The Giffords Shooting, as Only a Pulitzer Prize-winning Cartoonist Could Render it

It's not that we need more proof that editorial cartooning (with the exception of Reason.com's BokPayne, and Stantis) is the lowest of all art forms, but here you go, a week's worth of doodling by the Arizona Republic's Steve Benson, who is, of course, a Pulitzer Prize winner.

On January 9, the day after the horrifying violence in Tucson, Benson crafted a totally typical (read: uninteresting and instantly forgettable) image. Look, it's an old man (Barry Goldwater? No, can't be due to the 'stache and lack of trademark glasses) who's sad.

By Monday, January 10, the specious connection among rhetoric, the Tea Party, and Jared Loughner was hardening into conventional wisdom among the commentariat (though not the American people), sort of like the way that a crunchy gordita from Taco Bell hardens in your large intestine within an hour of consumption. So let's go with that. Don't you see that violence is a gun and rhetoric the trigger? Or, actually, rhetoric is the finger on the trigger. An itchy finger, I bet. And the bullet? What's the bullet? Mental illness? Well...this thing is already getting more complicated than a Yoko Ono word-painting.

On January 11, as we learn that Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is showing signs of response in the hospital, Benson thankfully makes sure that we won't mistake who's in the bed:

 

Is he going for another Pulitzer? A poignant January 12 image is rendered in anticipation of Obama's well-received address to the nation from University of Arizona, though the hugging eagle seems a bit awkward, if only because it's not clear if he is looking at the viewer or down the back of the personification of Arizona. Either way, something ain't right:

Then there's January 13, when the president himself had said that political rhetoric had nothing to do with the shooting. It's as good a time as any to take a shot at Sarah Palin, whose own statement on the shootings impressed no one outside of her own family (and even then, I'm betting the vote was split). Beyond the grotesque, dehumanizing imagery, note the helpful tags in the lower-third of the cartoon. Jeez, if it wasn't labeled, I would have guessed that the state outlined there was Arizona or that the Rep. Giffords was from there. It's a good thing that the shooting didn't take place in New Mexico, I guess, because then Palin's image would have been like totally in the way:

January 14 seems like a good time for Benson to drive back to the high road. The amazing thing here is Benson's generous reading of our intelligence by not slapping on a "Giffords" tag somewhere in the pic:

Then there's January 16's offering, which completes the cycle of cliche, sadness, recrimination, cliche, sadness, recrimination by imploring all of us to stop yelling at each other. But we should still keep drawing people as cyborg-like gun-ladies of course because free speech is really important, especially when it's directed at hate-mongers who are really deep-down responsible for the actions of a insane lone gunman who had no connections whatsoever to them. 

In this set of images, I think we get a good sense of how the media will memorialize the Tucson shooting and reference it in the future (indeed, Frank Rich is already traveling back in time to argue that point). That is to say, the rush to judgment that Tea Party/Sarah Palin/redneck rage was the root cause of it all regardless of any evidence in support of that thesis will stand. Because we should never forget that all the violence that was predicted by everybody with a brain back during the summer of 2009 (read: supporters of health-care reform) that never came to pass was really just the tinder for the current moment, when political violence remains thankfully shockingly rare and not even politically motivated when it does come to pass. Which isn't any reason not to marginalize anybody who disagrees with you on political issues.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • waffles||

    Hahaha! Wow! Best Friday Funnies ever!

    It's Monday!? Oh, um, err...back to work.

  • Suki||

    +1 good evening waffles.

  • Funnier Than The Comic||

    Is he going for another Pulitzer? A poignant January 12 image is rendered in anticipation of 0bama's well-received address to the nation from University of Arizona, though the hugging eagle seems a bit awkward, if only because it's not clear if he is looking at the viewer or down the back of the personification of Arizona. Either way, something ain't right:

    "What the effin' crap? That angel guy just felt me up!"

  • ||

    ...would I be responsible for any future complications in Giffords' surgery if I admitted my first response to the eagle-hug was that that it looked sexual and a bit disturbing?

  • JB||

    This stupid cartoonist and the rest of the stupid media reaction really makes me angry.

    Thankfully the result of all their hot air? More people buying guns.

    And I really doubt it's the "guns scare my vagina" Left buying them.

    Something these fools should think about every time they lie and blather.

  • ||

    " the "guns scare my vagina" Left"

    I'll have to remember that phrase.

    Maybe someone needs to put it on a t-shirt...

  • ||

    Real vaginas aren't afraid of guns.


    (it's giving me the spell-check warning. Is there a plural of vagina I don't know about? Vaginae maybe?)

  • Joe M||

    It's not that we need more proof that editorial cartooning (with the exception of Reason.com's Bok, Payne, and Stantis)

    FIFY

    Come on... someone had to do it.

  • cynical||

    If you didn't, I was going to.

  • -||

    editorial cartooning is the lowest of all art forms

    Not when it's done well.

  • Mike G||

    Name one.

  • CalebT||

    George Carlin: "I know what you're saying, 'He's not going to attack the fucking children, is he?' Yes, he is!"

  • ||

    A shame that someone with his drawing skillz has such a drearily conventional outlook.

  • ||

    His drawing skills are equally conventional, RC.

  • ||

    Compared to Toles and too many others of his ilk, he's freakin' Michaelangelo.

  • kinnath||

    I have vague memories of Benson being pretty sharp-witted in the late 80's when I lived in Phoenix. But he's an old man now (3 years older than me). And old men either get cynical (and post under assumed names on political websites) or get maudlin (and draw pictures of crying cowboys).

  • Jeffersonian||

    You shoulda seen the house artist of the Pulitzer flagship - the St. Louis Post-Dispatch - back in the 1980s and 1990s, Tom Englehardt. Any time anyone threatened to cut a dime out of a government budget at any level (other than from defense), Englehardt would stuff him into a Klan sheet faster than you could say "good government."

    Small wonder the Pulitzer Prize went to this hack.

  • mr simple||

    That eagle looks like it's getting a little handsy. Is that Bill Clinton in that eagle suit?

  • William||

    I hear you, and I feel your pain.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    That's great Willie, but my pain isn't down there, so move your hands.

  • Hillary||

    WillIAM!!! WILLIAM HARCOURT FENTON MUDD CLINTON!!! YOU GET YOUR HANDS OFF THAT RIGHT THIS INSTANT!!!!!!!

