CSotD: Claims and Disclaimers
Skip to comments
You may notice something new at the bottom of my columns: A disclaimer. I’ve been aware, and a few readers have pointed out, that I’ve adopted an increasingly progressive stance in my political analysis, and it seemed time to draw a line between my opinions and the overall site, which is pro-cartoons but otherwise non-partisan.
It was my idea, which seems unusual, since a lot of columnists claim their opinions are pure statements of fact. Gimme a break.
I have no idea what got Hans Christian Andersen so hopped-up against editors, but I’ve used H.J. Ford’s illustration from Blockhead Hans as a logo for CSotD for years, or at least the reporters who giggle. There was a time when it was mostly giggles, but we’re in a divisive period today where it is not.
I think we’re in a very serious crisis and that it’s no time for “on the one hand, on the other” neutrality, but I can best explain that with some cartoons from both sides of the aisle that I probably wouldn’t use.
I like Ohman’s work and I even had this one pulled out for possible use, but decided against it because it’s more of a personal insult than a political opinion. A close call, certainly, because of how much Trump bases political decisions on his personal whims, and because I do think he’s narcissistic to a toxic degree.
But there are many other cartoons that combine his narcissism with specific policies and statements, so it got a pass, albeit with considerable thought.
By comparison, here’s a personal insult tied to a totally irrelevant topic. Fauci has become a whipping boy of the right wing, but he’s retired and gone and has nothing to do with the hantavirus.
However, if your point is that we’re not prepared to handle the virus, here’s a cartoon I was primed to use, not because I hate RFK Jr personally but because I agree with Smith that he is unqualified for his position and represents a hazard.
And that’s not personal, except in that my degree included several semesters of History of Science. He has no qualifications for his role and has done specific things to work against proven, documented science. It may have been funny when Steve Martin played Theodoric of York, Medieval Barber on Saturday Night Live, but it’s scary to see it really happening in current society.
This one sent me to the Googles, where I discovered that, indeed, a California mayor was accused of being a Chinese operative, though it was before she was mayor, and she resigned over the matter. And we could justifiably argue over how this escaped scrutiny as she was running for office, perhaps more credibly if she’d been running for a more-scrutinized statewide or federal position.
But she was mayor of Arcadia, which has a population of 54,000 and is in LA County, which has a population of 9.7 million, in California, which in turn has a population of 39.3 million. I’ll let you figure the percentages, but, given that I’ve never heard anyone say, “As goes Arcadia, so goes California!” I’m gonna give Stiglich’s commentary a hard pass.
Kelley offers a harder decision with this one. I often pick on him because we differ strongly, but this is a case in which he expresses an opinion that can be defended, though his black-or-white binary view seems inappropriate this time around.
That is, even if you differ with those who thought Patel dodged and even lied his way through the hearings, it’s a stretch to say he came out as the Little Man So Spic and Span while Van Hollen was beaten up.
I might use it as a Juxtaposition with a cartoon depicting Patel as a clear loser, but I wouldn’t use it as a standalone, and that’s a case of “My house, my rules.” Read the disclaimer.
This, however, strays into a political shift that makes me very uncomfortable. Much of the pre-trip commentary — including mine — was that Trump was gullible and overmatched, and I suppose it’s supportive of his administration to suggest some kind of rapprochement coming from the summit, but only die-hard loyalists seem to have seen it.
Bennett, for example, suggested the imbalance between Xi as powerful leader of a major world power and Trump as chiefly driven, not by realpolitik but by personal considerations. It’s a personal insult, but not one without a significant political anchor.
And given Xi’s direct statements about Taiwan and Trump’s vacillation on American support for Taiwan, Kelley’s take seems less like an opinion about ending division — that part is welcome — and more like an appeal to underplay China’s status as a world power with ambitions counter to our own.
(If nothing else, those on right embracing China should quit using “communist” as an insult.)
Shifting back to the left side, I generally agree with Cousineau, but the bombing of an elementary school was a tragic screw-up, apparently caused by outdated data, which is one reason you don’t start a war on a whim and start bombing immediately.
However, it wasn’t intentional and it’s fair to portray it as an example of our incompetence, but not as a deliberate tactic.
Bombing and then deliberately killing poor fishermen in the Caribbean and pretending they were smuggling fentanyl would be an intentional war crime. This wasn’t.
War really is hell, and the truth speaks for itself.
Juxtaposition of the Day
The final category is “Say what?,” a category for cartoons that suggest the cartoonist isn’t following the news. I frequently criticize Benson because she takes too loyal and simplistic a view of things, and I find little backup for her apparent claim that Iran is doomed to fall. They seem mighty resilient and far more so than our official channels report.
Branco, by contrast, doesn’t merit an answer, because DOGE is long gone and the notion that Trump is doing Jesus’s work and that Democrats are the source of all corruption is not just partisan. It’s nonsensical.
Yes, just my opinion. YMMV.
Here’s another opinion: I want to see this movie:
Mike Peterson has posted his "Comic Strip of the Day" column every day since 2010. His opinions are his own, but we welcome comments either agreeing or in opposition.
Comments 2