And, as long as we're being paranoid conspiracy theorists here, there are those who claim that many more than four Americans died because of Watergate, too.
Feb 4, 2013
The Jason Voorhees of Politics
A.F. Branco, 2/1/13:
Not knowing why Americans were killed in a foreign nation (or, perhaps, misleading the public on the reasons for those deaths) is vastly worse than covering up a conspiracy to steal elections and illegally consolidate power.
And, as long as we're being paranoid conspiracy theorists here, there are those who claim that many more than four Americans died because of Watergate, too.
And, as long as we're being paranoid conspiracy theorists here, there are those who claim that many more than four Americans died because of Watergate, too.
The Gala Second Anniversary
Today marks two years of Editorial Explanations, which is a damn long time to do something that started randomly on an entirely separate blog. EE isn't ever quite what I want it to be -- it's too partisan too much of the time; in my head, you readers would never know how I feel about any issue -- and I've been debating in my head about ending it for more than six months now. (The feeling was particularly bad just before the election -- I almost quit then, but decided to stick it out to the end of the year -- and, since the partisan rancor quickly dropped in late November, reading several dozen cartoons was no longer as painful as it had become before.)
Once again I'll restate the purpose of this blog, in as close to an honest way as I can: many political cartoons are weaselly, sneaky things, that encode poisonous ideas, because of prejudice or malice or anger or fear. Sometimes that's deliberate on the part of the cartoonist, and sometimes it isn't -- though I don't claim I can tell the difference consistently. But I can point out those nasty cartoons, the ones with unexamined premises and massive leaps of logic and overweening special pleading.
EE should not be me pointing out that a cartoonist is "wrong;" as I wrote on the comment page, way back in the beginning -- and still want to hold to -- "all cartoonists are completely correct, in their own worlds." I fail at that -- some weeks, several times a day -- but it's still the standard, even on days I miss it.
EE occasionally is there to make a joke that a particular cartoon missed, or (even more rarely) to point out a good cartoon. But, most of the time, the point is to shine light on people doing their jobs badly, because they're lazy or corrupt or axe-grinding or stupid or tired or whatever other reason it is today.
The days I'm happiest with EE are the ones when I get to pick on people on both sides; recently I was thrilled to get back-to-back (and diametrically opposed) cartoons by Gary Varvel and Bruce Plante that I thought were both dumb and poorly thought-out.
I admit that I do end up picking on right-wingers much more than lefties, though I have to point out that I'm still a registered Republican, as I've been for my entire adult life. (And I'm equally sure those cartoonists would call me a "RINO" at best.) That's partly because I mostly agree with Mann and Ornstein -- there's one party that shifted massively to one side over the past decade, not for the good -- and also for a few cartoon-specific reasons.
First, conservative cartoonists are uniformly unafraid to take strong stances, unlike some of their liberal counterparts. (Ted Rall is the great outlier there; he can be as radical as Chuck Asay or the McCoys or A.F. Branco are reactionary, and I'd pick on him more if he found anything else that infuriated him as much as drone strikes.) The right-wingers also cartoon in the old single-image tradition the vast majority of the time, making a single, stark claim and standing strongly behind it. The lefty cartoonists are more likely to do a wordy four- or six-panel novella, running around and around an issue as if to cover every possible objection ahead of time. Those are harder to make fun of, since they're already pre-digested.
Even more important is that well-known Republican political discipline -- and, as far as I can see, the conservative cartoonists do see themselves as Republicans (or as some subset, like "true Republicans" or "Tea Partiers") and follow the standard messaging on the news of the day. So there's often a set of right-wing cartoons each day, all trying to make the exact same point -- and, even if that's a good point, there's usually someone doing it sloppily. And that discipline itself causes trouble -- I can't believe their hearts are all in yet another bloody shirt run up the flagpole about Benghazi, five months later, and that lack of real fire is sometimes clear in the final product.