  • Joe M||

    Shut up, Hillary!

  • Bill||

    You'll wanna put some ice on that.

  • ||

    Maybe some Neo-Sporin, too.

  • Ice Nine||

    >>That eagle looks like it's getting a little handsy.

    I think there is considerably more going on between them on the front sides - which is
    excellent political commentary if you ask me.

  • ||

    I can't tell you how many times I read a news story and my first thought is, "I wonder what a political cartoonist thinks about this?"

  • Brett L||

    I can. Zero.

  • Au H20||

    I believe that one of the requirements of the position is that one does not think.

  • ||

    Your comments sadden editorial cartoonists, and as a burgeoning editorial cartoonist I have drawn a .

  • ||

    I said I was a burgeoning cartoonist, not a burgeoning html programmer. Anyway, here is my original, thought-provoking cartoon to illustrate the sadness I referenced above.

  • Kolohe||

    You got the labeling thing down cold.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Hey, Bok... you'd best look for another gig. ClubMedSux is gunning* for your job.


    * No, that phrase is NOT a sign of potential violence, Frank Rich, so go fuck yourself in advance.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Very nice

  • Captain Obvious||

    HTML is not programming... It's a markup language.

  • Michael||

    I must say, that's a Pulitzer worthy .

  • Joe M||

    Actually, your comment reminded me of that old Atari game Adventure.

  • Jeff||

    You shouldn't feel that Benson is insulting your intelligence. You're not his intended audience; their intelligence is impossible to insult.

  • Bucky||

    +10

  • ||

    Look, it's an old man (Barry Goldwater? No, can't be due to the 'stache and lack of trademark glasses) who's sad.

    The Statue of Liberty's agent wanted too much money.

  • Spur||

    I can't wait to see his 'toon showing one of the shooting victims getting 5150'd for threatening folks at a tea party rally...

  • ||

    The amazing thing here is Benson's generous reading of our intelligence by not slapping on a "Giffords" tag somewhere in the pic:

    What makes you think that's Giffords?

    That's America.

    ON LIFE SUPPORT!!!111!!!!

  • Sal Paradise||

    Those editorial cartoons, so subtle and nuanced.

  • Spiny Norman||

    Well, at least he's not David Horsey.

  • Almanian||

    I like the subtlety

  • ||

    It's amazing how much groupthink these schmucks engage in. I mean, some of their cartoons are almost duplicates.

  • Rather ||

    Reason is free of groupthink, right!

  • OO||

    o hai! luv ur blog!

  • Rather ||

    You're in good company:
    Referrer Views
    reason.com 1,284

  • Trespassers W||

    You know who also got lots of page views?

    Hint #1: Not Hitler, that's ridiculous.

    Hint #2: It's goatse.

  • Rather||

    I'm proud to say I had to google the words unlike someone who has intimate knowledge of the site. How man hits were yours?

  • omg||

    I'm proud to say I had to google the words unlike someone who has intimate knowledge of the site.

    May I also suggest googling "tubgirl"?

    How man hits were yours?

    Freudian slip?

  • Cyto||

    Hard to believe that the web has been around long enough for goatse to be an "old timer's" tale. And for "Rather" - goatse predates hit&run; by quite a bit. It was the "Rickroll" when the internet was for 20-something year old male nerds.

  • Rather||

    My Daddy used to call me tubgirl.

    Read my blog.

  • fuck off||

    heller. Have you done your poll yet?
    http://rctlfy.wordpress.com/2011/01/10/1857/

  • Rather||

    Wow, I am soooooo deluding myself if I really think that heller is EVER going to click on my blog.

  • ||

    You should get a Pulitzer for that sock puppetry.

  • cynical||

    You know, they got on the cover of Time once.

  • fuck off||

    my little bitch Helle hits my blog everyday

  • Rather||

    The above comment is a fantasy of mine.

    Read my blog.

  • fuck off||

    Helle, I don't you I am not into playing pull the test tubes and dead mice out of your ass! See if Epi is available!

  • fuck off||

    Helle, I don't you I am not into playing pull the test tubes and dead mice out of your ass! See if Epi is available!

  • Rather||

    Don't mind my incoherent babble, I'm on my Hillary Revolution.

  • oncogenesis||

    That second one was obviously drawn by someone who has never been inside a gun shop.

  • robc||

    "Sonny" is unsafe, with his finger on the trigger and all.

  • ||

    Say what you want about his art, but the dude makes a damn fine horseradish-flavored sauce.

  • WasabiPeas||

    Hey, that gun shop clerk is Kissinger

  • Knutsack||

    Horsey? More like ass, if you know what I'm sayin'.

    Why am I not a editorial cartoonist?

  • Brian Sorgatz||

    ...sort of like the way that a crunchy gordita from Taco Bell hardens in your large intestine within an hour of consumption.

    Hey, what do you expect from the Mexican phone company?

  • Suki||

    Don't diss the crunchy gordita from Taco Bell!

  • mr simple||

    In another take, the limeys at the Economist think that freedom is to blame for the shootings and prescribe "sensible gun laws."

  • mr simple||

    I blame the server. Link:
    http://www.economist.com/node/17902699

  • Joe M||

    It is clearly true that American politics have got a lot nastier in recent years.

    Uh, no it isn't.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Neither of these will happen, though, unless the blame is directed to where it belongs.

    Tru dat Economist, tru dat. Fortunately, the individual to blame is already in jail and well on his way to serving a life sentence. So problem solved.

  • Brian Sorgatz||

    Luckily for the rest of us, homicidal maniacs respect the law.

  • ||

    + 100

  • Au H20||

    I mean, they're British. They have a thing about guns.

    Do I agree with it? No. But foreign publications that come from countries where gun control laws are strict and guns are seen as rare and especially dangerous supporting stricter gun control laws? Not very surprising.

  • ||

    Thing is, they just don't get why we insist on having guns in this country. It's because of them. We don't want to be owned by someone else. That is why we insist on having our inherent right of self defense at all times. If they don't get that by now, they'll never get it.

  • any random progressive nutbag||

    FREEDOM IS SLAVERY!!!ONE!11WON!

  • Michael Ejercito||

    And yet the government refuses to disarm despite its abuse of guns.

    Has the Economist ever wondered how Chicago practiced gun control ?

