What's Mallard raving about today?
Pirates, Mascots.
Honestly, when's the last time anyone remembers a significant outcry about team name?
I remember the Indians mascot itself being deemed offensive a while back because of it's general appearance. But honestly, this is nothing but manufactured outrage over something which simply does not occur with enough frequency to justify actual outrage.
Certainly not when our economy is in turmoil and War Criminals are roaming the country at liberty.
14 comments:
Actually, Cleveland's logo is really unbelievably offensive in every way--it's frankly shocking to me that this is still considered acceptable in 2009.
That doesn't make this comic any less dumb, however.
Not a bad rendering of the logo, though. Almost an exact copy, in fact. Except that the original has a little "TM" on it. I wonder what that means.
Weird. Since Pirates = Terrorists in right wing calculus now, I'd think that Tinshley would be all up in arms that there's a baseball team with that name, because Why Does Pittsburgh Hate America? But probably in his mind, only the non-white pirates are bad guys, right?
Yet another example, by the way, that Tinshley hates baseball. Two days in a row now!
ObAnonycoward: Obama is a failure because the snipers only shot three of them! Also, Kenyan birth certificate 57 states where are my pants blarrrgh
and Mallard ignores the fact that the Pirates are doing quite well so far this year.
When the Pirates meet the Mariners, Obama's gonna have to send in a swat team ... cuz most years, that's all that would save the Mariners.
(... you can tell I'm a fan of "Lesser Seattle"?)
It's not just manufactured outrage, it's a manufactured non-issue. Jesus H. Christ! Now we have straw Pirates.
How can somebody so stupid remember to breath and/or find his way home from the pub?
WV: croble - what you'd use to pry Tinkley's head open, in a fruitless search for grey matter.
It seems to me like he's done this one before. It's one of those Mad Libs jokes he enjoys so much. Case in point:
"Debates have popped up over whether the name 'Boston Celtics' is offensive...."
"....To the Irish community...."
Now just slap on a copyright-infringing logo and a duck and you have yourself a comic strip!
With our country facing so many historic and fundamental problems, it's good to see Mallard Fillmore confronting them head-on. Mascots, sports bars, small hamburgers, collectibles...
WV: urrit. The verbal response given by certain cartoonists when told to walk down the yellow line.
I can't wait until Hockey Season and he starts complaining about the Anaheim Ducks.
Perhaps the person who finds a team logo unbelievably offensive, with a slight revision, would you be less shocked concerning said logo?
What about the logo for the Duck and Cover blog, do you find it offensive?
Jeez, anonymous loser isn't even trying anymore, is it?
Dear Anonymous Coward: You need to bring on the funny.
While 12xuser's comment glossed over the Fair Use Doctrine, it has timing and a crisp punch line, ergo funny (albeit unfair ... but what's unfair when you're being funny?)
Your comment OTOH has neither, ergo not funny.
I'm trying to be helpful here. What was the punchline in linking to Cleveland's logo? What was the "slight revision"? You forgot the joke!
Likewise, the "Duck and Cover logo" joke ... you telegraphed your punchline by putting the link on "do you find it offensive". You woulda been funny if you had done this:
"Do you find the Duck and Cover blog logo offensive?"
I think the "sligt revision" of the Indians logo is, as 12xuser pointed out, the lack of the "TM".
No doubt Anonymous Coward thinks that if he removes that, he is not infringing on the trademark.
And the strip is STILL dumb.
To be serious, it's totally fair use. No argument there.
Post a Comment