# Prickly City - humor for conservative idiots **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 17, 2006, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026 "2006-06-17T02:17:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![nameless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/779978/32.png) [@nameless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nameless)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 12:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/41 "2006-06-17T12:00:36Z")
I don’t think it’s fair to call Brain Wreck’s statement bigotry, but can we at least agree that it’s idiotic? > [@Brain Wreck](#): > > The mass of conservatives are too stupid, greedy, and shortsighted to be persuaded, convinced, or negotiated with. They need to be moved into assisted-thinking communities where they aren’t going to fuck up anybody else’s world, and they shouldn’t be allowed outside unsupervised until they score 100% on a test of critical thinking skills. > [@Ann Coulter](#): > > Liberals become indignant when you question their patriotism, but simultaneously work overtime to give terrorists a cushion for the next attack and laugh at dumb Americans who love their country and hate the enemy. Let’s compare these two statements. Are they really any different in spirit and intensity? Generalization of entire group? Check. Ascribing massively negative characteristics to both groups? Check. Suggestion that we should round up all members of this group and put them in some sort of reeducation camp? Hmm, that’s only in **Brain Wreck’s** (although I’m sure Ann Coulter has said something analogous). So no, it’s not bigotry. And yes, Ann Coulter has made a career out of such talk and this is just one little thing. But I really don’t see much difference between these statements. So it’s rhetoric? So it’s polemic? It’s still stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/42 "2006-06-17T12:22:03Z")
> [@Brain Wreck](#): > > I was **so** looking forward to hearing how emitting less carbon actually makes the environmental problem worse. I think the author’s point is, if global warming is caused by too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, then being carbon neutral doesn’t really help the situation, because while you’re not increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (and thereby making global warming worse), you’re also not doing anything to remove CO2 from the atmosphere and make the situation better. (And since most people won’t be carbon-neutral, the situation will continue to get worse) However, being carbon-neutral makes you think that you’re making an effort to improve the situation (gives you a “false sense of superiority”), and stops you from actually doing anything useful about global warming, because you feel you’ve “already done your part”. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/43 "2006-06-17T13:10:49Z")
> [@Captain Amazing](#): > > I think the author’s point is, if global warming is caused by too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, then being carbon neutral doesn’t really help the situation, because while you’re not increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere (and thereby making global warming worse), you’re also not doing anything to remove CO2 from the atmosphere and make the situation better. (And since most people won’t be carbon-neutral, the situation will continue to get worse). That’s a candidate for an explanation. Still, being carbon-neutral does not “add to the problem.” More accurately, it “stops adding to the problem without actually reducing it”, if you want to take that most pessimistic possible viewpoint. And the implied conclusion of the strip, then, is “if you can’t make it better then there’s no point in not making it worse. And Al Gore said he invented the internet.” Fucking moron. ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/44 "2006-06-17T14:58:59Z")
**Yookeroo:** > [@](#): > > No way it’s half. It is one of the better conservative strips, but that’s not saying a whole lot. It will occasionally be willing to call out conservatives on their bullshit. _shrug_ That’s my perception, from reading it every day on the Metro. And I’m as liberal as they come. ---
**Author:** ![Operation\_Ripper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/34f0e0/32.png) [@Operation\_Ripper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Operation_Ripper)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/45 "2006-06-17T18:09:15Z")
Good grief, was that 'toon supposed to be funny? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/46 "2006-06-17T18:23:08Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > No, it isn’t. > > Conservative _adj_ 1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change. > > Conservative _n_ 1. One favoring traditional views and values. > 2. A supporter of political conservatism. > > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conservative > > Opinion: _n_ 1. A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof: > > http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion > > Thus, we see that a **conservative** may hold many **opinions**. Are you trying to prove my point, or your point? A conservative “favors traditional views and values.” Why? Because he thinks they’re better. Is that a fact? Is it provable in an absolute way? Is there a mathematical formula that shows that “conservative = better?” No. Because that’s an _opinion_. Conservatism is an opinion about the best way to run a society or system of government. That said, I agree with **nameless** that it’s a stupid over-generalization. Calling it bigotry, however, is at least as dumb as calling all conservatives “stupid, greedy, and short-sighted.” ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/47 "2006-06-17T22:04:56Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Are you trying to prove my point, or your point? A conservative “favors traditional views and values.” Why? Because he thinks they’re better. Is that a fact? Is it provable in an absolute way? Is there a mathematical formula that shows that “conservative = better?” No. Because that’s an _opinion_. **Conservatism** is an opinion about the best way to run a society or system of government. > > That said, I agree with **nameless** that it’s a stupid over-generalization. Calling it bigotry, however, is at least as dumb as calling all conservatives “stupid, greedy, and short-sighted.” [bolding mine] We’re arguing semantics at this point, but note the word I bolded, “conservatism” is not the same as the one I defined, “conservative”. I still say it’s more of a philosophy, or belief system, which may include opinions on more than one topic. Standing by the charge of bigotry. Politics is clearly included in the definition, and the kicker is the intolerance of those who differ. