On one hand, sexism, transphobia, rolling back civil rights, overturning roe v wade, closing planned parenthoods, and sexual assault with little to no consequence.
On the other hand, pronouns! Ahhh! Make the scary pronouns go away!
Herblock visualized the nations politics until shortly before his death, clearly, simply, boldly. He practically lived at the Post. Thanks for remembering his style! I'm sure his ghost has left the building.
I actually think this comic is fairly insightful! It lists some unpopular policies that Democrats have in fact associated ourselves with. While "open borders" is an exaggeration, it's true that the Biden administration spent a few years not closing asylum loopholes. Not pushing back against identity politics and DEI where people are judged by their race. Not pulling back from overspending on stimulus like loan forgiveness when inflation was happening.
And even on defunding police where most elected Democrats didn't support it, quite a lot of other influential Dems did (including the "highest, most knowledgeable" folks you think so highly of), and it totally makes sense that the party as a whole gets judged when so many of us showed bad judgment.
If our reaction is to pooh-pooh the real issues at play, and insultingly dismiss Trump voters as ignorant, we're going to keep losing ground.
Exactly, it was a misunderstood term that got blown up (how unusual) by the right. What is going on is so ridiculous, as Judy says, blaming the one being gaslighted and abused! The Dems refuse to use those tactics, refuse to lie at every turn, refuse to serve harmful propaganda for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
I dunno, a zillion sign-waving Black Lives Matter protestors after George Floyd - maybe you remember that? Whoever persuaded your council members, as well as mine in Philly? Fully 43% of Minneapolis voters in a 2021 referendum? If you're like me, many of your personal family, friends, and neighbors? Reducing police funding had a lot of support!
It could have been explained better. They could have said: "Many jobs are better left to mental health providers." Or: "Fund other ways to deal with addicts and other disruptive people." It was not presented well. As for BLM, the lie was that our cities were destroyed by riots. Never happened. I saw the "Umbrella Man" breaking windows to do the damage that BLM never did.
And I remember the late 70s and early 80s in Philadelphia, under Frank Rizzo, where the police had carte blanche to do what they wanted to whomever they wanted. This culminated in the 1985 MOVE fiasco where the police dropped an incendiary bomb on a house and burnt down an entire neighborhood. That kind of policing definitely needs defunding.
It needs fixing, but wouldn't you expect high-quality policing to cost more money than low-quality policing? Like, for oversight, sufficient staffing, and retaining the best people? Police defunding has always been a bad idea that sounded good to too many Dems.
Still haven't answered who those "too many Dems" are/were? Considering 80% of House members of the party formerly known as Republican were against funding the police (Republican Study Committee Report) and the Biden administration through the American Rescue Plan, Violent Crime Reduction and Prevention Fund and Safer America Plan has, in fact, led to the hiring of more police officers and helped avoid drastic cuts to local law enforcement budgets, I suggest your finger is pointed in the wrong direction.
As I said originally, most elected Dems wisely ran away from defunders! (And yes, I'm well aware of the insanities of Republican budget proposals.) Ted reminded me that there were quite a few exceptions at the level of city government, however.
And electeds aside, my main point on police defunding is that it really has had a lot of vocal Democratic support. Like, Sasquatch is right up there in the thread. The cartoon is correct that it is a bad look for us as the party that wants to do good government.
I asked for names of the other influential Dems and you didn’t name any. No, none of my family and friends supported it, but none of them are influential anyway.
And what were those "real" issues at play? Other than a phoney "victimhood?" We're talking about pure emotion, not reason, inflamed by a career criminal and having less to do with the price of eggs than deep-seated fears and biases.
I think the sin was to say they are garbage or stupid. Many were ignorant if they did not know the facts. I do think that over years, some lies have been rooted in the media and grown to become facts. And few dared to say we need workers, or stimulus was not the same factor for inflation as was the lack of workers to harvest and process foods and even to build homes. All that money raised to elect Harris should have gone to information advertisements. It may have turned the tide. Likely we were due a new administration. It was a global trend.