  • ||

    The violence/rhetoric cartoon might have made sense if he'd labeled them the other way around.

    Violence isn't a gun. Violence is the hand that pulls the trigger.

    No really.

  • paloma||

    And you'd think someone would maybe want to look up the original use of the word "rhetoric"?

  • Bucky||

    is that a rhetorical question?

  • ||

    If anybody knows what qualifies as "sensible" gun laws, it's the Limeys.

    ps- you SFed your link.

  • alan||

    I have a dream that Muslims take over that country because they chose not to defend themselves and are quite proud of it. No really, I am not fear mongering the Muslim hoard, I would really like to see them enslave the English.

    Whatever else you may say about them they have not slipped into the decadence of a people who think self defense is antiquated, so by the very laws of nature dominion over the English, a Bottom if there ever was one, should be theirs to butt fuck to their heart's content.

  • ||

    Not sure they ever believed it was "antiquated." My impression is that the ruling classes traditionally did not trust peasants with guns, and the peasants traditionally did not trust police with guns.

  • ||

    The Turkish prison scene in Lawrence of Arabia leads me to believe it would be consensual, so I wish them the best.

  • Almanian||

    I have a dream, that someone will start writing about the TSA again.

    ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  • affenkopf||

  • ||

    The "editorial cartoonist is now sad" part is fucking awesome.

  • ||

    I thought you were going to go with this.

  • Ziggy||

    My wife is a whore.

  • Rather ||

    Congratulations and stop trying to make these guys jealous

  • Rather||

    Because you're making me so wet.

    Daddy.

    Read my blog.

  • fuck off ||

    heller

  • Rather||

    ooooooooooh yes Daddy fuck me off...

    Read my blog.

  • fuck off||

    helle

  • Rather||

    *yawn*

  • ||

    In keeping with the apparent "theme" of this morning's posts, I ask:

    How many American lives would be saved if we disarmed the police?

  • cynical||

    That Sarah Palin drawing really creeps me the fuck out. Guy's got a knack for horror, I'll grant him that.

  • The Ghost of Mao Tse-tung||

    Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.

  • Invisible Finger||

    A gun barrel? I thought it was a tracheotomy.

  • ||

    Mao was the first editorial cartoonist?

  • fuck off ||

    Did all 4 of your mommies' tits feed you?

  • Rather||

    My sexual insecurities with my father make me lash out at others.

    Teehee.

    Read my blog.

  • Helle||

    sucking on my mothers' four tits has made me fixated on women. Mommies, I cant find a girl with 4 tits!!!!

  • Rather||

    Oooh nice try. Less imitation of my spoofing style, more original thought. I know you can do it!

  • Rather||

    But I am flattered.

  • fuck off Helle||

    You're flattered? You're a fucking stalker! You're flattered when I take a shit.

  • Rather||

    Woops, I forgot to do my Hooked on Phonics today. Reading comprehension ain't my strongsuit. BTW, you can see my shits on tubgirl.com

  • Bucky||

    i didn't think of Palin
    i thought it was Pelosi...

  • Old Mexican||

    The Giffords Shooting, as Only a Pulitzer Prize-winning Cartoonist Could Render it[.]




    Ah. If Walter Duranty could win a Pulitzer, then....

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    As we speak, I am doodling a Friday Funnies cartoon about the state of affairs in the current headlines. Picture, if you will, a nondescript, nonhirsute individual with the label "Reason Contributor" under him, standing over a piece of paper labeled "Hit & Run Post". But here's the kicker: His mouth is a pen and he's actually signing his name to his post. And then Cash4Clunkers happens.

  • ||

    a nondescript, nonhirsute individual with the label "Reason Contributor" under him

    If you're going to draw him as non-descript and non-hirsute, then its a good thing you're going to put a label on him.

    We all know the trolls are morbidly obese with an encycopedic array of skin conditions, while the regulars are tanned and muscular, with strong jaws and piercing eyes. A "non-descript" H&R commenter is almost a non-sequitur, except as an average of the two types.

  • Rather ||

    RC Dean it is a scientific fact that Reason regulars have moobs and as to whether they have pieced their tits I cannot say.

  • BakedPenguin||

    ...whether they have pieced their tits I cannot say.

    Regardez en bas.

  • Rather ||

    Quoi?

  • BakedPenguin||

    Enlevez votre blouse et regardez. Vous êtes un habitué, n'est pas?

  • Rather||

    lol

  • Rather||

    If you want to learn how to say "Daddy fill me up!" in French, read my blog!

  • fuck off ||

    heller

  • Rather||

    Not me, dumb schizo bitch.

  • fuck off||

    bitch get down on your well-worn knees and STFU-it's you till I say it isn't.

  • Rather||

    ^ again, delusional thought most likely brought on by trauma from being sexually abused by Daddy.

    I'm an angry little schizo, teehee.

    Read my blog.

  • fuck off heller the||

    ^ delusional stalker who follows me around ALL DAY and then pretends to NEVER come to my blog. lol

  • Rather||

    Paranoid schizophrenics often invent elaborate conspiracy theories, such as a stalker who follows her every word, even on the internet. I'm sorry everyone.

  • Spoonman.||

    I'm pretty sure I qualify as a non-descript H&R commenter. Sometimes it feels like my posts are invisible.

  • rather||

    trade places?

  • Number 2||

    "Then there's January 13, when the president himself had said that political rhetoric had nothing to do with the shooting."

    Maybe I am cynical, but isn't just possible that the Chicago pols in the Obama White House "suggested" the right-wing-rhetoric storyline to its allies in the press, only so that Obama could posture himself as "Presidential," "reasonable," and "middle of the road" by later denying that political rhetoric had anything to do with the shooting?

  • cynical||

    That also means he set them up to look like asses to people outside of their clique. Which makes it even better, if it's true.

  • BakedPenguin||

    While I wouldn't put it past the WH, I don't think the trained seals in the press need to be thrown a fish to stay "on message."

  • conspirator||

  • Joe M||

    I wondered that myself. It would be the zenith of sickening political calculation, which makes it at least possible.

  • Rather ||

    My blog inspired by this thread
    http://rctlfy.wordpress.com/20.....dquarters/

  • Rather||

    Did someone call for The BlogWhore?

    Cuz here I am!

  • Cyto||

    They have run that play several times, to pretty good effect. As a bonus, they get to harp on the R's for being partisan when they engage the debate - since the Potus had the grace to be "above politics".