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2006, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/48 "2006-06-17T22:14:58Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > [bolding mine] > > We’re arguing semantics at this point, but note the word I bolded, “conservatism” > is not the same as the one I defined, “conservative”. I still say it’s more of a philosophy, or belief system, which may include opinions on more than one topic. :dubious: And the difference is what, exactly? > [@](#): > > Standing by the charge of bigotry. Politics is clearly included in the definition, and the kicker is the intolerance of those who differ. So, if I consider people who follow the political philosophy of National Socialism to be half-witted racist screwheads, am I a bigot? Further, does that make me a hypocrite for being bigoted against bigots? ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2006, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/49 "2006-06-18T02:50:36Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Standing by the charge of bigotry. And hiding behind a dictionary. When you let Webster do your thinking for you, nothing impressive can ever be the result. > [@](#): > > Politics is clearly included in the definition, and the kicker is the intolerance of those who differ. Thanks for illustrating the other brain damage that needs to be addressed. You people have absolutely no clue what tolerance or intolerance means. Tolerance means: if you want to be a moron, fine, as long as it doesn’t harm me, do what you will. Intolerance means: Even though what you’re doing doesn’t affect me, I’m going to keep you from doing it because I don’t like it. “Intolerance” does not mean disagreement, even vigorous disagreement. Please write that down, take it back to all your like-thinking buddies and talk it over until you understand it. ---
**Author:** ![Talon\_Karrde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c5a1d2/32.png) [@Talon\_Karrde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Talon_Karrde)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/50 "2006-06-19T02:22:21Z")
**nameless** , your mentioning of Ann Coulter was a good way to put this in perspective for me. I decided to do a quick pit search for threads with her name in the title, and searched those threads for the word “bigot” just to see if people here were using the word to describe her. I got bored after eight or so threads, but I saw enough. I was actually surprised that the word wasn’t used to describe her much. I only found three. Unfortunately with Ann Coulter there are reasons for people to call her a bigot other than just what she says about liberals, so with two of them it doesn’t count for anything. The third is a [post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6049805&postcount=174) by **Scylla** that’s interesting. He uses the same argument that **Oakminster** is using now, and there wasn’t a huge objection to it then. **Oakminster** , whether you’re right about it being bigotry or not, I suggest you drop the argument and focus on what is objectionable about the statement. I did the search hoping to see if the word bigotry was accepted in that way around here in the past, but no such luck. By maintaining that it’s bigotry you’re standing on shaky ground. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/51 "2006-06-19T04:55:40Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Standing by the charge of bigotry. Politics is clearly included in the definition, and the kicker is the intolerance of those who differ. Is there a phrase for this logical fallacy? _Argumentum ad lexicographia_ or something? > [@Brain Wreck](#): > > “Intolerance” does not mean disagreement, even vigorous disagreement. Please write that down, take it back to all your like-thinking buddies and talk it over until you understand it. Thank you. I don’t have to agree with everyone’s beliefs. Tolerance means allowing the KKK to have a rally. It doesn’t mean not calling them brain-damaged slimeballs who, if they had a moment of self-reflection, would immediately kill themselves for the sake of society. Why do conservatives get so whiny when people disagree with them? ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/52 "2006-06-19T12:46:35Z")
Strange that you pick a strip to rant about that pokes fun at Algore, who most assuredly is a good target for derision. But why haven’t you been ranting about strips like these? > **[Prickly City by Scott Stantis for June 01, 2006 | GoComics.com](https://www.gocomics.com/pricklycity/2006/06/01/)** > > Man: Afghanistan! Iraq! Katrina! Now the border!!! One weekend a month and two weeks a year, my keister!! Winslow: Out National Guard: perhaps a tad overextended... > **[Prickly City by Scott Stantis for May 31, 2006 | GoComics.com](https://www.gocomics.com/pricklycity/2006/05/31/)** > > Winslow: Mexico is threatening to sue the U.S. for protecting its borders. Winslow: Think of the carnage! A tsunami of our trial lawyers flooding into Mexico. Winslow: Downside? Carmen: Can't think of one. > **[Prickly City by Scott Stantis for June 19, 2006 | GoComics.com](https://www.gocomics.com/pricklycity/2006/06/19/)** > > Carmen: Homeland Security Secretary Chertoff!! Michael Chertoff: Who needs money!? Want some? Here ya go! Take as much as you want! It's free! It comes from a magic place I call taxpayer-topia! It's limitless! Carmen: Secretary Chertoff, shouldn't... Oh, silly me. There, he’s poking fun at conservatives and that’s perfectly okay. Stantis tends to piss on everyone’s shoes. He’s right in the middle as far as I can tell - neither conservative nor liberal. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/53 "2006-06-19T13:09:31Z")
A what-about-the-poor-oppressed-convervatives non sequitur from **Clothahump**? Bored now. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/54 "2006-06-19T13:39:50Z")
