Cartoonists With Attitude

My favorite all-time Tom the Dancing Bug recurring theme is Lucky Ducky. More specifically, it’s Hollingsworth Hound, the perpetually aggrieved and victimized dog banker who suffers from Lucky Ducky’s privileged position in the upside-down world of conservative thinking.

I mention this, because Ruben Bolling revived him as an illustration for a post linking to Matt Taibbi’s take-down of David Brooks’ corporate class victimhood. Also for your edification I submit HTML Mencken’s structural analysis of BoBo’s rhetoric.

Yeah, though racists are more specifically people who say things like well, like what David Brooks said about Haiti. But thats neither here nor there; my point is Brookss strategery, his affect, and for what ultimate purpose. The first co-opts a liberal point; the second does as well, but is a more subtle (doesnt immediately ring as phony) evidence against interest item than the first, coming from a conservative. Then theres the third item; ding ding ding; heres the real tell: those who even see class differences are the moral equivalents of racists. And to actively oppose the interests of the opposite class? Hitlerian, presumably.

And on a tangential note, MightyGodKing adds his two-cents regarding the Citizens United decision. Shorter: he thinks it sucks, but can’t muster the indignation others have. Certainly worth a read, as his take is different from Glenn Greenwald’s standpoint of free speech absolutism.

Once again on Meet The Press, David Gregory shows a cartoon without citing the creator:

Well, David Brooks, the final word at the end of the week, it was crystallized, I think, by The New Yorker cartoon which, I can tell you on good authority, the president finds quite amusing. Here it is, these various panes [panels?] describing how the president used to be able to walk on water, and that final page [panel?] he actually shows he’s a mere mortal, he’s lost his magic power, he’s into the drink. Where are we?

Could Barry Blitt at least be credited by Gregory for the illustration? Perhaps not the idea, since editorial cartoonists ran that cliche into the ground over a year before The New Yorker thought it cover-worthy, but the “various panes” were drawn by someone.

A great post by Matt Taibbi taking down David Brooks's attempt to paint those who attack bankers for helping to cause the financial meltdown as divisive, ungrateful class warriors, taking on the same tactics as racists.

Click to enlarge

More on the risks for pregnant Haitian women from Women’s eNews.

And MADRE has more on the unique needs of women and children in Haiti in the aftermath here. An excerpt:

All Haitians are suffering right now. But, women are often hardest hit when disaster strikes because they were at a deficit even before the catastrophe. In Haiti, and in every country, women are the poorest of the poor and often have no safety net, leaving them most exposed to violence, homelessness and hunger in the wake of disasters. Women are also overwhelmingly responsible for other vulnerable people, including infants, children, the elderly, and people who are ill or disabled.

Because of their role as care-takers and because of the discrimination they face, women have a disproportionate need for assistance. Yet, they are often overlooked in large-scale aid operations. In the chaos that follows disasters, aid too often reaches those who yell the loudest or push their way to the front of the line. When aid is distributed through the “head of household” approach, women-headed families may not be recognized, and women within male-headed families may be marginalized when aid is controlled by male relatives.

It is not enough to ensure that women receive aid. Women in communities must also be integral to designing and carrying out relief efforts…

Update: The New York Times has more on this issue.

An alert reader (from the great state of Alaska) notes that a guest on today's Morning Edition on NPR was the president of the National Workrights Institute… Lewis Maltby.

I always let the silence of the fetus graveyard do my pro-choice pro-abortion talking for me.

Brian McFadden has a good comic on corporate personhood and links to some other good ones while lamenting Kevin Moore’s decision to stop editorial cartooning. That’s the exact blog post I was going to write today, so instead I’ve composed a blog post telling you about it and linking to his post.

click for comic

The Supreme Court took a big wet shit on the shag carpet of democracy with their decision last week. Corporate personhood is garbage. A shitty human being can be shamed, or in the case of super-greedy-fucks, at least be torched and pitchforked by an angry mob. A corporate person can morph into a faceless non-person and hide behind a pile of money and an ace legal team as soon as it’s convenient.

The only rights corporations should have are the ones that protect their human participants’ individual rights. Telling ExxonMobil or Lockheed to shut the fuck up and stay out of elections doesn’t stop any of its vile, rapacious employees or shareholders from doing the same. Until Apple develops a tablet with its own life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, only human beings deserve certain unalienable rights.

There were many great comics on the subject this week. Here are a few of my favorites:

Matt Bors – The Corporate Civil Rights Movement

Lloyd Dangle – This Week’s Troubletown

Abell Smith – Great Moments in American Jurisprudence

Kevin Moore – If Persons Were Treated Like Corporations (I’m sad to report that this is the last In Contempt strip ever. At least until President Jenna Bush draws Kevin away from Wanderlost in the Fugly 20s.)

Next Week: Big Fat Valentines

I’m loving that second panel.

(click here to view)

Chuck Asay Creators Syndicate Inc. Jan 29, 2010 EditorialCartoonists.com

Don’t drive in bike lanes.