  • Old Mexican||

    In this set of images, I think we get a good sense of how the media will memorialize the Tucson shooting and reference it in the futur[.]

    I remember a cartoon that depicted the firefighter holding the body of a baby, after rescuing it from the building blown up in Oklahoma City, with captions like "Damned Conservatives". I remember also the harsh words coming from that same fireman, as he was (and probably still is) a conservative. And I remember that the cartoonist refused to apologize.

    And I find - it's the same asshole that drew the above cartoons! History repeats itself.

    http://articles.cnn.com/1997-0.....n?_s=PM:US

  • Michael Ejercito||

    I remember a cartoon that depicted the firefighter holding the body of a baby, after rescuing it from the building blown up in Oklahoma City, with captions like "Damned Conservatives". I remember also the harsh words coming from that same fireman, as he was (and probably still is) a conservative. And I remember that the cartoonist refused to apologize.


    Should not conservatives do to the cartoonist what Muslims wanted to do with the Danish cartoonists?

    If violence can deter people from publishing defamatory cartoons against Mohammed, surely it would do the same in deterring people from publishing defamatory cartoons against Ron Paul and Sarah Palin.

  • Rich||

    Hey, where's Barfman when you need him?

  • BakedPenguin||

    Probably in the hospital with dehydration after all this.

  • ||

    the president himself had said that political rhetoric had nothing to do with the shooting

    Yet, somehow, this message was combined with a call for more "civility." Am I the only one who finds the call for civility undermines the disclaimer of responsibility?

  • Wesley||

    I miss the sixties, when we had a heavily-regulated media that stayed mostly civil and above the fray, everyone respected Walter Cronkite, and there weren't any assassinations.

  • creech||

    Except Cronkite didn't respect everyone, telling an Ed Clark LP candidate staffer that he wouldn't give any publicity to Libertarians because "they are evil."

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Ahh, and here I thought there weren't any more reasons to despise Cronkite.

  • Hugh Akston||

    If there is any argument to be made that the market doesn't lead to the most efficient distribution of resources, one need look no further for evidence than the fact that Steve Benson and Frank Rich are being paid for their opinions rather than for flipping burgers at Jack-in-the-Box.

  • ||

    Yeah, except for the whole newspapers losing readership in droves, barely clinging to life thing. Every opinion or joke in the modern newspaper is designed to not offend 70 year old methodist grandmothers, because they are who still buys this shit.

  • ||

    Hey, someone with the name "Hugh Akston" shouldn't knock burger preparation. Have some pride, man!

  • Hugh Akston||

    Hey I respect a good burger, which is why I put them at JitB instead of In-n-Out.

  • ||

    Who has been to Hopdoddy in Austin? They are burgersmiths. and its good.

  • ||

    What-a-Burger!!!!!!!

  • ||

    Is there such a thing as a non-Pulitzer-Prize-winning editorial cartoonist? Because I swear anytime I see one mentioned by name that descriptor is tagged on to the name. Is it just me?

  • Warty||

    Bill Watterson's political cartoons

    If even a great cartoonist draws terrible political cartoons, maybe the medium is at fault.

  • Warty||

    Though this one is about as good as a political cartoon can get.

  • ||

    Imagine the horror of political The Far Side cartoons.

  • ||

    I don't know; I didn't think Larson's political contributions were that bad.

  • ||

    I miss Gary. I saw a random Far Side panel this weekend, and it reminded me how dryly funny he was.

  • Hugh Akston||

    The 80s were the Golden Age of daily comics. You could open the paper, toss the 40 or so pages of opinion masquerading as journalism and go straight to Far Side, Calvin & Hobbes, and Bloom County on the same page.

    Modern webcomics are the nearest thing, but they aren't really as good. Modern newspaper comics, of course, are only good for blog-fodder.

  • ||

    I bet the libtard who did this cartoon gave himself a big ol' pat on the back after drawing this! Then polished off his shelf for another Pulitzer.

  • ||

    Why do I have the be the first one to bring up Kelly?

    http://www.theonion.com/articles/january-17-2011,18839/

    His is the only opinion I value on the matter.

  • Max||

    There aren't connections "among" things, you stupid fucking asshole. Benson's cartoons are infinitely better than drivel you write. Shove your Glock up your fat ass.

  • Mike M.||

    Do you live in Arizona? If so, someone ought to petition the state to give you a mental health evaluation.

  • KPres||

    Max is zeroing in on your "grammars". Look out!

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Max proves, yet again, his lack of worth.

  • Pedantic lurker||

    Not only is Max irrelevant, but he is wrong. He is (apparently) thinking of two-way connections; it is perfectly correct to talk about connections among things as long as three or more things all share a common connection.

  • Old Mexican||

    Please don't gang up on the pet yorkie. He barks at everything, he can't help that.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Max,

    Max, H&R's pet yorkie.

    Here, boy! Here, Max, go fetch! That's a good boy!

    Nooo! No, no, don't do your banalities over the carpet, you mutt! I just had it steamed! Bad boy! Bad Max!

  • KPres||

    The Left thinks this is the another Oklahoma City. Polls say it's more like their "political correctness" movement, the last thing they shot themselves in the foot with.

    All this is doing is confirming in the minds of Independants how shameless they are, and how bent to the left the MSM is.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: KPres,

    All this is doing is confirming in the minds of Independants how shameless they are, and how bent to the left the MSM is.


    Well, Tony pretty much admitted the Left is populated by pimps. No surprise there.

  • creech||

    A libertarian friend, fed up with the b.s. over "incendiary rhetoric," said the real moral to this story is that Rep. Giffords got in Laughner's crosshairs when she refused to answer his admittedly looney question back in 2007, and that perhaps congresscritters need to stop blowing off those constituents who expect a response.

  • Jeffersonian||

    To be fair, Loughner's question didn't exactly lend itself to an answer.

  • cynical||

    Well, any answer worthy of the question would have probably set the fucker off right then and there.

  • ||

    "It depends on what the meaning of "meaning" is."

  • Rather||

    lowest of all art forms...(read: uninteresting and instantly forgettable) image...Beyond the grotesque, dehumanizing imagery

    "Which isn't any reason not to marginalize anybody who disagrees with you on political issues" lowest of all art forms...(read: uninteresting and instantly forgettable) image...Beyond the grotesque, dehumanizing imagery

    "Which isn't any reason not to marginalize anybody who disagrees with you on political issues" ...cause that's my job

  • Rather||

    I tried my hardest to make sense, I really did, Daddy. Don't punish me!