Love Herblock! Miss that guy. I got to go to an entire exhibit about his cartooning. (Was it at the now defunct Newseum? I cannot recall).
Meanwhile, I'm not sure whether it makes me feel better or worse that the most-knowledgeable-about-the-news citizens voted the way I did. It's like one of those optical illusions, each time I think about it I have the opposite response. It inspired me to reflect on George Carlin's riff about stupid people: Imagine how stupid the average person is, and remember, half the people are stupider than that!
As a kid, my lower-middle-class family subscribed to TWO daily papers, the WaPo, which came in the morning and the Journal which was a PM paper and covered my suburban county. My mom had a word for people who did not subscribe to a newspaper. I can't remember what it was but it was not a compliment.
I proposed to Gene a Separated at Birth entry starring Michael Ramirez and Trump spokesphincter Steven Cheung. Apparently Gene didn't see fit to run it.
I was lucky enough to be at the Post when Herblock was there, and like you, I had grown up reading his cartoons, with similar effect. He was such a gentle man—hard to believe his work was so capable of well-deserved, priceless, ferocity.
I agree 100% about that cartoon. Could they not find a cartoonist on the right with some wit and insight, something that might actually make you stop and think, maybe even chuckle? Naw, let's just hit the joke home with a sledgehammer.
Interesting the variations among Romance languages when it comes to the pronunciation of the "r." Spanish and Italian trill or roll the "r," while French and Portuguese make an uvular or guttural "r" sound in back of the throat. Also variations in how the "r" is trilled, with Spanish and Italian keeping the tongue firmly vibrating on the roof of the mouth while Romanian requires only a light tap. Of course this rule of mouth will vary with various dialects
The traditional business model for newspapers died a long time ago. Most of the legacy papers just refused to accept it. Once it finally dawned on them (or their big bucks "saviors"), it was frantically throw pasta against the wall and hope some sticks. Along with the traditional business model, out (for the most part) went just about all other traditions of journalism. It became cliques and clicks.
The left needs to improve it’s messaging. The ivory tower, political junkie stuff isn’t working. The DNC needs to work with a marketing firm to come up with slogans that will reach regular people— slogans that are short, catchy and not preachy.
We have a bigger problem, which is that the media narrative is now 100% driven by right wing media -- even WaPo and NY times have suffered that role and are just chasing their narrative. Gene is right.
No, just more direct and at the heart of things people care about (I think Freedom is too vague). In this election people cared most about cost of living and, even though Dems would be better at fixing it, they couldn't get that message across. I agree that the media is giving way too much deference to outright liars in the name of balance.
I think if you review her and Walz's use of "freedom" during the campaign in their speeches and interviews you'll find they were almost always specific in defining it. Here's one example from the gov. "But when we Democrats talk about freedom, we mean the freedom to make a better life for yourself and the people that you love. Freedom to make your own health care decisions. And yeah, your kids’ freedom to go to school without worrying about being shot dead in the hall.” The message was there and in detail for the most part. A bunch of people just decided those freedoms were either not important (vis-à-vis the price of bologna) or couldn't possibly be pursued and moreover, enabled or protected, by a woman of color as a president.
On one hand, sexism, transphobia, rolling back civil rights, overturning roe v wade, closing planned parenthoods, and sexual assault with little to no consequence.
On the other hand, pronouns! Ahhh! Make the scary pronouns go away!
Widdershins is a galluptious word, preferable to the more technical levorotatory.
I have actually used widdershins previously, in college, when writing a parody on something or other. It should get more action.
I mentally use it whenever I go the opposite way around my walking loop (counterclockwise instead of clockwise).
I never before he’d any idea what it meant. Thanks Gene!
Herblock visualized the nations politics until shortly before his death, clearly, simply, boldly. He practically lived at the Post. Thanks for remembering his style! I'm sure his ghost has left the building.
