Project Wonderful Banner

Monday, October 08, 2007

That damned Ahmadinejad

What's Mallard raving about today?

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Rodents.

Is it just me, or would this caricature look like Abraham Lincoln, if Mallard put a stove-top hat on him? Except for the deformed index finger, of course.


BillyWitchDoctor said...

Is there ANY country where it's expressly illegal to wear live rodents in your underpants?

Tinny's choice of phrase is very telling. You see, it's not that you're FREE to speak your mind in America; you're just ALLOWED. Welcome to Tinsley's American Dream.

Speaking of disgusting people who are ALLOWED to speak in America, Tinny, I can't wait to hear your defense of Rush "Phony Soldiers" Limbaugh. This should be a howler.

Truce Binsley said...

I'm not sure why Tinshley would think it was bad idea to let Ahmadenijad speak at Columbia, since he ended up making a fool of himself with his deservedly ridiculed comments about the absence of gays in Iran.

Of course, Tinshley probably drew this comic before the speech, while still cowering in fear over what Ahmadenijad might say.

Michael said...

billywitchdoctor nailed it again. "Allowed" to speak, indeed.

NW said...

Why does Tinsley know whether or not it's legal to wear live rodents in your underpants?

And what does he mean by "wearing" the rodent. Is he wearing it as a condom?

Makes you wonder that he was drinking while writing THIS strip.

Mysterio said...


If Tinsley does mention Rush's comments (and that's a big if), he'll probably take the same route that other right-wing cartoonists have taken-"The Dems are obsessing over Rush, but you know who really hates the troops? Hillary Clinton and!"

Scanman said...

uhhh Tinsley it's NOT legal to have squirrels in your pants for gambling purposes in Springfield USA

tBone said...

Reading Mallard Fillmore is also legal, but not necessarily a good idea. See? It works!

Anonymous said...

I think the "rodents in the pants" reference is a reach out to the Senator Craig crowd.

Michael said...

So Mallard's point is that it's not a good idea to "allow" Ahmadinejad to speak here? For someone who claims to like free speech so much, comparing the actual practice of free speech to an underwear rodent isn't exactly a glowing recommendation of it. Is free speech only desirable if the speaker already agrees with you, Mallard?

exanonymous said...

I fail to see the parallel. Letting Iran's president show his true colors kind of kills sympathy for Iran, doesn't it? What's that got to do with rodents in pants that really just turns out to be a slow and silly method of pest control. And birth control.

Or does he really assume that all college students are so easily molded that they'll blindly follow what a speaker says and believe it with their hearts?

Wait... yes.

Frankly, I think it's a good test. If you can bring an evil dictator in to speak to the students and they do not turn into his zombie slaves, you are doing your job as a university. Unfortunately, people like Mallard don't like that because that means they can never use it to their advantage to gain followers with their lack of logic and general hate.

Kaitlyn said...

It looks like the duck should be angry, but his expression doesn't change at all - and Ahmadinejad's face hurts my eyes.

I'm addicted to Law and Order reruns on TNT, and I see commercials for Cold Case. The main actress reminds me of Mallard - her voice sounds the same no matter what she says.

As for the rodents...

I'm actually surprised that he's not pissed about right-wing speakers getting pied and Ahmadinejad not, of course, he's a leader of a country and all the security would have been tighter.