  • fuck off||

    Do you spend all day looking for my comments-you really are a new puppy!

  • Rather||

    I'm so important everyone must be paying to ME. ALL ME. FEEEED MEEEEEEEEEEE....

    Read my blog.

  • Fuck off helle||

    Good idea! I'll put paypal on my blog

  • Rather||

    That way Daddy can pay his hush money to me without anyone knowing.

  • Tony||

    I fail to see why reason thinks it has a dog in this fight. All I see is the cherrypicking of a set of cartoons that is offensive to you, then you acting like a victim of something.

    If your lifeblood, hysterical government hate, in no way could possibly play a role in any violent antigovernment action, then why so defensive?

  • KPres||

    Yeah, Reason. Just shut-up about it so we can soak this inane and infantile narrative for all it's worth!!

  • ||

    FAIL.

  • 16th Century Tony||

    All I am saying Reason is if you are in fact innocent and NOT a witch, then you wouldn't be fighting so hard to not be drowned.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Tony, translated:

    Even though the Tucson shooting had nothing to do with political rhetoric, I'm still sticking with the fact that it had everything to do with political rhetoric.

    Oh, and Tony: Will you be aghast at the "hysterical government hate" Team Blue will dish out if/when it ever loses the House, Senate, and presidency?

  • Anonymous Coward||

    No, he won't. Because on that day, a miracle will occur. Like the mystery of Transubstantiation, dissent will alter its substantive elements from "hate" to "patriotism" while retaining its outward elements, much as the bread becomes flesh, yet still appears to be bread.

    Amen and WTF.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    I forgot about the way the left treated that prick GW Bush. Thanks for the reminder.

  • Joe Biden||

    How to be patriotic under a Democratic administration:

    1. Pay your taxes.
    2. Shut the fuck up.
    3. Do everything we say.
    4. Believe everything we say.
    5. Shut the fuck up some more.

    How to be patriotic under a Republican administration:

    1. Do what you did in the 1990s.

    I got a train to catch. Stay true, minions!

  • Barry||

    That was good, Joe, but get back into the broom closet until I need you again.

  • Tony||

    I've never said that. And the left doesn't hate government qua government when the right is in power, though it may hate those in power. Whining about the poor treatment of Bush tends to ignore the fact that he was an unmitigated disaster from which we may never recover.

    Being anti-government by itself is something completely different, and not something that should hold a respectable place in political discourse. Anarchy is for weekend lake parties, it's not a real alternative to civilization.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Tony,

    And the left doesn't hate government qua government when the right is in power, though it may hate those in power.




    Which would prove unequivocally the pimping nature of the left.

    Being anti-government by itself is something completely different, and not something that should hold a respectable place in political discourse[...]




    ... because you say so... Right?

  • Tony||

    The left still believes in the necessity of government even when they aren't in charge. The right believes in a very powerful government, but only when they are in charge, otherwise they are antigovernment.

    You tell me a time and place where antigovernment radicalism has been considered a mainstream, respectable alternative in political discourse.

  • So...||

    ...anti-BIG-government = radicalism. Got it.

  • Tony||

    What is big government? Government that does more than you want it to?

    Why can't the right just explain its policy preferences, instead of attacking the very concept of government itself? Someone might mistake them for anarchists.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Tony,

    What is big government? Government that does more than you want it to?

    That is the working definition. If it does MORE than what people expect, then it is doing TOO much - ergo, it is TOO BIG.

    Why can't the right just explain its policy preferences, instead of attacking the very concept of government itself? Someone might mistake them for anarchists.


    The right is just the other wing of the same vulture. And don't merely confuse me with an anarchist - I AM an anarchist (of the Rothbardian, anarcho-capitalist kind.)

  • Tncm||

    Old Mexican, you are being way too generous in assuming how much Tony knows about Austrian economics, or economics in general. I doubt he knows who Hayek or Menger are, let alone Rothbard.

  • $$$||

    Big government is more government than you can pay for.

  • No...||

    "What is big government? Government that does more than you want it to?"

    ...it means "government that does more than it should".

    Of course, liberals - and far-right conservatives - never cop to any such limits, based on their respective goals.

  • KPres||

    It's not government, per se, it's central planning.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Tony,

    The left still believes in the necessity of government even when they aren't in charge.

    I didn't disagree with this. I said that, if what you say is true, then the left shows it is populated by pimps.

    The right believes in a very powerful government, but only when they are in charge, otherwise they are antigovernment.

    Which would show the right is populated by opportunists. And the left by pimps.

    You tell me a time and place where antigovernment radicalism has been considered a mainstream, respectable alternative in political discourse.

    In 1776, if memory serves...

  • Tony||

    So you're a "pimp" if you believe we should have government? So everyone on the planet is a pimp, except for a few teenagers and idiots who think they're anarchists (all of whom live comfortably within a civilization with a government)?

    In what way was the American Revolution an anarchist endeavor? Not all government is tyranny! Though anarchy would almost certainly be like tyranny.

  • The Ingenious Hidalgo||

    Ah yes, because one should always judge your own opinions by what others consider mainstream and respectable - otherwise you could accidentally end up thinking for yourself.

  • paloma||

    What do you think the Bill of Rights is? Totally to protect the individual from the power of government, and to underscore in a very concrete way that the government is the SERVANT of the people, not the master.

  • paloma||

    What do you think the Bill of Rights is? Totally to protect the individual from the power of government, and to underscore in a very concrete way that the government is the SERVANT of the people, not the master.

  • Tony||

    How quaint. I'll bet you believe the Tenth Amendment means something it doesn't really mean.

  • paloma||

    Oh, okay, YOU know what it REALLY means, everyone else misinterprets it.

  • vousy zuřivosti||

    No, he actually has no idea what it means, so therefore nobody else does either

  • So...||

    ...all anti-government sentiment = pro-anarchy. Got it.

    Oh, and Bush sucked, as well.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I've never said that. And the left doesn't hate government qua government when the right is in power, though it may hate those in power.

    You mean the way Jared Loughner hated someone in power?