I actually think this comic is fairly insightful! It lists some unpopular policies that Democrats have in fact associated ourselves with. While "open borders" is an exaggeration, it's true that the Biden administration spent a few years not closing asylum loopholes. Not pushing back against identity politics and DEI where people are judged by their race. Not pulling back from overspending on stimulus like loan forgiveness when inflation was happening.
And even on defunding police where most elected Democrats didn't support it, quite a lot of other influential Dems did (including the "highest, most knowledgeable" folks you think so highly of), and it totally makes sense that the party as a whole gets judged when so many of us showed bad judgment.
If our reaction is to pooh-pooh the real issues at play, and insultingly dismiss Trump voters as ignorant, we're going to keep losing ground.
Sorry, that cartoon is bs.
It’s the equivalent of saying to an abused spouse. “look what you made me do“. I’m not having it.
What are the names of the “other influential Dems” that supported defunding the police? I don’t recall any, just a few city council members.
Exactly, it was a misunderstood term that got blown up (how unusual) by the right. What is going on is so ridiculous, as Judy says, blaming the one being gaslighted and abused! The Dems refuse to use those tactics, refuse to lie at every turn, refuse to serve harmful propaganda for breakfast, lunch and dinner.
I dunno, a zillion sign-waving Black Lives Matter protestors after George Floyd - maybe you remember that? Whoever persuaded your council members, as well as mine in Philly? Fully 43% of Minneapolis voters in a 2021 referendum? If you're like me, many of your personal family, friends, and neighbors? Reducing police funding had a lot of support!
It could have been explained better. They could have said: "Many jobs are better left to mental health providers." Or: "Fund other ways to deal with addicts and other disruptive people." It was not presented well. As for BLM, the lie was that our cities were destroyed by riots. Never happened. I saw the "Umbrella Man" breaking windows to do the damage that BLM never did.
And I remember the late 70s and early 80s in Philadelphia, under Frank Rizzo, where the police had carte blanche to do what they wanted to whomever they wanted. This culminated in the 1985 MOVE fiasco where the police dropped an incendiary bomb on a house and burnt down an entire neighborhood. That kind of policing definitely needs defunding.
It needs fixing, but wouldn't you expect high-quality policing to cost more money than low-quality policing? Like, for oversight, sufficient staffing, and retaining the best people? Police defunding has always been a bad idea that sounded good to too many Dems.
Still haven't answered who those "too many Dems" are/were? Considering 80% of House members of the party formerly known as Republican were against funding the police (Republican Study Committee Report) and the Biden administration through the American Rescue Plan, Violent Crime Reduction and Prevention Fund and Safer America Plan has, in fact, led to the hiring of more police officers and helped avoid drastic cuts to local law enforcement budgets, I suggest your finger is pointed in the wrong direction.
As I said originally, most elected Dems wisely ran away from defunders! (And yes, I'm well aware of the insanities of Republican budget proposals.) Ted reminded me that there were quite a few exceptions at the level of city government, however.
And electeds aside, my main point on police defunding is that it really has had a lot of vocal Democratic support. Like, Sasquatch is right up there in the thread. The cartoon is correct that it is a bad look for us as the party that wants to do good government.
I asked for names of the other influential Dems and you didn’t name any. No, none of my family and friends supported it, but none of them are influential anyway.
I didn't intend to equate "influential" with "famous" - was thinking more like BLM leadership and such - but if we must: https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/26/politics/kfile-kamala-harris-praised-defund-the-police-movement-in-june-2020/index.html
Thank you for telling us who you are: one of the low information voters who were the Trump +19.
And what were those "real" issues at play? Other than a phoney "victimhood?" We're talking about pure emotion, not reason, inflamed by a career criminal and having less to do with the price of eggs than deep-seated fears and biases.
