What's Mallard raving about today?
Liberals, Obesity, Drugs.
I won't pretend to speak for all Progressives, but let's compare and contrast my mind with Mallards.
Mallard: Drugs come from Mexico and Colombia, I blame Mexicans and Colombians.
Me: I blame the drug cartels which operate out of those countries.
Mallard: Progressives don't blame drug suppliers.
Me: That's an idiotic Straw Man.
Mallard: Progressives blame fast food companies for Obesity.
Me: That's also an idiotic Straw Man.
Mallard: Let's only attack problems from the supply side.
Me: Why don't we attack both the supply and demand side of the problem and solve it faster?
Mallard: You want me to hold two thoughts in my head at the same time? Blaaaargh!
18 comments:
Between the magical vanishing glasses, being the 43rd installment of a newly introduced series, the random shoehorning of Mallard into the first panel, the stereotypical hippie ponytail, AND the rampant straw men, it would seem we have a new golden standard for stupidity in this comic.
Wooo...
Maybe this is why his cartoons are all straw man arguments. If he wants to understand a progressive's views, instead of talking to them he just looks in their ear and says, "Wooo..."
Hey, we forgot about Reagan and the CIA setting up tin pot dictators in South America to "stop the spread of communism", which gave the drug cartels their power in those countries!
Is this what Tinsley thinks "supply-side economics" means? "If we nuke Mexico, the drug trade will stop!" Wooo...
Yes, the two situations are identical!
Darn those drug-producing companies and the millions they spend advertising their drugs every day!
Curse the way they pack their products with hidden, um, drugginess and always offering to supersize your order!
WV: 'butscifi' -- speculative fiction pulled from your butt
"Wooo..." is the smartest thing I've read in this comic so far this year.
word veri: cozies. Chinese-made foam sleeves with American flags and crying bald eagles on them, purportedly designed to keep a canned beverage cold. Brucie doesn't use them because they don't sell whiskey in 12oz cans.
I tried to read the text, but I got stuck on the fact that it looked like extra care was taken to have Mallard look ready to have the word "progressive" shoved up his butt.
That's what happens when you usually draw your strip with only the head or as a blob on a couch.
I too found the positioning of Mallard as a little...odd. Of course, my puzzlement over the duck was completely dwarfed by my bewilderment over Tinsley's "facts."
Nice touch how all of a sudden the Liberal straw man presupposes market forces of supply and demand.
And a peek into the Neocon mind ...
OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD WHY DID I LOOK THE RIVERS OF BLOOD AND THE HOWLING MAGGOT-COVERED CHILDREN AND THE CITIES AWASH WITH FIRE OH GOD WHY WHY WHY OH GOD NOOOOOOOOO
Inside Tinshley's "mind":
Consistency requires treating all drug dealers alike: either sell cocaine in middle school snack machines, next to the twinkies and Coca-Cola, or bomb the heck out of Columbia and Coca-Cola bottling plants (and every other user of HFCS).
That'd be harsh but I suppose it's logical.
Congratulations, Tinsley, you have implied that corporations are as bad as drug addicts and deales. This is a completely unfair accusation, of course, because though drug dealers and addicts are some of the worst scum on Earth, all executives are exponentially times worse. This is not the first time I have pointed out such an obvious, unintended implication--maybe, if Tinsley were more literate than a sixth grader, he could avoid such errors.
Bruce Tinsley wanted to say "Puerto Ricans and Costa Ricans," but he was too cowardly. Rican is equivalent to nigger for Latinos.
Word Verification: Tatippa, the polar opposite of a teetotaler, i.e, Bruce Tinsley.
A floating duck, freaking out at the demonic that is rambling about enemies and self-destruction? How much Hedlitin did Tinsley take?
Word Verification: Detart, art produced by retard, such as Mallard Fillmore would be if it had any artistic merit.
So the basic message here is "liberal hypocrites! They refuse to criticize drug cartels, and yet they're HAPPY to attack fast food restaurants! Where as we non-hypocritical conservatives LOVE to attack drug cartels, but we don't have WORD ONE to say in criticism of fast food! Wooo..." This is actually his argument. Huh.
In all fairness, you can see why a fan of Rush Limbaugh would be eager to avoid blaming dopers for their own problems.
Peek inside Bruce Tinsley's mind #34:
"zzzzz ... SNXX-X-X-X -- UUCHHH!! Aww, crap -- what crawled into my mouth an' died?? ... Shit, where's that bottle? ... Aw, man, I finished off the whole thing last night? ... Well, at least Fox is still on ... dang, that Gretchen Carlson is hot ...
"What time is it? ... OH, F**K!!! I gotta send in the next batch of strips in half an hour and I'm still one short! OK, OK, uh ... paper, pen ... What was that talking point I heard last year? ... Oh, yeah, liberals blame America first. Heh ... I'll call 'em 'progressives' in quotes 'cuz that'll piss 'em off ... Ugh, looks like I need another panel ... What were they talkin' about on Fox last night? Somethin' about obesity? Oh, yeah -- some dumb liberals blame fast food for it ... aaaand ... DONE! Haw ... now for a reward. Where'd I put that fifth of gin? ..."
Not That Anonymous' Peek Into The Neo-"Conservative" Mind #67,327.9B:
"Obama will go to hell for freeing up abortion funding! We are Christians who believe in the sanctity of human life!"
"...Yay war! To the victor go the oils! Blow up th' towelheads!"
Your turn. C'mon, people, there are so many possibilities!
Peek into Bruce Tinsley's mind #135
Well, gee - other than the facts that the two situations eluded to have absolutely nothing to do with each other; and that there is, in fact, no contradiction at all in the two viewpoints shoe-horned into straw progressive's head, the srip still makes no goddamned sense.
Well, what exactly is he even arguing here. Is he saying that by refusing to condemn the whole nation we are wrong? If that's the case then any kind of geopolitical movement needs to consider that, we then need to assume that the US is functionally a corporatist state with the focus of power to those who have the greatest degree of wealth. He could also look at the issues from multiple persepectives. You know like how cocaine and other 'high end' drugs tend to be focused on the upper and middle class and the fact that we as a nation consume a crapload of these drugs. Maybe triyng to figure out what is causing this hunger and stopping it would be a good way to deal with it.
Post a Comment