    Whining about the poor treatment of Bush tends to ignore the fact that he was an unmitigated disaster from which we may never recover.

    Glad you acknowledge your poor treatment of Dubya. But then, why is Barry doubling down on what Dubya started since he was an unmitigated disaster?

    Being anti-government by itself is something completely different, and not something that should hold a respectable place in political discourse.

    Do you wholesale your strawmen or make them yourself? Being opposed to certain government activities does not make one opposed to the existence of government in whole. To suggest otherwise is as ridiculous as saying a doctor who wants to remove a tumor really means to murder their patient.

  • Trespassers W||

    No, Tony. You are the demons.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Apparently, Tony thinks anyone who is falsely vilified needs to just lie down and take it like a bitch.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    "anyone right-of-center needs to just lie down and take it like a bitch" should have been in the first draft. Damn my fastish fingers.

  • Tony||

    Sound good to me. What have they ever done for the world? Ever?

  • So...||

    ...what has "anyone who is falsely vilified" done to warrant this treatment, Tony?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Tony either missed the "right-of-center" bit, or he considers everyone right-of-center to be just as evil as the far-right.

  • Trespassers W||

    Tony either missed the "right-of-center" bit, or he considers everyone right-of-center to be just as evil as the far-right.

    I think that Tony, like most people, considers everything not-left to be the right. This is why he gets frequently confused about peoples' actual positions -- the "right" so defined encompasses people who disagree on some pretty fundamental points about the nature and purpose of government.

    Hence comments like

    Why can't the right just explain its policy preferences, instead of attacking the very concept of government itself?

    and then a few minutes later

    The right believes in a very powerful government, but only when they are in charge, otherwise they are antigovernment.

    So, according to him, the right attacks the very idea of government, except when they don't; they think it's too big except when it's not; the right is a monolithic political entity and yet inconsistent, and so forth.

    We get lumped in with the "right" in his mind, and since he doesn't have any interest in thinking further than that--it's more fun to fight the demons in this head--he still doesn't seem to have the slightest grasp of what libertarians stand for and why, let alone the nature of the relatively-minor differences among us.

    It's just silly, but to be fair, he doesn't have any obligation to us to inform himself.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    So, according to him, the right attacks the very idea of government, except when they don't; they think it's too big except when it's not; the right is a monolithic political entity and yet inconsistent, and so forth.

    Everything not of The Party is opposed to The Party. Counterrevolutionaries must be discredited and destroyed.

    Thus spaketh the Tony.

  • Tony||

    Usually the exact same thing they're whining about. Being a big fat hypocrite doesn't excuse poor behavior against you, of course, but but it does put you way down on the list of people whose grievances I care about.

  • Tony, translated||

    I only care about people who think like me, I excuse hypocritical behavior from people who think like me, and only people like me are allowed to have grievances.

  • paloma||

    Great translation, thank you.

  • ||

    Perfect translation that works for more than just Tony.

  • ||

    Doesn't that make you a hypocrite, Tony?

    You want to dish it out, but you can't take it.

  • Mike M.||

    Sorry Tony, but the days when you liberals can lie and smear with impunity without being called on it are over, and they're never coming back again. You'd better get used to it, buddy.

  • Old Mexican||

    Re: Tony,

    If your lifeblood, hysterical government hate, in no way could possibly play a role in any violent antigovernment action, then why so defensive?




    McCarthy: "But if you are so sure you're not a communist, then why so defensive?"

    "A Big Lie told many times becomes truth"
    Old Statist proverb.

    "Does not matter how sound your argument, the tyrant will always find an excuse" - Aesop.

  • Michael Ejercito||

    Read Radley Balko's article , Chony.

  • Brian E||

    These just remind me of Penny Arcade's equally (but purposefully) dumb Star Wars political cartoons:

    http://www.penny-arcade.com/2010/6/7/
    http://www.penny-arcade.com/20.....l-cartoon/

  • Adam||

    This is surely the PA gold standard when slicing apart editorial cartoons ...

    http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2009/4/1/

  • Anonymous||

    I'm sorry, I can't take any of this seriously coming from a blog that un-ironically syndicates Chip Bok.

  • Anonymous||

    I'm sorry, I can't take any of this seriously coming from a blog that un-ironically syndicates Chip Bok.

  • ||

    Bok may not be funny most of the time, but at least he's not a raging asshole like Benson.

  • Some other guy||

  • ||

    Great cartoons. Thanks!

  • anarch||

    Politics make strange beds, Fellows.

  • Old Mexican||

    "[T]he left doesn't hate government qua government when the right is in power, though it may hate those in power." - Tony

    Just so nobody loses sight of the above, Tony pretty much confirmed that the Left is populated by pimps.

  • The Ingenious Hidalgo||

    Also he came to a site populated by people who are consistently anti-government to complain about people who are inconsistently anti-government.

  • Point||

    Less.

  • TallDave||

    When will Sarah Palin apologize for JFK's assassination?

  • Some other guy||

    When will Sarah Palin apologize for the McKinley assassination?

  • MLK||

    Yo! Pasty-assed bitch shot me in '63!

  • MLK||

    Shit, sorry, she shot me in '68. But she shot that Kennedy guy in '63.

    Being dead, you get dates mixed up.

  • Abe Lincoln||

    John Wilkes Booth may have been holding the gun, but Palin pulled the trigger.

  • CalebT||

    CNN is reporting that a shooting victim is apologizing for telling a Tea Party leader, "You are dead."

  • James Eric Fuller||

    Palin made me say that!

  • Ed Schultz||

    Damn right she did, James!

  • Olbermann||

    Got your back, James!

  • Frank Rich||

    I'm gonna write a column in your favor, James!

  • Olbermann||

    "How come the only two people that have taken responsibility for what they've said are John McCain and Me?!"

  • jester||

    I think this page about Benson from Wikipedia explains it all:
    Steve Benson (cartoonist)
    Stephen Reed Benson (born January 2, 1954 in Sacramento, California) is a Pulitzer Prize-winning U.S. editorial cartoonist for The Arizona Republic. Benson is the grandson of former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture and former LDS Church president Ezra Taft Benson.