Well, the third, about Chertoff, isn’t making fun of conservatives. In fact it’s making the conservative point that the Department of Homeland Security seems to be wasting money in direct contradiction of conservative principles. The first is a populist sentiment and is isn’t denigrating conservatives at all; just that the current state of permenant war is give the Reserves and National Guard a royal screwing. The second is just a stupid anti-lawyer joke; not a conservative skewering in any shape or form. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/55 "2006-06-19T13:48:07Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > My point is, I wouldn’t make that attempt. It might interest you to know that I recently got accused of favoring liberals and unfairly bashing Bush on my own little board. Had my most outspoken conservative poster leave the board in a huff over it. For someone who couldn’t spare the effort to actually discuss the cartoon and explain what it means, you certainly have a lot of time to discuss bigotry against conservatives. You even have gone to the trouble of digging up multiple dictionary definitions! Care to spend a few minutes now explaining the comic strip to us? Your other options are to b) continue to evade by following up tangential discussions or c) slink away. Please go with (a). I do have to confess, however, that I appreciate your clearing up something I’ve suspected for a while: conservatives are in fact fixed and immutable in their thinking, rendering their opinions as distinguishing features akin to gender, skin color, race or ethnicity. It has always seemed that way to me, since they appear to be unable to change an opinion in the face of contradictory evidence or due to clear outcomes of failure. I’m afraid I cannot stop engaging in this type of “bigotry,” unfortunately. See, unlike people distinguished by different races, genders, or skin colors, conservatives have proven to be exceedingly bad for America, and I love America. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/56 "2006-06-19T14:17:51Z")
> [@Brain Wreck](#): > > That’s a candidate for an explanation. Still, being carbon-neutral does not “add to the problem.” More accurately, it “stops adding to the problem without actually reducing it”, if you want to take that most pessimistic possible viewpoint. And the implied conclusion of the strip, then, is “if you can’t make it better then there’s no point in not making it worse. And Al Gore said he invented the internet.” Fucking moron. Well, thinking that being carbon-neutral helps solve the problem can add to the problem, though, because there’s the danger that those people who are concerned about the issue of global warming will embrace “carbon-neutrality” and think they’ve “done their part”. There’s always the danger of placebo solutions that, while they work to relieve guilt, don’t actually help solve the problem. And the “Al Gore claims to have invented X” joke is pretty much inevitable when his name is mentioned. ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/57 "2006-06-19T14:27:52Z")
> [@](#): > > A what-about-the-poor-oppressed-convervatives non sequitur from Clothahump? Fuck off. For once, Clothahump is absolutely right. Not that it lessens the ridiculousness of the strip linked in the OP, obviously, but it’s absolutely unfair to call Prickly City a conservative (or, if you must, a _partisan_) strip. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/58 "2006-06-19T14:31:07Z")
And as to another point made in this thread, “Prickly City” is pretty clearly a conservative strip…even putting aside strip content, Scott Stantis has made it clear in interviews that that’s the case. However, that doesn’t mean that he’s a blind supporter of the Bush administration. The National Guard strip, the Chertoff strip, and others, and others, like this one, which is against the wiretapping: > **[Prickly City by Scott Stantis for May 28, 2006 | GoComics.com](https://www.gocomics.com/pricklycity/2006/05/28/)** > > Winslow: What do you know about me? Man: Can't say. Winslow: How do I find out? Man: You can't. Winslow: What if I raise a big stink? Man: Then we'll release the most damaging parts. Winslow: That's how I'll know what you know about me!?! Man: The... and the series of strips ending May 20, which, except for the last one, are no longer available online, which really criticize the Iraq War. He’s generally critical of the Bush administration for not being “real” conservatives…of betryaying conservative values. ---
**Author:** ![Gadarene](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Gadarene](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadarene)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/59 "2006-06-19T14:38:38Z")
I’m on board with that. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2006, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026/60 "2006-06-19T14:40:24Z")
> [@Gadarene](#): > > Fuck off. For once, Clothahump is absolutely right. Not that it lessens the ridiculousness of the strip linked in the OP, obviously, but it’s absolutely unfair to call Prickly City a conservative (or, if you must, a _partisan_) strip. I don’t think it’s unfair. If you click on the “about the author” link at the comic’s website, it includes the following quote from him: > [@](#): > > As Stantis puts it, “As a conservative it always seemed a bit unfair that there was no comic strip rebuttal to the likes of ‘Doonesbury’ and ‘The Boondocks.’ Plus, I can expand on an idea and I get to do it with great characters. Comic strips, with their multiple panels, are fantastic vehicles for driving home a point that you just can’t do in the daily editorial cartoon format.” I don’t think the fact that it’s conservative is neccesarily a bad thing. If you have a strip that deals with current events, it’s going to have a bias, and Prickly City is generally a funny strip with really endearing characters (I like Winslow especially). It’s not really like Mallard Filmore, which is just “look at how dumb liberals are” or B.C., which used to be funny and innovative, but lately, has turned into “Believe in Jesus or you’ll burn in hell! (oh, and here’s some fake dictionary definitions that are bad puns.)” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/prickly-city-humor-for-conservative-idiots/361026.md?page=4)