That's what led to the current glut of right-wingers on EE -- that's why the most commented cartoonists, right now, are Chuck Asay, Lisa Benson, Terry Wise, and Bob Gorrell. I have to admit that I've been following Asay for even longer than this blog has been around; he's a lovely draftsman whose thought processes I find deeply mysterious, and sometimes actively insane. Benson and Wise come across as just pure partisans, always ready to follow the Roger Ailles background memo of the day. And Gorrell is the most frustrating: he's got the drawing chops to be a great cartoonist -- he draws strong, iconic images day after day, either out of training or instinct, has a real knack for caricature, and keeps his captions simple and direct -- but his subjects and his angles are usually second-hand and flabby, and he's far too often reliant on the not-bothering-to-draw-something crutch.
But none of those things are inherent in cartooning, or in those particular cartoonists. Any of them could move to a different media outlet, with a different editorial slant, any day. Or the center of debate in Washington could shift yet again, making everyone shift with it. But I'm sure that, no matter what the topic, there will be a few really dumb cartoons in any given week. And, for now at least, Editorial Explanations will be around to find them, to point fingers at them, and to laugh one of those really annoying bully-on-Simpsons laughs at them.
Once again I'll restate the purpose of this blog, in as close to an honest way as I can: many political cartoons are weaselly, sneaky things, that encode poisonous ideas, because of prejudice or malice or anger or fear. Sometimes that's deliberate on the part of the cartoonist, and sometimes it isn't -- though I don't claim I can tell the difference consistently. But I can point out those nasty cartoons, the ones with unexamined premises and massive leaps of logic and overweening special pleading.
EE should not be me pointing out that a cartoonist is "wrong;" as I wrote on the comment page, way back in the beginning -- and still want to hold to -- "all cartoonists are completely correct, in their own worlds." I fail at that -- some weeks, several times a day -- but it's still the standard, even on days I miss it.
EE occasionally is there to make a joke that a particular cartoon missed, or (even more rarely) to point out a good cartoon. But, most of the time, the point is to shine light on people doing their jobs badly, because they're lazy or corrupt or axe-grinding or stupid or tired or whatever other reason it is today.
The days I'm happiest with EE are the ones when I get to pick on people on both sides; recently I was thrilled to get back-to-back (and diametrically opposed) cartoons by Gary Varvel and Bruce Plante that I thought were both dumb and poorly thought-out.
I admit that I do end up picking on right-wingers much more than lefties, though I have to point out that I'm still a registered Republican, as I've been for my entire adult life. (And I'm equally sure those cartoonists would call me a "RINO" at best.) That's partly because I mostly agree with Mann and Ornstein -- there's one party that shifted massively to one side over the past decade, not for the good -- and also for a few cartoon-specific reasons.
First, conservative cartoonists are uniformly unafraid to take strong stances, unlike some of their liberal counterparts. (Ted Rall is the great outlier there; he can be as radical as Chuck Asay or the McCoys or A.F. Branco are reactionary, and I'd pick on him more if he found anything else that infuriated him as much as drone strikes.) The right-wingers also cartoon in the old single-image tradition the vast majority of the time, making a single, stark claim and standing strongly behind it. The lefty cartoonists are more likely to do a wordy four- or six-panel novella, running around and around an issue as if to cover every possible objection ahead of time. Those are harder to make fun of, since they're already pre-digested.
Even more important is that well-known Republican political discipline -- and, as far as I can see, the conservative cartoonists do see themselves as Republicans (or as some subset, like "true Republicans" or "Tea Partiers") and follow the standard messaging on the news of the day. So there's often a set of right-wing cartoons each day, all trying to make the exact same point -- and, even if that's a good point, there's usually someone doing it sloppily. And that discipline itself causes trouble -- I can't believe their hearts are all in yet another bloody shirt run up the flagpole about Benghazi, five months later, and that lack of real fire is sometimes clear in the final product.
