Oct 08

Typically I include a Rose cartoon because they are so uniformly terrible at fulfilling the definition of ‘editorial cartoon,’ so often mining stories that meet the minimum threshold of ‘news’ and layering on the simplest pun or joke that anyone - ANYONE - could do, raising the question of why Rose in particular is paid to do this.

Anywho… This cartoon. It touches upon an actual news story and SHOCK OF ALL SHOCKS it seems to express an actual opinion. I know, I know, calm down. Rose has something to say?

But of course he’s an idiot and what he has to say amounts to “Derpy derpy derp, look at me, I can talk about real issues like an adult!’ And in the process he reveals his own staggering ignorance.

Look at the headline. The Supreme Court ‘refused to get involved in national debate’? ‘Refused to get involved in national debate’? The Supreme Court does not debate anything with the public, you moron! They hear arguments, they weigh the legal question(s) being discussed, and THEY LAY DOWN DECISIONS! They don’t engage in a dialogue with you or I, trying to convince us of anything. They tell us what the law is, for good or ill. How can you be an adult and not understand that?

I can better understand how you don’t understand why the Supreme Court didn’t take up any same-sex marriage cases recently, because that surprised even the people who follow the Court for a living, but even then THEY RULED ON DOMA LAST YEAR! What is this “Why doesn’t the Supreme Court take any gay marriage cases” when the exact same make-up of the Court gave a landmark ruling last year? Do you expect something different this time around?

Typically I include a Rose cartoon because they are so uniformly terrible at fulfilling the definition of ‘editorial cartoon,’ so often mining stories that meet the minimum threshold of ‘news’ and layering on the simplest pun or joke that anyone - ANYONE - could do, raising the question of why Rose in particular is paid to do this.

Anywho… This cartoon. It touches upon an actual news story and SHOCK OF ALL SHOCKS it seems to express an actual opinion. I know, I know, calm down. Rose has something to say?

But of course he’s an idiot and what he has to say amounts to “Derpy derpy derp, look at me, I can talk about real issues like an adult!’ And in the process he reveals his own staggering ignorance.

Look at the headline. The Supreme Court ‘refused to get involved in national debate’? ‘Refused to get involved in national debate’? The Supreme Court does not debate anything with the public, you moron! They hear arguments, they weigh the legal question(s) being discussed, and THEY LAY DOWN DECISIONS! They don’t engage in a dialogue with you or I, trying to convince us of anything. They tell us what the law is, for good or ill. How can you be an adult and not understand that?

I can better understand how you don’t understand why the Supreme Court didn’t take up any same-sex marriage cases recently, because that surprised even the people who follow the Court for a living, but even then THEY RULED ON DOMA LAST YEAR! What is this “Why doesn’t the Supreme Court take any gay marriage cases” when the exact same make-up of the Court gave a landmark ruling last year? Do you expect something different this time around?

I have a worse cartoon coming after this, but I wanted to include this one as an appetizer of sorts because it’s so Gorrell.

Who is this guy supposed to be? Shouldn’t John Roberts, the Chief Justice, be depicted here? And the old stand-by, the couple papers clutched in one hand that are meant to represent… what? Yes, it says ‘Traditional marriage,’ but does Gorrell believe this is the best way to convey this cartoon is talking about gay marriage or is he just lazy? Is he just so set in his way ‘Whatever gets the cartoon done quickest’ ways that he reuses that shorthand out of habit, not even questioning if it makes sense?

I have a worse cartoon coming after this, but I wanted to include this one as an appetizer of sorts because it’s so Gorrell.

Who is this guy supposed to be? Shouldn’t John Roberts, the Chief Justice, be depicted here? And the old stand-by, the couple papers clutched in one hand that are meant to represent… what? Yes, it says ‘Traditional marriage,’ but does Gorrell believe this is the best way to convey this cartoon is talking about gay marriage or is he just lazy? Is he just so set in his way ‘Whatever gets the cartoon done quickest’ ways that he reuses that shorthand out of habit, not even questioning if it makes sense?

Oct 06

Just as a horse cannot blinker itself, Obama did not create the Iraq withdrawal strategy alone. You can thank his predecessor for signing the Status of Forces Agreement.

An ‘Oh, those pesky facts’ cartoon.

Just as a horse cannot blinker itself, Obama did not create the Iraq withdrawal strategy alone. You can thank his predecessor for signing the Status of Forces Agreement.

An ‘Oh, those pesky facts’ cartoon.

Oct 02

Listening to Bill Maher’s show from last week, the discussion of how to combat ISIL leads the main part of the show. Everyone vociferously argues whether America should be the world’s police, whether ISIL is a threat to American soil, one guy (the general, I believe) says “We cant ignore this fight” because this time it’s the really important, all-or-nothing battle for the preservation and existence of America, unlike every previous really important, all-or-nothing battle for the preservation and existence of America like the fight against the Taliban or the invasion of Iraq.

And no one even brings up the idea that taking the fight to ISIL can be done in any way other than direct military action like bombings. It’s just ‘Should we have a new war against the latest banner Muslim extremists rally around?’ This is what I was talking about yesterday, America’s foreign policy can only look at everything as ‘Bomb this or be considered cowards for not bombing this?’

