http://doonesbury.msn.com/strip/dailydose/index.html
Can I sue for misrepresentation of comic result?
I do not go to Doonesbury so I can be made to cry.
Do I have a cause of action?
If so, against whom…?
Or is truth a defense.
How long have you been reading Doonesbury? It’s been running for 34 years now, and this is no different than the way it’s always been. Trudeau has always made political comments in his strips (sometimes subtly, but sometimes with a heavy hand). Trudeau has frequently caused unhappy things to happen to his characters, including several deaths. Doonesbury has never been remotely a laugh-a-minute joke strip. Why is this even remotely surprising to you?
oh dear.
I have never stooped to resort to little faces, but perhaps the time has come…
Wait, let me get this right, you voluntarily (seemingly regularly) view the Doonsebury strip and now you are upset becuase it isn’t funny? :rolleyes:
-
Doonesbury is very rarely funny. I don’t think side-splitting gales of laughter is Trudeau’s intent. Doonesbury is meant as a political cartoon, not as a laugh-riot.
-
This story line about a soldier losing his leg has been running for a while, what makes this particular strip so bad?
-
Crying over a comic strip? Time for a new sig line…visigothic destruction may be a bit out of your league.
Let me translate my post:
For all you scum sucking republicans out there here is something you need to cast your jaundiced, covetous eyes on, you chickenhawk motherfuckers.
TEACH IT, GARY!
(which is the little face for “teach it”?)
I’m sorry.
Did I say “chickenhawk”?
Typo.
Replace with “chickenshit”
I myself see the strip as a touching story of the love of a father by a son.
This bothers you?
Au contraire.
My illustrious forbear, Alaric I, was frequently caused to shed tears when the contemplated how he and the other visigoths were being shabby did by the emperor
(At least that’s what they say in the family when the dancing girls have driven gthe old men beyond reason…)
alaricthegoth,
I have absolutely no idea what point you’re making. Tell us very clearly the point you’re trying to make. Do this without any use of irony, because it’s impossible to understand what you’re talking about when you do that. Just make some simple, clear, direct statements about Doonesbury and why this particular strip bothered you.
“driven the old men MAD beyond reason”…(altho it works the other way too).
I liked the strip.
Is there something to debat here?
Reeder writes:
> I myself see the strip as a touching story of the love of a father by a son.
Sam (whose full name is Samantha) is B.D.'s daughter, not his son.
If you liked the strip, what’s there to debate? I liked the strip too, and I generally like Doonesbury. If you’re going to start a GD thread about a comic strip, I would presume that it would be about a controversial one.
The debate I was trying to frame was this:
Those who create the conditions pursuant to which tours duty arise and are extended, and on account of whose blunders children and mothers must ultimateley be grateful for amputations that render up live parents and husbands take upon themselves a heavy responsibility before history.
In other words, Dumb George had no margin for error, and he’s way over the line…
on reflection, perhaps more of a pit item than a debate.
mea culpa.
I hope I’m being whooshed here. Doonesbury is, and has been for decades, the very definition of a controversial comic strip, possibly surpassed only by Family Circus.
I didn’t have any trouble understanding the OP at all.
And B.D. isn’t just “a soldier” for those of us who have “known” him for thirty or more years.
If I think of the fictitious nature of the cartoon character, I have to ask myself why I tear up at the thought. If I think of the truth of the message, how can I help but be moved?
Excuse me, I meant that I thought that today’s strip was not controversial, not that Doonesbury in general is not controversial. I don’t see why today’s strip was particularly more interesting than any other Doonesbury strip. There have been a lot of strips over the years in Doonesbury that might be the start of a debate, but this one isn’t one of them, for my taste.
Sorry, I thought you meant in general. OK, then, I agree.