That's what led to the current glut of right-wingers on EE -- that's why the most commented cartoonists, right now, are Chuck Asay, Lisa Benson, Terry Wise, and Bob Gorrell. I have to admit that I've been following Asay for even longer than this blog has been around; he's a lovely draftsman whose thought processes I find deeply mysterious, and sometimes actively insane. Benson and Wise come across as just pure partisans, always ready to follow the Roger Ailles background memo of the day. And Gorrell is the most frustrating: he's got the drawing chops to be a great cartoonist -- he draws strong, iconic images day after day, either out of training or instinct, has a real knack for caricature, and keeps his captions simple and direct -- but his subjects and his angles are usually second-hand and flabby, and he's far too often reliant on the not-bothering-to-draw-something crutch.
But none of those things are inherent in cartooning, or in those particular cartoonists. Any of them could move to a different media outlet, with a different editorial slant, any day. Or the center of debate in Washington could shift yet again, making everyone shift with it. But I'm sure that, no matter what the topic, there will be a few really dumb cartoons in any given week. And, for now at least, Editorial Explanations will be around to find them, to point fingers at them, and to laugh one of those really annoying bully-on-Simpsons laughs at them.
Feb 1, 2013
The OTHER Side of the Gun Debate
Andy Singer, 1/31/13:
Yes, he is literally saying that if you want to kill someone, you should just run them over with your car, since there are never any convictions for vehicular homicide anywhere in the world.
Jan 31, 2013
Spare the Rod
Terry Wise, 1/30/13:
This is a cartoon literally about beating up people smaller than you until they do what you want.
And, as Genghis Khan knew, it does work.
And, as Genghis Khan knew, it does work.
Que?
Ed Gamble, 1/30/13:
Typically, an editorial cartoonist will take a stand on the issues, but not ol' Ed! He's content to just say that there's a plan on illegal immigration in the works, and he's sure our infinitely wise government will carry it out effortlessly.
Gamble is also possibly the only cartoonist left who could use an "out of the closet" metaphor like this, and mean it utterly innocently, bless his heart.
Gamble is also possibly the only cartoonist left who could use an "out of the closet" metaphor like this, and mean it utterly innocently, bless his heart.
We're All Mad Here
Randy Bish, 1/30/13:
Americans are terrorized daily by a lack of adequate government-funded health care!
Oh, wait, I think Bish is against that, too.
I mean, look out! Gorilla!
Oh, wait, I think Bish is against that, too.
I mean, look out! Gorilla!
And This One Is For Bravery, And This One Is For Me
Chan Lowe, 1/30/13:
When you're not sure what to do in any situation, ask yourself: what course of action will keep the flow of sweet, sweet corporate cash flowing?
Then do that.
Then do that.
Jan 30, 2013
Not a Clue, Sorry
Nate Beeler, 1/29/13:
This was marked as a local cartoon, so it's entirely possible I'm not supposed to be able to understand it.
But how difficult can it be to understand? Sure, Internet Cafes are running a combination charity bingo parlor and sausage factory -- doesn't that happen in every town?
I can't help but think that if the ground meat was just labeled, then I'd know what was going on.
But how difficult can it be to understand? Sure, Internet Cafes are running a combination charity bingo parlor and sausage factory -- doesn't that happen in every town?
I can't help but think that if the ground meat was just labeled, then I'd know what was going on.
Jan 29, 2013
Bibbidi Bobbidi What-the-Hell?!
Graeme MacKay, 1/26/13:
This is actually how Canadians pick their political leaders -- through the time-hallowed ceremony of The Shoe Fittings.
Cantinflas, Where Have You Gone?
Bob Gorrell, 1/28/13:
In case you have forgotten, Gorrell would like to remind you that all this sweet talk about "illegal immigration" is really about dirty foreigners.
And, if you should happen to be worried that he'll either steal your job or burgle your home, then Gorrell has done his job for the day.
And, if you should happen to be worried that he'll either steal your job or burgle your home, then Gorrell has done his job for the day.
Jan 28, 2013
Cover Your Ears and Whistle
Eric Allie, 1/25/13:
Believe absolutely nothing you hear anywhere but from Rush and Fox -- they're all lying to you about everything!
Really! Everything!
Really! Everything!
Just Try to Read the Fine Print!
Jeff Stahler, 1/27/13:
The only possible reason for disagreeing with our current President on anything is that you're blind.