Oct 01

The War on Terror cannot be ‘won’ because terrorism is not an organization or country or any body made up of specific adherents. Terrorism is a tactic, a tactic that will always be used by people in certain situations and with certain motivations and goals.

We are 13 years into the War on Terror now and it is staggering how few people seem to understand this. I am using this cartoon as an illustration of the lack of understanding but there are many others I could have used. So many other cartoons that present ISIL as a specific, centralized body and our objective as nothing more than to sufficiently neutralize them and then we win.

It’s the exact same mindset we had with al Qaeda for over a decade, until ISIL recently supplanted them as the face of terrorism. And if/when ISIL is put down there will be another group to take their place, whether because they are as efficient as ISIL or because the American media will trump them up to the level of ISIL because, if this isn’t already clear, we need a face for terrorism. We, the American public, need to have this ‘war’ framed as an actual war, America vs. This One Group.

Combatting terrorism, finding and preventing acts of terrorism, is not a movie-ready combat experience like war was in the past. But that doesn’t deter politicians and the media from crafting a narrative like it. And as long as we the public go along with this, we will continue to misunderstand what objectives are and how to go about them. Fighting terrorism does not require the military build-up fighting a war does, but we still spend trillions on aircraft carriers and jet planes and other vehicles and equipment that don’t have the efficacy in fighting terrorism that intelligence gathering and scaled-down operations like the hit on bin Laden do.

It’s the repetition that gets to me. We’ve heard this song before but people act as if it’s new, same as the Eric Holder thing I talked about a couple days ago. American politics is Groundhog Day but none of us are Bill Murray. We’re the people going through the exact same motions again and again and again.

The War on Terror cannot be ‘won’ because terrorism is not an organization or country or any body made up of specific adherents. Terrorism is a tactic, a tactic that will always be used by people in certain situations and with certain motivations and goals.

We are 13 years into the War on Terror now and it is staggering how few people seem to understand this. I am using this cartoon as an illustration of the lack of understanding but there are many others I could have used. So many other cartoons that present ISIL as a specific, centralized body and our objective as nothing more than to sufficiently neutralize them and then we win.

It’s the exact same mindset we had with al Qaeda for over a decade, until ISIL recently supplanted them as the face of terrorism. And if/when ISIL is put down there will be another group to take their place, whether because they are as efficient as ISIL or because the American media will trump them up to the level of ISIL because, if this isn’t already clear, we need a face for terrorism. We, the American public, need to have this ‘war’ framed as an actual war, America vs. This One Group.

Combatting terrorism, finding and preventing acts of terrorism, is not a movie-ready combat experience like war was in the past. But that doesn’t deter politicians and the media from crafting a narrative like it. And as long as we the public go along with this, we will continue to misunderstand what objectives are and how to go about them. Fighting terrorism does not require the military build-up fighting a war does, but we still spend trillions on aircraft carriers and jet planes and other vehicles and equipment that don’t have the efficacy in fighting terrorism that intelligence gathering and scaled-down operations like the hit on bin Laden do.

It’s the repetition that gets to me. We’ve heard this song before but people act as if it’s new, same as the Eric Holder thing I talked about a couple days ago. American politics is Groundhog Day but none of us are Bill Murray. We’re the people going through the exact same motions again and again and again.

Hopefully that last post didn’t turn up on people’s dashboards 7 or 8 times. Kept trying to upload it but Tumblr was having troubles.

"Here are two stories that are in the news right now. I have nothing to say about either of them, but perhaps by combining them into one image I can give the impression I am making a comment about current events."
-Bill Day (and far too many other editorial cartoonists)

"Here are two stories that are in the news right now. I have nothing to say about either of them, but perhaps by combining them into one image I can give the impression I am making a comment about current events."
-Bill Day (and far too many other editorial cartoonists)

"Here are two stories that are in the news right now. I have nothing to say about either of them, but perhaps by combining them into one image I can give the impression I am making a comment about current events."
-Bill Day (and far too many other editorial cartoonists)

"Here are two stories that are in the news right now. I have nothing to say about either of them, but perhaps by combining them into one image I can give the impression I am making a comment about current events."
-Bill Day (and far too many other editorial cartoonists)

"Here are two stories that are in the news right now. I have nothing to say about either of them, but perhaps by combining them into one image I can give the impression I am making a comment about current events."
-Bill Day (and far too many other editorial cartoonists)

"Here are two stories that are in the news right now. I have nothing to say about either of them, but perhaps by combining them into one image I can give the impression I am making a comment about current events."
-Bill Day (and far too many other editorial cartoonists)

"Here are two stories that are in the news right now. I have nothing to say about either of them, but perhaps if I combine them into one image it will seem like I am presenting some sort of opinion."
-Bill Day (and far too many other editorial cartoonists)

"Here are two stories that are in the news right now. I have nothing to say about either of them, but perhaps if I combine them into one image it will seem like I am presenting some sort of opinion."
-Bill Day (and far too many other editorial cartoonists)