I hate that strip. One reason is because his only arguement is Straw men. He makes “the Liberals” or whatever say stupid things (that they have never actually said) and then knocks them down. Man it must be hard to do that! :dubious: :rolleyes:
The other thing is that he is just plain biased. Sure Doonesberry is biased also but when the Liberals (like Clinton) do something stupid, Trudeau will sometimes skewer them also. No such luck with that damn duck. He knows one song, and that not well. :wally
Now- I think PJ is both funny and sometimes convincing. Note that he also will skewer the GOP when they really need it.
That’s because conservatism isn’t funny, especially when you’re shackled with self-imposed rules like “criticism of the President/the Nation/the Republican party is unpatriotic/not allowed/treason.”
Politics can be damn funny, as Johnny Carson, Jay Leno, John Stewart, and David Letterman constantly demonstrate. And liberal humorists don’t have a problem getting laughs, because they’re not afraid to ding their own party/candidate/nation when the need arises. It’s only conservative humorists, with their black-and-white “you’re either with us or against us” mentality, that ends up short on material (at least when a Republican politician is involved).
Except that Tinsley is a liar (Liberal media? what cave did he crawl into 30 years ago?), while Tom Tomorrow’s strips tend to start with an indisputable fact, and then makes fun of it.
The more committed and obsessive one is about a cause, the less the likelihood that one will have a real sense of humor and have the capacity for self-mockery.
I haven’t seen any evidence that the creator of Mallard Fillmore has two new ideas a week, but even if he did that would still far exceed Johnny Hart, who is down to about two new ideas a year. If that.
Mallard Fillmore just makes me shake my head with wonder. Every strip is the same:
cross-eyed liberal with tongue hanging out: “Doy! I’m a liberal! Doy! I want what’s worst for everyone! Doy!”
Mallard: (rolling eyes) “Liberals!”
cross-eyed liberal with tongue hanging out: “Doy!”
I miss Bloom County, which was hands-down one of the best comics of all time. Doonesbury cracks me up now and then as well. I’d be happy to see a conservative counterpart to these which actually employed subtlety, sarcasm and humor, if for no other reason than to send Bruce Tinsley back to pumping gas where he belongs.
Not being personally familiar with Mallard Fillmore, I looked through the last two months’ worth of strips. I’ll admit, the line: “The stock market dropped like an Iraqi prisoner being tortured by a sadistic American soldier today” made me laugh, but probably not in the way Tinsley intended.
I used to subscribe to National Review in the late-60s, early '70s (before they were bought out by Josef Goebbels) and they had lots of funny stuff, even while not making fun of Richard Nixon or right wing Republicans. I’d be okay if Tinsley were a funny right wing ideologue. His problem is that even if a Liberal did something stupid, he’d still blow the joke, and use one his strawmen instead. He’s just the funniest right wing cartoonist working today.
The Daily Show does better jokes about Kerry than he does.
Oh, and in rec.arts.comics.strips, threads on Mallard are prefaced by DS - for Duck Shit.
I always figured that Mallard Fillmore was done through a pseudonym by Brutus, Shodan, and pkbites.
Those frothing members of the insane right who talk about the left like the stereotype of a 1970s black man bitching about “THE MAN” are so ludicrous that only they could write such things and find them funny and true.
I think O’Rourke is pretty funny, regardless of his fascist elitist racist pig status. But then, I also think George Will can be funny, so that tells you about my sense of humor. (Will had one article about ice cream, and how it’s impossible to be dignified when you’re ordering a "Nutty-Buddy’.)
Fascist…nope. Libertarian-leaning Conservative. He thinks you should smoke dope…conservatively.
Elitist…nope. Unless you think having people running things who actually know what they are doing is elitist, that is.
Racist…nope. The group he is hardest on is middle-class White Republicans like himself. He thinks a lot of them are fools.
Pig…probably. But he would wear the label proudly, while having a drink.
Parliament of Whores is one of the funniest, and most accurate books on government ever published. His evaluation of US Agricultural Policy is spot-on!
They were going to just cut the frontal lobe, but when the surgeon drew a dotted line marking where he was going to cut, he zigzagged back and forth all over the brain, and, well…
And there’s even less chance of filtering that viewpoint into art.
[old fart] Why, in my day giants strode through comics, from syndicated names in the local rag, Mad magazine, the 'Poon, underground 'zines. Sigh. Nobody worried whether Al Capp’s L’il Abner exactly balanced Pogo, though both definitely reflected stresses and issues of the times.
And rather accurately, balanced with the gentler 'toons of the day, though most of ‘em were rife with their own underlying viewpoints.
Cartoons are art, and that carries its own demands for craft, creativity and insight. Specifically OpEd cartoonists are a different breed. Shoving a strip onto the OpEd page solely on pre-fab viewpoints pretty much defeats the purpose.
Mallard Fillmore had a blip of faddish relevance sometime way back in Gingrich years. "Hey, check out the Geriatric Buffet for the Lunch Clubbers’ Rush Room!" Doonesbury is the Keith Richards of cartooning. Gratification is reserved for devoted occultists waiting for the dead to rip off a hollow riff. [/old fart]
I don’t mind Mallard Fillmore’s viewpoint. I mind like hell that the schtick is stale and moribund. Is this the pitiless artist’s eye and conscience of conservatism? Barf.