    Benson attended Brigham Young University, from which he graduated cum laude. He became the cartoonist for the Republic in 1980.[1] In the late 1980s he was at first a supporter, then a prominent critic, of Evan Mecham, the first Mormon to be elected governor of Arizona. Benson's criticism stirred controversy among Arizona's Mormon population,[2][3] leading some LDS church members to seek the intervention of Benson's grandfather in the matter;[4] Benson was later relieved of his position on a church council.[5][6]

    Benson moved to the Tacoma Morning News Tribune in 1990,[7] but then returned to the Arizona Republic in 1991.[1]

    In 1993 Benson faced further controversy within the LDS church, when he stated that his grandfather, then nearing his 94th birthday, was suffering from senility that was being concealed by church leadership.[8] Later that year, Benson publicly left the church.[4][9] He has since become an anti-religious freethinker, appearing at Freedom From Religion Foundation's annual conventions and stating in its paper Freethought Today, "If, as the true believers claim, the word 'gospel' means good news, then the good news for me is that there is no gospel, other than what I can define for myself, by observation and conscience. As a freethinking human being, I have come not to favor or fear religion, but to face and fight it as an impediment to civilized advancement."[10][11]

    In 1997, a Benson cartoon used the image of a firefighter carrying a dead child to comment on the death sentence that had just been imposed on Oklahoma City bombing defendant Timothy McVeigh. Benson forcefully defended his work against some readers' contentions that the cartoon was insensitive.[12]

    Benson was awarded the 1993 Pulitzer Prize for Editorial Cartooning, was a Pulitzer finalist in 1984, 1989, 1992, and 1994,[13][14] and has received a variety of other awards.[1] He has served as president of the Association of American Editorial Cartoonists.[15] His cartoons have been collected in a number of books.[1]

  • jester||

    Short story: rather than quietly reject his past, he engaged in warfare against it. Since Mormonism (excepting maybe Harry Reid) generally embraces Conservatism, he feels a need to go after Conservatism. Unfortunately, he feels a need to bring the liberty-minded into the fray perhaps due to his grandfather's embrace of the Birch Society and the link many place between them and libertarianism. Of course, Glenn Beck doesn't help in this matter.

  • Don't forget...||

    ...how libs treated Mormons when that fuckstain* Romney was running, but kept their venom close to the vest when that fuckstain** Reid was running.

    * - Mormon = not necessarily a fuckstain.

    ** In this case, Reid being a Mormon was his only decent-ish characteristic. But the libs kept a hands-off, don't-criticize attitude about Reid the Mormon, while dragging Romney the Mormon over the coals.

  • Jeffersonian||

    That's because the religion of the Left is the State. Whatever "faith tradition" you might have takes, at best, a distant second.

  • Libs in the pews||

    Amen!

  • sevo||

    jester|1.17.11 @ 7:29PM|#
    "I think this page about Benson from Wikipedia explains it all:..."

    Could be, but like Paul Kurtz's lies about the 'concentration of media', any explanation is pretty irrelevant to the fact that they both lie in furtherance of an ideology. And both ignore evidence to the contrary.
    I'm an atheist; they're "freethinkers". I think that means lefties who aren't quite commies.

  • jester||

    I had to laugh when he mentioned the term 'true believers': out of the frying pan and into the fire.

  • BrokeBroker||

    Fuck, what a disgusting guy. I'm sorry but that one with the little 9 years old at the end... No sorry, I can't take it. Fuck!

  • Jack Meihoff||

    Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent anymore of it.

  • David E. Gallaher/Ruthless||

    This guy won a Pulitzer. Krugman won a Nobel. So where do we go now?
    If you just push paper in your job, maybe you have a more noble calling than you thought?

  • Warty||

    It seems that Ricky Gervais was a dick, and it was awesome.

  • ||

    I watched a clip of that on YouTube, and it was more like a roast than an awards ceremony. Most excellent.

  • ||

    Nice. While I'm not ungrateful for his monologue, it easily could have (and should have) been more vicious.

  • 1_Eagle||

    This vast overwhelming libel from the left as a 'reaction' to the tragedy in Tucson from all sectors smells mightily of co-ordination.

    Even Jane Fonda got in on the act.

    Someone, somewhere, must have pushed the Alinsky button. If so, who?

    I strongly suspect this was a pre-planned strategy, a 'rhetoric card' to play for supporting a new variation of Fairness Doctrine or to stifle Conservatives, or more likely, to turn off those squemish indy voters... Sometime closer to election day.

    But somebody had an itchy finger on the Alinsky switch.

    The problem is the simple fact that the election is eons away in terms of electorate attention spans. Somebody goofed. There is a truckload of time to clear the record and worse, for them, to innoculate the issue. Time by itself is a great cure.

    The worst damage they have done, of course, is to themselves. Olberman, Matthews, snide media 'journalists', not to leave out Obama himself, have strangely been painted into a corner of their own making. When all is said and done, Obama will as gladly receive and abide by the new 'civil discourse' as he did with campaign finance reform. (He won't)

    They have unwittingly painted themselves into a corner, now watch them apply the paint remover over time. They can't sustain this for two years.

    But, yes, they may try playing this card again. Its what they do.

  • alan||

    The left did not need any planning, that is what the body of them are like on autopilot. The only ones who showed any signs of planning -- forethought & intelligence -- were those who were saying knock it off, and the spinmeisters triangulating in the White house.

    What's the deal with linking Alinsky? The man hated government bureaucrats and crony capitalism, not free markets.

  • Oh, looky!||

  • CE||

    I read on a WSJ comments page that Loughner was just another in a long line of mentally ill lone gunmen, including (among others) Lee Harvey Oswald and John Wilkes Booth....

    Apparently few remember that Booth (a successful and popular actor) didn't act alone, and actually was part of a conspiracy to assassinate the President, the Vice President, the Secretary of State and General Grant. Only Booth killed his target, but eight others were convicted and four were hanged.

  • ||

    If you're interested in this subject I'd recommend "Assassination Vacation" by Sarah Vowel. In order to get published it seems she felt the need to throw in a few irrelevant slanders against Bush, but other than the occasional unhinged screed its a very interesting book. The Lincoln assassination was part of an attempt to decapitate the government, and the gent who shot Garfield is a character that only Johnny Depp could play. You'll need to skip a page or two when Sarah goes over the edge, but the rest is very interesting.

  • ||

    How incompetent and corrupt does your government have to be, for citizens to think bringing back "Baby Doc" would be an improvement?

    Haiti is fucked.