I think the sin was to say they are garbage or stupid. Many were ignorant if they did not know the facts. I do think that over years, some lies have been rooted in the media and grown to become facts. And few dared to say we need workers, or stimulus was not the same factor for inflation as was the lack of workers to harvest and process foods and even to build homes. All that money raised to elect Harris should have gone to information advertisements. It may have turned the tide. Likely we were due a new administration. It was a global trend.
Wow, would you enjoy my screaming rant about this very subject.
Love Herblock! Miss that guy. I got to go to an entire exhibit about his cartooning. (Was it at the now defunct Newseum? I cannot recall).
Meanwhile, I'm not sure whether it makes me feel better or worse that the most-knowledgeable-about-the-news citizens voted the way I did. It's like one of those optical illusions, each time I think about it I have the opposite response. It inspired me to reflect on George Carlin's riff about stupid people: Imagine how stupid the average person is, and remember, half the people are stupider than that!
As a kid, my lower-middle-class family subscribed to TWO daily papers, the WaPo, which came in the morning and the Journal which was a PM paper and covered my suburban county. My mom had a word for people who did not subscribe to a newspaper. I can't remember what it was but it was not a compliment.
I proposed to Gene a Separated at Birth entry starring Michael Ramirez and Trump spokesphincter Steven Cheung. Apparently Gene didn't see fit to run it.
I've spoken Spanish since I was 14 and still can't roll the 'r's"
THANK YOU
The resistance is alive and, well….
I have disliked Ramirez also, but today's (11/15) contribution has an apt title: Winner of our Discontent.
I was lucky enough to be at the Post when Herblock was there, and like you, I had grown up reading his cartoons, with similar effect. He was such a gentle man—hard to believe his work was so capable of well-deserved, priceless, ferocity.
I agree 100% about that cartoon. Could they not find a cartoonist on the right with some wit and insight, something that might actually make you stop and think, maybe even chuckle? Naw, let's just hit the joke home with a sledgehammer.
there would have to be one in existence first.
Interesting the variations among Romance languages when it comes to the pronunciation of the "r." Spanish and Italian trill or roll the "r," while French and Portuguese make an uvular or guttural "r" sound in back of the throat. Also variations in how the "r" is trilled, with Spanish and Italian keeping the tongue firmly vibrating on the roof of the mouth while Romanian requires only a light tap. Of course this rule of mouth will vary with various dialects
The traditional business model for newspapers died a long time ago. Most of the legacy papers just refused to accept it. Once it finally dawned on them (or their big bucks "saviors"), it was frantically throw pasta against the wall and hope some sticks. Along with the traditional business model, out (for the most part) went just about all other traditions of journalism. It became cliques and clicks.
Fortunately, I share an office with a native speaker of Spanish and he personally approved of my pronunciation.
I just have to double-up on my French half-rolled R’s.
The left needs to improve it’s messaging. The ivory tower, political junkie stuff isn’t working. The DNC needs to work with a marketing firm to come up with slogans that will reach regular people— slogans that are short, catchy and not preachy.
Harris got it right with "FREEDOM."
We have a bigger problem, which is that the media narrative is now 100% driven by right wing media -- even WaPo and NY times have suffered that role and are just chasing their narrative. Gene is right.
In other words, dumb it down.
No, just more direct and at the heart of things people care about (I think Freedom is too vague). In this election people cared most about cost of living and, even though Dems would be better at fixing it, they couldn't get that message across. I agree that the media is giving way too much deference to outright liars in the name of balance.
I think if you review her and Walz's use of "freedom" during the campaign in their speeches and interviews you'll find they were almost always specific in defining it. Here's one example from the gov. "But when we Democrats talk about freedom, we mean the freedom to make a better life for yourself and the people that you love. Freedom to make your own health care decisions. And yeah, your kids’ freedom to go to school without worrying about being shot dead in the hall.” The message was there and in detail for the most part. A bunch of people just decided those freedoms were either not important (vis-à-vis the price of bologna) or couldn't possibly be pursued and moreover, enabled or protected, by a woman of color as a president.
I'm open to reading a short, catchy slogan about fighting inflation.