Project Wonderful Banner

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Those damned pants

What's Mallard raving about today?

Judge Roy Pearson.

Mallard has absolutely no sense of composition, choosing to draw himself into this panel twice for reasons passing understanding. If this had been a blank white space with text it would have been just as effective.

I said it once, I'll say it again: Mallard is reaching a point where running his comic is akin to publishing a person's diary, assuming that it was a really, really, really boring person.


GeoX said...

You know what OTHER "fucking guy" is still a judge in spite of a mad frivolous lawsuit? Robert Bork, that's who. As a super-intellectually honest conservative scholar, I'm sure this OUTRAGES! Mallard to a similar degree.

Scanman said...

What a professional! Standing up for moral values while cursing on air!!

EddyPo said...

Today's strip is just mindless ramblings, ripped out of Turdsley's not so private diary.

Hey weirdo. Do you think anything you don't draw?

Anonymous said...

It isn't "fucking" guy, there are only four letters plus the optional double exclamation point. It has to be the unlikely "damn guy" or the even stupider sounding "shit guy". Then again, being a duck, it was probably "Kwak guy".

Anonymous said...

Robert Bork is not now and has not for many years been a judge. His lawsuit was criticized by a number of persons, including conservatives.

dlauthor said...

That's great, "anonymous." Can you point to the time Tinshley did it?

No? Oh, well. Have another drink, Bruce.

GeoX said...

I'm not sure that one profanity symbol equals one letter. I could be wrong, however.

Anonymous, are you saying Bork was disbarred? No? And, as dlauthor asked, do you REALLY imagine that Tinsley would criticize him? Then what exactly is your point?

And how is it possible that Tinsley actually has defenders? The mind boggles. I suppose if I were involved in such a futile endeavor, I too would prefer to remain anonymous.

Captain Slack said...

Hey weirdo. Do you think anything you don't draw?

I was reminded, on seeing this question, of Mil Millington's list of concepts his girlfriend Margret continues to have trouble assimilating, specifically of item 5: "One may have a thought and not say it. This does not make me insular, it merely separates me from you and that mad woman who's always shouting at the pigeons outside the supermarket."

Andy said...

The last time we covered this, the "joke" was our legal system that allows lawsuits like this to happen.

Except the suit was thrown out, providing a Tinsley-approved result. So our joke of a legal system actually works like it's supposed to in cases like these.

Our legal system is still a joke when it comes to capital murder trials in Texas.

BillyWitchDoctor said...

Geox: Oh yes--Tinny has a loyal "legion" of mouthbreathers who jam their fingers in their ears (until they touch) and wail LALALALALALA!!! (or just fart and curse) if anyone dares criticize their fellow Culture Warrior.

(This is why I'm so happy to find Duck And Cover where I can vent; if you say anything remotely critical of Tinsley at Comics Curmudgeon, one such mouthbreather will pitch a shrieking tantrum, and you'll get banned. Go ahead, ask me how I know this.)

As for the issue at hand; no, I wouldn't say this is a case of the system working. Contrary to other posts, the cleaners are still working on getting their substantial legal fees back from the jackass judge--and of course, even if the money is restored they'll never get back the hours wasted coping with the moron.

But beware the "concerned" neocon; when Tinsley grouses about frivolous lawsuits, what he really envisions is a system where Big Business can do whatever the hell it wants to you (think the infamous $25 Halliburtonburger with Cheese) and you have no recourse at all.

Anonymous said...

This is "Anonymous" again. I am not "defending Tinsley," just trying to straighten you out on a simple fact. Bork hasn't been a judge since about 1988, almost 20 years ago. Of course I'm not saying he was "disbarred" - that is something quite different and refers to disqualifying an attorney from practice, not whether someone is a judge or not! I never said Tinsley criticized Bork's lawsuit, but other people did, and some were conservatives and some were not. It's fine to dislike this strip, but try not to be too ignorant along the way, OK?