  • Almanian||

    Yes, I commented on this yesterday. "Baby Doc's back! Everything will be OK now!"

    What the fuck?

    Haiti was, is, and shall be...right foked.

  • ||

    Yeah - this guy is a schmuck. We get it. But is that any reason for you to denigrate all editorial cartoonists?

    Based on the first sentence of your article, you owe Michael P. Ramirez an apology.

  • ||

    There is only ONE possible comment both in response to this Left-Wing Contempt-Filled hateful "artwork" - AND your Numb-Skulled decision to publish this and give in more "air":

    FUCK YOU!

    You can stop "spooning" with Allahpundit, now - I'm sure you got the response you were going for!

  • ||

    Maybe if you knew how to read you wouldn't be telling the people that are defending you to fuck off.

  • ||

    Maybe if you knew what "inciting the enemy" was - you'd be telling those here - including Reason and Allahpundit elsewhere - appropriately to Fuck Off.......

  • ||

    Someone forgot to take their crazy pills this morning...

    (hint, hint: That's you)

  • ||

    No - I just didn't take the "I am so erudite and elitist that I will "give as much air time as possible" to left-wing, America-Hating creeps.....because, that's how I roll - I'm balanced and equivocating Like Dat!" Pills that obviously you and Nick took.

    Sometimes - it's best to sublimate the kind of CONTEMPT foisted by these cartoons, instead of waving it around in public and making it look like "a normal point of discussion". Doing THAT is CRAP!

  • ||

    How low. It is painfully obvious this shooting had nothing to do with "rhetoric", yet the left are using it as an excuse to shut up the right and bully them into doing what they want.

  • Kevin Carson||

    You should check out Vic Harville, the house editorial cartoonist for the Don-Rey Media chain papers in NW Arkansas.

    He got his start drawing caricatures of team mascots on the sports pages before the big game every week. And what passes for his "political cartooning" looks exactly the same. For example, last Sunday he did a picture, in the manner of a birthday party caricaturist, of Tom Delay being hit over the head by a giant hammer. The caption: "The Hammer Gets Hammered." And Delay was helpfully tagged "Tom Delay" for the folks who followed Vic over from the sports page and were too dim to get it.

    Seriously. This is typical of Harville's stuff that they run EVERY FREAKIN' DAY. Actually, it's less of an obvious phone-it-in effort than some of his other stuff.

    And in the meantime, they stopped carrying Mike Luckovich, who IMO is the greatest living political cartoonist.

  • ||

    "...Mike Luckvoch... the greatest living political cartoonist." Only if every other political cartoonist on the planet died in the last five minutes.

  • ||

    Is this guy related to the Indian presenter?

  • ||

    more proof that a pulitzer prize, like a nobel prize and so many other "prizes" is essentially worthless. thanks to pandering liberal fools of the modern era for taking the value out of everythng. as for benson, a ridiculous hack, nothing more.

  • ||

    These are great editorial cartoons - especially the one of ol' machine-gun-mouth Sarah.

    Thanks for sharing ! Your article makes it possible for many more of us to see Benson's work. Thanks for promoting him

  • ||

    The shooter was obviously a man in great pain and he wanted everyone around him to be in pain. His politics clearly had nothing to do with this.

  • ||

    Benson cartoon =

    Pen in his hand = IDIOT

    Hey it's his logic.

    I'm down with that

  • charlie x||

    What leftist tripe. Loughner was a leftist. He shot giffords at the behest of a Daily Kos diarist.

    Deal with it.

  • ||

    At times like this I really miss Jeff MacNelly. He was by far the best of his generation, in a class by himself. His characterizations of Jimmy Carter as "a small dip in the road" and Reagan as Rooster Cogburn at the State of the Union were priceless. I hope his heirs are working on a collection of his editorial cartoons.

  • ||

    you need some Obamacare.
    Is lobotomy covered?

  • ||

    i'm pretty sure it's against the law to reproduce even a likeness of the presidential seal:

    "Whoever, except as authorized under regulations promulgated by the
    President and published in the Federal Register, knowingly
    manufactures, reproduces, sells, or purchases for resale, either
    separately or appended to any article manufactured or sold, ANY LIKENESS OF THE SEALS OF THE PRESIDENT OR VICE PRESIDENT, OR ANY SUBSTANTIAL PART THEREOF, except for manufacture or sale of the
    article for the official use of the Government of the United States,
    shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six
    months, or both."

  • Michael Ejercito||

  • Jman||

    Wow. It's as though Bil Keane decided to take up political cartooning. Except for the one with the eagle molesting the lady, which should've been titled "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you".

  • philmon||

    Only one gripe with the piece...

    I HATE (I know, I shouldn't use that inflammatory word) the term "more proof".

    "More evidence" is the correct way to put it. Evidence can contribute to a proof, but evidence is just evidence.

  • ||

    Wow - those cartoons are like something out of PRAVDA circa 1937. Really spooky creepy stuff.

  • ||

    Hmm... the United States (the eagle) fucking the state of Arizona. Very true.

  • ||

    My question is: If everything the liberals were saying about the shooter's motives were true...
    SO WHAT?

  • ||

    That is to say, would anyone's tone change? Mine wouldn't... I'd still hate liberalism as much as always, and fight against it as vigorously as always.

  • Kevin||

    These cartoons make me wanna fucking puke.

  • Terry Anderson||

    Sorry, but if Benson is a weak cartoonist then so are the three you publish; a cursory glance at their work reveals the same kind of flourishes and stylistic choices you single out for criticism here. Saying that an inelegant, on-the-nose Leftist cartoon is indicative of intellectual dwarfism while equally obvious Right wing humour is simply robust commentary reveals your own substitution of bias for "reason". And if editorial cartooning is low art, how would you define blogging? A cartoon of you would doubtless feature a man in a glass house with a pile of stones by his laptop...

  • Bob Gren, Jr.||

    The problem with liberal cartoons is that they don't make any sense. That's why they seem so vague. The cartoonist draws Sarah Palin with a gun coming out of her mouth, why not draw her with crosshairs on her forehead. Liberal cartoonists do what they profess to hate about her. I've never seen so much hate speech and hate cartoons directed at one woman in my life. If you want to see some cartoons that make sense, go to mensunion.org

  • Infoteknik||

    Englehardt would stuff him into a Klan sheet faster than you could say "good government."

  • ||

    creepy.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement