|
I'm not seeing an "Israel is not an Apartheid state" anywhere in this cartoon. I would say that's kind of essential when the punchline is "Heh, Kerry is dumb and all Democrats are dumb  "
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 02:38
|
|
6
|
|
| # ? Jun 18, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
DarklyDreaming posted:I'm not seeing an "Israel is not an Apartheid state" anywhere in this cartoon. I would say that's kind of essential when the punchline is "Heh, Kerry is dumb and all Democrats are dumb allie-sotomayor-thats-racist.png
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 02:41
|
|
|
... and therefore we should kill them all? ... and therefore we should never leave? ... unlike us Americans who don't cause any problems ever? Is there a message coming out of this cartoon that I can't see? Because it seems like really angry pointless racism from here.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Remember, Arend van Dam is the uncomfortably racist Dutch guy. He's not even American.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 02:53
|
|
|
Soviet WWII partisan posters. The interesting part about these is that after the first few generic "for the Motherland, for Stalin" slogans, the artists involved figured out that REVENGE is a far better motivator for people in German occupied areas. Switching over to "You know what those fuckers did to you, your home and your family. Kill them!" worked quite well.          Everyone must learn to ski in order to  He who comes to us with a sword, will die by the sword.   On the nameless hill. ("The nameless hill" is one of the many WWII memes. There were a lot of nameless hills (and valley, and cliffs) that people fought and died for to give the enemy a pause. Endless minor repetitions of Hamburger hill, or whatever the French variant was). Xander77 fucked around with this message at 03:05 on May 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:03
|
|
|
It's a bit ambiguous on the frame, but it's really a  cartoon.
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:07
|
|
4
|
Argh, so many people are mischaracterizing the recent affirmative action decision. They're all mixing it up with the decision around a year ago that maimed the Voting Rights Act. Even Jon Stewart incorrectly said something about the Supreme Court saying that affirmative action is no longer necessary. The recent affirmative action decision said that it's not unconstitutional for voters in states to ban race-based affirmative action by their universities. The majority opinion's reasoning had nothing to do with whether racism is still a problem. I disagree with this decision, but its rationale is less extreme and very different from the recent Voting Rights Act decision.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:20
|
|
2
|
MoFauxHawk posted:Argh, so many people are mischaracterizing the recent affirmative action decision. They're all mixing it up with the decision around a year ago that maimed the Voting Rights Act. Even Jon Stewart incorrectly said something about the Supreme Court saying that affirmative action is no longer necessary. JGR took a swipe at SS's dissent on the grounds that race is only an issue because we keep bringing it up
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
A Good Cartoon. For once, Allie hit the nail on the goddamn head. Wait, I'm supposed to disapprove of something in this, right? Whether Kerry accidentally saying what he actually believed or the media actually reporting on it?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
Fried Chicken posted:JGR took a swipe at SS's dissent on the grounds that race is only an issue because we keep bringing it up I don't think this happened. Edit: Though I was a little hard on the cartoon. For some reason I guess I interpreted it as being in line with Jon Stewart's mischaracterization. It says "No need for affirmative action" and I interpreted as "No longer need affirmative action," which is what people keep mistakenly saying the recent opinion states. I still think it's not a good way to describe the court's decision though. MoFauxHawk fucked around with this message at 03:32 on May 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:29
|
|
|
MoFauxHawk posted:I don't think this happened. It was highly coded but he's referring to this passage: Grand Dragon John Roberts posted:To disagree with the dissent’s views on the costs and benefits of racial preferences is not to “wish away, rather than confront” racial inequality. People can disagree in good faith on this issue, but it similarly does more harm than good to question the openness and candor of those on either side of the debate. Which was a response to these lines from the dissent: Wise Latina Sonia Sotomayor posted:This refusal to accept the stark reality that race matters is regrettable. The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to speak openly and candidly on the subject of race, and to apply the Constitution with eyes open to the unfortunate effects of centuries of racial discrimination. So it's not quite as Fried Chicken characterized it, but I can't read it any way other than "The first rule of race is don't talk about race."
