another round of TERRIBLE POLITICAL CARTOONS

[Crossroads Inc.]

ITS THAT TIME AGAIN!
















And just to finish things.. One more from Michael Ramirez Who has drawn his EIGHT "Obama is stupid on Afghanistan" Cartoon in the past month

[Duckie]

... wh... wh? wh?

did they just compare FOX news getting jibed at and Rush Limbaugh not being allowed to buy into a private company that is not obligated to accept his money as the equivalent of segregation and persecution of blacks in the early 60s?

I am not being facetious and underscoring the point here, my mind is literally rebelling that anyone could ever think that comparision is valid. It's so wrong you can't even make a joke about it because jokes have to have an element of reality to combine with the absurd.

[Darksider]

and then there's the (not so) subtle racism of Obama laying in bed smoking with four white chicks.

[Instant Sunrise]

Crossroads, you forgot the capstone of this talking point, Mike Lester:



I'm going to go ahead and hook up a generator to the grave of Thomas Nast.

[Terralthra]

I think my favorite part is in the fox-hunt one, the fox is actually labeled "FOX." Says something about how far down the lowest common denominator in the target audience is.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

I think my favorite part is in the fox-hunt one, the fox is actually labeled "FOX." Says something about how far down the lowest common denominator in the target audience is.

The "68,000 reasons" one I thought was even crazier because the artist put "68,000 U.S. troops" directly above that part of the caption just in case it wasn't clear enough. At least redundant labels plastered on obvious symbolic objects is traditional in political cartoons.

[Ritterin Sophia]

I know that in political cartoons you embellish features, but I know Soldiers who weigh 125 lbs and fill out their kit better than that.

[Johonebesus]

Crossroads, you forgot the capstone of this talking point, Mike Lester:

[cartoon]

I'm going to go ahead and hook up a generator to the grave of Thomas Nast.

I don't even get that one.

[Instant Sunrise]

It's a reference to this Norman Rockwell painting:



Only instead of a child having to be escorted to and from class by US Marshals because people were threatening to poison her. It's about a radio host's bid to buy ownership rights of a private organization rejected.

The two scenarios are completely and totally the same.

[Crossroads Inc.]

The worst part about it is that he even screws up the message.. His "Cartoon" has the people around Rush labeled as "NFL" "Liberal Medial" and my favorite... "TRUE" Racisits" which all allude that their badguys.. in Normans original and Iconic pic, the people around the girl are National guard, PROTECTING and escorting her to school.
So its a Double Fail really.

[Johonebesus]

Ah, I wasn't familiar with the original painting.

[wautd]

I love how the FOX on the fox hunt comic has FOX written on it as well. Thank you Captain Obvious!

edit: already mentioned I see

edit2: so that's what political cartoons look like if one starts to believe their own propaganda. Since when are polar bear populations rising?

[The Spartan]

edit2: so that's what political cartoons look like if one starts to believe their own propaganda. Since when are polar bear populations rising?

Some people claim that polar bear populations have doubled since the 1960's. Technically that's true, but it's only half the truth. They do have twice the population, but only because we stopped hunting them into extinction and rebounded. The decline in population that has us worried is much more recent. Further, there's been a sudden decline in sea ice, which greatly reduces their habitat and hunting grounds.

From here:

Today's polar bears are facing the rapid loss of the sea-ice habitat that they rely on to hunt, breed, and, in some cases, to den. Last summer alone, the melt-off in the Arctic was equal to the size of Alaska, Texas, and the state of Washington combined—a shrinkage that was not predicted to happen until 2040. The loss of Arctic sea ice has resulted in a shorter hunting season for the bears, which has led to a scientifically documented decline in the best-studied population, Western Hudson Bay, and predictions of decline in the second best-studied population, the Southern Beaufort Sea.

Both populations are considered representative of what will likely occur in other polar bear populations should these warming trends continue. The Western Hudson Bay population has dropped by 22% since 1987. The Southern Beaufort Sea bears are showing the same signs of stress the Western Hudson Bay bears did before they crashed, including smaller adults and fewer yearling bears.

At the most recent meeting of the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group (Copenhagen, 2009), scientists reported that of the 19 subpopulations of polar bears, eight are declining, three are stable, one is increasing, and seven have insufficient data on which to base a decision. (The number of declining populations has increased from five at the group's 2005 meeting.)

Some members of the press take advantage of the complexity by stating that "polar bears are not in trouble—their numbers have doubled since the 1960s." That's a disingenuous statement, of course. It is true that polar bear populations rebounded after over-hunting was restricted, but that situation has nothing to do with the threat polar bears now face: the loss of the sea ice habitat essential to their survival.

Short version: the people who say that the polar bears are okay are just being dishonest couch fuckers. Or are grossly ignorant of what's going on...

[PeZook]

Short version: the people who say that the polar bears are okay are just being dishonest couch fuckers. Or are grossly ignorant of what's going on...

They're probably just utter simpletons, to be honest. People like them downgrade every complicated issue into talking point. It happens everywhere, from the health care debate through global warming, the swine flu virus and down to current technology and science (LHC WILL CREATE BLACK HOLES WERE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE OMG).

So they see one figure, they smile under their noses, think "I ur so smrt ha ha stoopid liberals don't knw bears r fine!" and proceed to draw a cartoon, totally smug and satisfied that they have everything figured out.

[Crossroads Inc.]

I'd like to present two WTF cartoons:




And this I mean, whats even being said here? Obama is running for president, again? WTF?

[Thanas]

I also love him giving the hitler salute. Real subtle there.

[Crossroads Inc.]

Thats Eric Allie for you, go through his "cartoons" virtually Every Obama he draws looks exactly the same.







Notice a trend?

[Ritterin Sophia]

He likes to draw Obama like a snob when Obama is a Star Wars Nerd and his wife looks on like 'OMG what am I gonna do with you b HUSSEIN?"

[Darmalus]

He likes to draw Obama like a snob when Obama is a Star Wars Nerd and his wife looks on like 'OMG what am I gonna do with you b HUSSEIN?"

I'm sorry, is there a reference I missed that makes this make sense?

[Executor32]

He's referring to this picture:

[PeZook]

You know, I am still confused by Lester's picture. How does it work? Is Rush the good guy or the bad guy? Do the liberal media, NFL and True Racists (:D) protect him from people viciously screaming "CONSERVATIVE!" at him? Shouldn't they be the ones beating him up?

What the fuck?

Also, I see there are lots of terrible cartoons advancing the conservative agenda ; I wonder if the liberal side has any terrible cartoonists? It may be eye-opening to compare the amounts and styles,seeing as the recent "scary quotes" thread duo seems to point to the fact that conservatives are, in fact, crazier and scarier than liberals.

[The Spartan]

They're probably just utter simpletons, to be honest. People like them downgrade every complicated issue into talking point. It happens everywhere, from the health care debate through global warming, the swine flu virus and down to current technology and science (LHC WILL CREATE BLACK HOLES WERE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE OMG).

So they see one figure, they smile under their noses, think "I ur so smrt ha ha stoopid liberals don't knw bears r fine!" and proceed to draw a cartoon, totally smug and satisfied that they have everything figured out.

That may be true for the sheeple in most other cases, but the big wigs, Limbaugh as an example who I wouldn't trust on the environment if he said the sky was blue, spread this because they're dishonest little fuckwits. The sheeple on the other hand aren't going to take the time to look up information on this, i.e. do 30 seconds of Googling, and verify or investigate the information.

I also love him giving the hitler salute. Real subtle there.

That may just be a bad angle on the picture and he's just waving. Or meant to be as such. Most of these guys tend towards the Communist angle.

Of course, you could be right...

[Thanas]

I also love him giving the hitler salute. Real subtle there.

That may just be a bad angle on the picture and he's just waving. Or meant to be as such. Most of these guys tend towards the Communist angle.

Of course, you could be right...

It may, but the picture is certainly ambigous enough. Usually, if someone is waving, he does not raise his hand so far over his head, at least not without bending at the elbow. I am sure if someone were of the opinion Obama was a fascist, he would recognize it as such.

[The Spartan]

Oh, I see what you're saying, but what it was that made me think that it's not meant as a Nazi salute is that his fingers are splayed open. A Nazi salute would have had his fingers all together.

[Isolder74]

It's more of a fencing pose really....