In case you hadn’t heard, John Auchter reminds us that there is an election coming up, and he provides a summary of what is at stake. As Mose Allison explained, “All I want is plenty, but I will take more.”
Maybe we should swap that out to replace “E Pluribus Unam,” given that we’re a long way from one, while “In God We Trust” just adds to the lack of unam around here.
Tom the Dancing Bug points out the way our failed attempts at civil rights and equality have brought about the principles and traditions that made this country what it is today, whatever that is.
Bolling breaks character somewhat in the last panel, which is unusual for him but necessary in this case in order to make the point that the first five were sarcasm.
George S. Kaufman said “Satire is what closes on Saturday night,” and in checking the quote I came across this well-written essay on the topic, which is a decade old but makes the eternally true point that there is no parody so clearly stated that it won’t be misinterpreted.
In this case, when you get to that final panel, you need to re-read the rest to see how Bolling sets up his argument, unless you’re already either so furious or so much in agreement with him that the final panel slips past you.
Things are spinning so fast now that it’s hard to tell the intentional jokes from the sincere, foolish statements. Having some nitwit mistake Gonzaga’s basketball team for a busload of illegal aliens is funny until you realize that the nitwit is a member of the Michigan legislature and empowered to use his tiny little brain to make laws.
And then another Michigan legislator, this one a federal representative, declares that the problems in Gaza and Ukraine should be solved the way we settled things in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, after which he tries to back off his lunatic proposal by saying he was simply using a metaphor.
As in, “This guy is a bigger moron than I had ever metaphor.”
There is some hope, though kind of backhanded. Drew Sheneman notes the number of politicians and staffers who are choosing early retirement, and I’m particularly pleased that he uses the “rats leaving a sinking ship” metaphor properly: They are safely getting off dockside, knowing that the vessel is doomed.
The backhanded aspect being the possibility that, if all the sane people leave the GOP, it will become so appallingly toxic that nobody will support it anymore.
Which, if you look around, you’ll realize is overly optimistic, but we can at least hope that, as the party becomes more pure in its extremism, it will no longer command a majority.
Rob Rogers explains how this all works: The extremists have no coherent platform — haven’t bothered to write one in years — but they give clear indications of their intentions, with the expectations that 52% of voters will be pleased to lose their rights.
Depicting the Republican Party as an elephant goes back 150 years, so it’s hard to imagine anyone misconstruing even a personified, satiric depiction, but if you think people are only fools one day a year, you haven’t been paying attention.
Ann Telnaes spells it out more plainly, and it would be impossible for anyone to misinterpret her warning.
Well, assuming they have been following the news, recognize at least Thomas if not Alito, and realize the two invoked the Comstock Act repeatedly during the hearing of the mifepristone case.
As that linked article explains:
So much for states’ rights. Meanwhile, Thomas is already eyeing the potential for outlawing same-sex relationships and contraception:
Neither Rogers nor Telnaes are joking or inventing threats. They’re simply reporting, with a touch of satire but a basis in pure truth.
Mike Luckovich is counting on the Greatest Generation, but there were more of them June 6, 1944 than there will be come November 5. They’re no longer a majority, nor much in charge of anything.
Somebody else is gonna have to stand beside them.
We need Gen Z and their compatriots, X and Millennials, but, as Morten Morland points out, the horrors of Gaza and the back-and-forth between Biden and Netanyahu are a genuine fly in the ointment.
The war popped up at a time when it can’t help but interfere with our upcoming election, just as, in the 1980 elections, the Iran hostage crisis became a factor beyond its overall importance, handing Reagan the win and sparking conspiracy theories that would be absurd if we didn’t also know that Nixon had intervened to destroy LBJ’s peace efforts in 1968.
Let’s be clear: There’s nothing wrong with holding Biden accountable for arming Israel while it is killing 32,000 civilians, even if the deaths are retaliation for an appalling, barbaric Hamas raid.
But it’s critical to consider that established treaties may back a country into that kind of contradictory situation, though it’s fair to demand more transparency than we’ve had until recent events.
As Cathy Wilcox points out, our abstention in the UN vote seems like a less-than-clarion call for peace and justice. You may have to read the father’s explanation more than once for it to make sense.
Then whether or not it does make sense is up to you.
You also, to be fair, have to keep up with current events to know where things stand. The Biden administration has become more forceful in calling for at least a temporary ceasefire, return of the hostages and new elections in Israel.
It may be couched in diplomatic language rather than shouted from rooftops, but in that world there is little difference except, as Kal Kallaugher suggests, whether or not Netanyahu responds and how people in both Israel and the US follow developments.
The Iran hostages were freed the day Reagan was inaugurated, but not every crisis can be resolved by electing the opposition: Half the names on the Wall belong to Richard Nixon.
It’s important to distinguish between a tie-breaker and a deal-breaker: Do you feel the only difference between Biden and Trump is Gaza?
Do what you’ve got to do. As Pat Bagley reminds us, it’s important in fraught times to elect people with expertise to guide us through the danger.
Thank you. Your article serves as a great reminder that not only do some people get their politics from cartoons, but some political views have all of the depth of a cartoon.
We need to change the narrative around Netanyahu.
Prior to October 7th he was facing constant protests over his attempts to effectively dismantle the Israeli Supreme Court. Within that framework members of his cabinet were calling for the busting of the protesters’ heads.
Then October 7th happened and afterwards certain things came to light. Like the movement of troops from the Gaza Border to the West Bank. Like an international blind eye turned toward years of money moving from Qatar to Gaza. It was hampered briefly when he was out of power but resumed when he returned.
Now Israelis are protesting in the streets again over the lack of movement on the hostage situation. And Bibi has ministers who want to break their heads.
So what’s the narrative we need to take away? Simply this: Bibi is what you get when a leader’s top priority is avoiding legal jeopardy. Do we have someone in the US looking to do the same?
Yes. Yes we do.
Read “intentional blind eye” for international blind eye above.
Well, that works, too.
All this insanity reminds me of (yes, I’m that old) a bumper sticker:
“Nuke the gay Iranian whales”
Then, as now, it sums up the idiocy well.
“Gotta nuke somethin’.” – Nelson Muntz
and Trump knows more about modesty than probably anyone ever