What's Mallard raving about today?
Republican Party, Democratic Party.
Mallard's version of the election year chant of "a plague on both your houses" is as incomprehensible as pretty much everything he does.
Anyone want to venture an opinion as to what the hell today is all about?
11 comments:
I don't care what he really meant; Mallard has just admitted that the Democrats are the ones who are interested in consensus, coalition-building and cooperation. (alliteration much?)
In the words of Stephen Colbert, I accept your apology.
In a nutshell: Democrats equate cooperation with overruling republicans.
In defense: so do republicans.
You wouldn't think that cooperation was being tossed aside in favor of someone else unless you felt your views were the ones that should have been used in the spirit of "cooperation."
Where's my Hillary photos? HE PROMISED ME HILLARY PHOTOS.
Well, that's us librul fascists--always beating up on the poor down-trodden li'l republicans and taking their lunch money.
Poor Tinsley. He clearly misses the good ol' days of Gingrich and Delay and their ilk telling the minority Dems to get the hell out of their way and calling it "bipartisanship."
That makes one of you, Tinny. Enjoy your bawling crybaby status over the coming four years. It's a small price for America to pay.
I think he's saying that the Republicans have lost. Tinny never like those Republicans.
And, like Ex, I too feel cheated. Where is that Hillary picture??
Ummmm, from what I have seen and read, it seems that to the GOP, "bipartisanship" translates to "give the Republicans everything they want or they'll pitch a fit."
So the fact that a handful of Dems are basically saying "screw you, we're the elected majority for a reason" is frightening to Tinman. OH NOES WHAT IF THEY FORCE EVERYONE TO GAY MARRY?!?
Given the way the Democrats shamelessly gave up and rolled over on almost every major issue, Tinsley should be happy for the supposed merger. The "liberal" majority has gone along all too happily with Bush's unconstitutional and unjust war, with torture, and with the evisceration of constitutional rights. If only the Democratic party WERE the all-powerful, idealistic threat Tinsley seems to think!
Uh oh, just learned that William F. Buckley died. We'll be seeing some pathetically fawning cartoons a few weeks from now.
Maybe Mallard is suggesting a compromise in which the one-party state takes the name of its ruling party from the Democrats and its policies from the Republicans?
I think it's a follow-up to this strip, which in turn is based on the (as Matt and goodnonymous point out) completely Opposite Day premise that the problem with Congress is all the goody-good Republicans who are too ready to make nice, and all the ruthless, jugular-hungry Democrats who will do or say literally anything to win. (Brucie's good buddy David Horowitz got an entire book out of that premise, which should tell you pretty much everything you need to know about both of them and the right-wing noise machine in general. Except why the ring-tailed rambling hell these people still get paid thousands of dollars per book, while much more coherent disputants with a much better grasp of reality have to make do with a soapbox on the corner to warn about much more serious problems, like the Venusians beaming sexy pictures into my brain and the warthog demons trying to steal my valuable gum wrappers.)
TuxedoSlack: That's an interesting cartoon. Too bad it was in 2006 so it's ineligible for a Golden Ellipses award for "most flagrant ellipses abuse".
Post a Comment