enrichment program and come to the table and negotiate, or they can continue on a path of isolation that is not in the best interest of the Iranian people. The choice is up to the Iranian regime."

  
  Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this pretty much the same damn "choice" we gave Iraq when all along we were just going to invade them anyway??


• Cheney (just back from another hunting trip) is now being forced to make the hilarious admission that he has "no reason to question the intelligence released this week showing that Iran is not an imminent nuclear threat." Even more ridiculous, he claims that his position "has not changed" that we need to deal with Iran "diplomatically." Riiiiiiight...
  
  Reportedly, Dick and his pals are "infuriated" by this "breathtaking repudiation of [their] policy arguments."


• Greg Sargent has been all over the media's role in this one. The funniest thing I've seen: CNN was forced to postpone their "speculative documentary" titled "We Were Warned -- Iran Goes Nuclear." The show was described as being a "what-if scenario" where "fictional cabinet members" debate how to deal with the Iranian threat.
  
  Yeah... that's good journalism.


• The truth is (and I believe people like Noam Chomsky have been saying this for years) that Iran is a rational actor, despite the scary stories told to us by Israel and the Bush administration. As such, the NIE found that "Tehran's decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic and military costs."

Fighting Words: 12/10/07 Cartoon...

"World Darts Championship"...

Similar 'toons:

More on Global Warming, IPCC report...

Articles for this week's 'toon:

• The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued their report last week, which spelled out the situation in stark and unambiguous terms. The team of scientific experts on the subject calls the evidence of global warming "unequivocal" and the need for action "urgent." The panel's head is quoted as saying that this is our "defining moment" and that "if there's no action before 2012, that's too late." Meanwhile, experts have reportedly been "stunned" at the loss of Arctic ice recently, to the extent that they predict the summertime Arctic could be completely ice-free by 2030.
  
  The IPCC spells out our options pretty clearly: either we take action NOW and take a small hit to the world's economic growth (which is offset by short-term benefits like improved health due to reduced pollution), or we roll the dice and risk what the world's top minds predict will be catastrophic consequences.
  
  
• All of this can only leave one wondering how those who oppose any action on climate change are afforded any credibility whatsoever in this debate. What possible counter-argument is there? All that's left is a childish, responsibility-shirking retort along the lines of "but I don't wanna!" And yet, there they are, in the Washington Post's story on the IPCC report, which dutifully warns the reader that "some" people disagree with the findings.
  
  Which people, exactly? Well, the people who write op-eds like this one in Investor's Business Daily, which counter the science community's conclusions on global warming with a string of ad hominems and baseless accusations about the scientists' sinister hidden agendas (of course, there's no mention of the corporate community's possible agenda). Or the people who cherry-pick or misrepresent facts to argue that "carbon dioxide is actually good!" (except, y'know, where there's too much of it) or that global warming is actually due to "solar brightness."
  
  
• While Bush has finally admitted that global warming is real, it appears that not much has changed in the administration's approach to the problem. While yet another story recently came out linking a top Bush contributor to excessive carbon emissions, Darth Cheney is again angling for more control over the administration's global warming policy.
  
  
• Check out a fascinating review by Gary Kamiya of Alan Weisman's "The World Without Us."