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:39
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:It was highly coded but he's referring to this passage: Sotomayor is responding to a famous comment Roberts made in 2007 saying that the way to end racial discrimation is to stop racially discriminating. She's replying to that in her dissent in this case, and then in his concurrence in the same case he's saying "I'm not saying don't talk about race or that racism isn't a problem, I'm saying I think affirmative action is harmful." It was a concurrence, not the majority, though, so it's not the Roberts Court saying it anyway. MoFauxHawk fucked around with this message at 03:48 on May 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Wasn't what he said was that with a one-state Israel would have to choose between becoming an apartheid state or no longer being a Jewish state per se? I mean, I know people are supposed to never say bad things about Israel ever even if they're true, but isn't that basically right? He didn't even directly call Israel out for its actual human rights abuses, which are, you know, an actual thing that brutalizes other human beings.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
What's the "we do" supposed to mean, anyways? "We the democrats do believe"? "We do mean to say that"?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Xander77 posted:What's the "we do" supposed to mean, anyways? "We the democrats do believe"? "We do mean to say that"? We mean to tell the people what the DUMBocrats really believe - this poo poo shoved into the mouth of a straw man in a political cartoon.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
Krinkle posted:We mean to tell the people what the DUMBocrats really believe - this poo poo shoved into the mouth of a straw man in a political cartoon. I thought that The Press was in the Demonocrats' pocket?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
Guilty Spork posted:Wasn't what he said was that with a one-state Israel would have to choose between becoming an apartheid state or no longer being a Jewish state per se? I mean, I know people are supposed to never say bad things about Israel ever even if they're true, but isn't that basically right? He didn't even directly call Israel out for its actual human rights abuses, which are, you know, an actual thing that brutalizes other human beings. John Kerry posted:A unitary state winds up either being an apartheid state with second-class citizens—or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel to be a Jewish state. I don't see how any reasonable person could object to this statement.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:09
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I thought that The Press was in the Demonocrats' pocket? Notice these pressmen aren't donkeys, that means you can trust them (maybe)
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:11
|
|
|
Republicans posted:I don't see how any reasonable person could object to this statement. I have isolated the problem.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:13
|
|
|
Somfin posted:I thought that The Press was in the Demonocrats' pocket? The idea isn't that the press is trying to expose the TRUTH about KERRY, or anything like that, I'm pretty sure. I think it's trying to say that, unlike Kerry, the media is too stupid to lie about what they believe.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
Guilty Spork posted:Wasn't what he said was that with a one-state Israel would have to choose between becoming an apartheid state or no longer being a Jewish state per se? I mean, I know people are supposed to never say bad things about Israel ever even if they're true, but isn't that basically right? He didn't even directly call Israel out for its actual human rights abuses, which are, you know, an actual thing that brutalizes other human beings. Kerry was making a bland, pretty agreeable statement about working for a two-state solution. He was saying if the talks only work towards maintaining a single-state situation, it would end in either an apartheid state or a Non-Jewish state. Two-state solution means that Israel and Palestine both get working, functional governments and can live without shooting at each other, but also recognize the authority the other has. He used the "A" word, so people are making a stink. Though, I've heard an awful lot of Israelis use "apartheid" to describe the mistreatment of Palestinians, so it's not like it hasn't been said to others before.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:30
|
|
|
Ok, the cartoon seems to be saying that the Vatican may be rushing to canonize JPII because he was very popular. I can follow that line of reasoning. But, I seriously don't get the punchline here. Why the hell would the Vatican be canonizing Penn and Teller? Why would the Vatican even have an opinion on Penn and Teller?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
 This isn't how diplomatic immunity works, Muir.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:
Will Muir ever tire of that loving commercial?
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
Republicans posted:I don't see how any reasonable person could object to this statement. Samurai Sanders fucked around with this message at 05:00 on May 1, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:02
|
|
|
Capfalcon posted:Ok, the cartoon seems to be saying that the Vatican may be rushing to canonize JPII because he was very popular. I can follow that line of reasoning. There is probably an unofficial mild dislike since Penn at least is a very loud and prominent atheist. The kind that flares up when he does some jerk atheist things instead of magic tricks.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:06
|
|
|
I'm willing to bet a Republican wouldn't you loving drunk.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
A... Good... Cartoon? 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:09
|
|
|
This is absolutely magical.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
Rack 'em, we're done here.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Two things. First, what is up with the duck's hair? Usually it's all spikey, today it looks like they brought in a new guy. Second, this is Bruce "Squirrel Appreciation Day" Tinsley. First, the premise of the cartoon is that simply being depicted in a cartoon is some form of torment. Second, Tinsley admits that he is subjecting Holder to that torment simply to make him complain. And third, Tinsley expects us to find Holder to be in the wrong, when he admits that what he is doing is tormenting Holder. Shoulda called it Mallard presents Race Baiting with Bruce Tinsley. Political Cartoons 2014: Mallard presents: Race Baiting with Bruce Tinsley.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:31
|
|
|
I think this beats "Wow, stuff happens!" as my cartoon of the year. Thanks, drinky duck.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:
Every time I see Zed wrangling his glasses or whatever the hell it is he's doing, I think of those commercials aimed at folks with no muscular coordination who cause their entire kitchen to collapse by placing a bowl in a cupboard or lacerate themselves with a tape measure. I expect to see Zed down on his rear end in the last panel with his glasses sticking out of his nose, exclaiming "
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
Tinsley will never top this please put it in the OP
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:46
|
|
|
Darkman Fanpage posted:
No no, see this is all leading up to a Benghazi joke. Just wait for it. He mentioned an embassy, all embassies are Benghazi. Benghazi.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:56
|
|
|
For a guy with that kind of money, Dom Deusex should really be able to get a suit jacket with sleeves tailored well enough to show an appropriate amount of cuff without looking like bellbottoms for the arms in the first panel. I was going to use this post to make some crack about Hugo Boss since I remembered something about them loving over American workers a while back, but googling it it looks like labor actually won that fight 
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
Shugojin posted:There is probably an unofficial mild dislike since Penn at least is a very loud and prominent atheist. The kind that flares up when he does some jerk atheist things instead of magic tricks. "
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 18, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
I was about to call you all idiots for not realizing that was an edit, then I checked to make sure. Tinsley rules.
|
|
#
?
May 1, 2014 06:04
|
|