Live Confused
But I can't figure out why Asay would be upset about any of that.
Rosie the RPGer is Coming!
Uh huh. And monkeys will fly out of my ass.
Dr. Mary Walker Would Like a Word
Gary Varvel, 1/25/13:
Women in the US military have never, up to this day, been captured as POWs -- but allowing them to serve in combat would suddenly allow that possibility.
Also, the whole thing about Barbie as the primary role model and image for young women -- can't forget that.
Also, the whole thing about Barbie as the primary role model and image for young women -- can't forget that.
Dripping Poison in His Ear
Lisa Benson, 1/25/13:
Obama should open the Keystone XL pipeline, which would send dirty, messy oil-jobs spewing forth across the Oval Office...and this is a good thing!
This metaphor may perhaps not have been thought through as well as it could have been; this cartoon does not look like an argument in favor of opening a pipeline.
This metaphor may perhaps not have been thought through as well as it could have been; this cartoon does not look like an argument in favor of opening a pipeline.
Jan 25, 2013
They're All His Helicopters
Michael Ramirez, 1/24/13:
Watch out! Obama's going to get us into another useless quagmire war!
Even worse: it's not one of the ones the GOP wants!
Also, has it been long enough that people forget it was Bush that had the big flight-suit "Mission Accomplished" fiasco? Ramirez sure hopes so....
Even worse: it's not one of the ones the GOP wants!
Also, has it been long enough that people forget it was Bush that had the big flight-suit "Mission Accomplished" fiasco? Ramirez sure hopes so....
Get Your Scrambled Eggs Back in the Kitchen!
Bob Gorrell, 1/24/13:
Having women serve in combat is completely horrible, for reasons Gorrell would be happy to explain...
...if only he didn't have this darn 3:00 tee-time.
Maybe tomorrow!
...if only he didn't have this darn 3:00 tee-time.
Maybe tomorrow!
Yesterday's Laziest Cartoon
John R. Rose, 1/24/13:
The true job of the President is to refuse to spend any money whatsoever, like your skinflint uncle.
The Great Whatever
Lisa Benson, 1/24/13:
The Benghazi attack was only outrageous up until the election.
You know, I was sure Benson would hate Hillary more than this.
You know, I was sure Benson would hate Hillary more than this.
Jan 24, 2013
Yes, Folks, He's Serious
Chuck Asay, 1/23/13:
Simply allowing governments to help women and children in need will inevitably drive their husbands and fathers away, and this is bad.
Therefore, government must never do anything that would even, in the slightest way, benefit women or children, for fear of scaring off the very skittish Wrench-Weilding Male.
Therefore, government must never do anything that would even, in the slightest way, benefit women or children, for fear of scaring off the very skittish Wrench-Weilding Male.
A Cold Day in Detroit
Henry Payne, 1/23/13:
Hey, we haven't had one of these in a while, so everyone say it together:
"Global warming means it's never cold anywhere!"
Funny, these cartoons come later and later every year -- can't think why that would happen.
"Global warming means it's never cold anywhere!"
Funny, these cartoons come later and later every year -- can't think why that would happen.
Be Careful With Your Rhetorical Questions
Chuck Asay, 1/23/13:
Asay, once again, makes his most radical opponents' points for them.
As long as you're regulating guns, why not do like the UK and outlaw them all? After all, clearly there's no other way to stop crazies from killing lots of people, right?
As long as you're regulating guns, why not do like the UK and outlaw them all? After all, clearly there's no other way to stop crazies from killing lots of people, right?
Those Horrible, Clinton-Era Tax Rates!
Steve Kelley, 1/23/13:
That guy is by definition making more than $400k a year, since that's the only people new federal taxes are hitting.
If he's whining that the two-year-old payroll tax cut wasn't extended yet again, I sincerely hope his next complaint won't be about the insolvency of Social Security....
If he's whining that the two-year-old payroll tax cut wasn't extended yet again, I sincerely hope his next complaint won't be about the insolvency of Social Security....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)