Chuck Asay died for your sins: batshit rightwing cartoonists 2009

I also like the fact that the pink triangle doesn't, for some reason, remind Asay of the people killed in the holocaust because they 'went against nature'. I mean, he went out of his way to draw the triangle.

Yeah, but these are militant gays; got an armband and everything.

why does that gay have a jumbo shrimp on his forehead

it's gayfish

wtf was that. dammit

i'm trying to figure out what's on his neck.

i think its a tattoo that says "Doo"

its a PEARL NECKLACE lol fagz

meanwhile, TAXES IS THEFT OR SOME SHIT still reigns supreme in somebody's mind

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/mallard/2000/MFT20090218.jpg

NY Post's ``apology'':

Wednesday’s Page Six cartoon — caricaturing Monday’s police shooting of a chimpanzee in Connecticut — has created considerable controversy.

It shows two police officers standing over the chimp’s body: “They’ll have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill,” one officer says.

It was meant to mock an ineptly written federal stimulus bill.

Period.

But it has been taken as something else — as a depiction of President Obama, as a thinly veiled expression of racism.

This most certainly was not its intent; to those who were offended by the image, we apologize.

However, there are some in the media and in public life who have had differences with The Post in the past — and they see the incident as an opportunity for payback.

To them, no apology is due.

Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon — even as the opportunists seek to make it something else.

that's so Post

god damn what a bunch of whiney bitches

Sometimes a cartoon is just a cartoon

"It's was just a noose nailed to his door! A piece of rope, how could that cause a fuss?!"

Either stand behind the cartoon 100% or retract it 100%, you half-assed Post wimps.

It's like they're saying, we apologize that you aren't smart enough to understand the cartoon.

what if they're apologizing for blowing our mind?

I want more reaction from Rev. Al Franken.

It annoys me that when someone issues a "sorry you're too dumb to get it" half-apology like that (which happens all the time) the newspaper headline is still like "Post apologizes for cartoon," even though they aren't really apologizing.

they have yet to even attempt to explain what theme ties the monkey attack to the stimulus bill - they were both news stories? maybe if the monkey was supposed to be the stimulus bill. but the monkey is the author of the bill. the bill is so bad it was written by a crazed monkey? ok in this thread weve all seen that sort of sloppy thrown together thinking. obv not convinced and still clearly a horrible choice either way.

lol at that 4th grade level faux apology

http://i42.tinypic.com/261j0iu.gif

POOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOP
HEHEHEHEHEH
HEHEHEHEHE
HEH
POOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOPPPPPP

im willing to believe that the cartoonist is so dumb and clueless he didnt think about the "monkey" bit--but for this to have gone thru the editorial wringer and emerged intact is just straight up wtf.

it bothers me that the gop has a sweet elephant and the dems get a poopy donkey - they should switch to a tiger or some such awzom beast

I remember someone on the Corner once complaining that libs are sweet, beautiful blue and conservatives have to be mad, evil red. For realz.

be curious to see what the posts cartoon editorial wringer looks like - bet it doent do so much wringing

blue is preferable to red def

I remember someone on the Corner once complaining that libs are sweet, beautiful blue and conservatives have to be mad, evil red. For realz.

― Mordy, Friday, February 20, 2009 9:45 AM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

looking a little red there, comrade

i imagine someone in the office bringing it up like, "you know this could probably be misconstrued as racist" and the post editors talking about it like a bunch of screaming 10-year-olds, "No he means THIS, STUPID!!"

you'd think with their rep as the party of geriatric, liver-spotted segregationists on their deathbeds the GOP might welcome a color as vibrant and alive as red

I assume they knew that it might be conceived as racist, but probably determined there was enough plausible deniability to run it anyway. Not that I think they *are* racist (though I have no idea), but I think they think of themselves as provocateurs, and anti-PC'ers, and so this is a good chance to tweak liberal noses.

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/1887/mk9lpsek8.th.gif

it bothers me that the gop has a sweet elephant and the dems get a poopy donkey - they should switch to a tiger or some such awzom beast

dUDE, I'll take a good farm animal over a circus freak any day of the week.

whats the matter w/arkansas

http://i41.tinypic.com/8xrkzq.jpg

thats a joke making fun of the white guy right

i don't know what's going on anymore. i'm scared.

has gary mccoy ever seen a picture of eric holder?

scared of HILARITY

http://i39.tinypic.com/2hqcnph.jpg

wrong nose, sorry

http://i41.tinypic.com/2r75wdl.gif

sometimes these guys do a single "rednecks can be dumb about shit too" comic to prove.... something??? i remember bugging out in the old thread after posting a million far-right brian fairington comix to one where some gun nut is pontificating about the 2nd amendment and it was so close to being plausibly gun nut but i guess dude was showing hes a moderate when it coms to school shootings??

Looks like Richard Pryor with David Paterson's eyes.

I'm willing to buy that it wasn't created as a racist conceit. I'm not willing to accept that it made it into print without someone along the way realizing the obvious racial interpretation. I mean, this is a well-worn ploy of the right: Annoy the left by acting stupidly and then pretending not to understand what they could have pahwwwssssssibly done wrong when called on it. The Post's editors understood very well the lines of development of this type of juvenile drama, but they didn't quite realize that they would have a wider audience this time. At least, their 1/2-assed "apology" makes me think that they're a wee bit worried, though not too much, about the backlash. They've probably tripled their sub re-up for this month, tho.

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/lb0223cd20090220075017.jpg

OH NO NOW THEY COMING FOR YOUR WHITE GRANDMAS PURSES

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/2-20-09natohelprgb20090220033519.jpg

Last one's kinda accurate isn't it?

I mean, dude's only been in office for about a month, but that's been the response thus far, no?

gma's mouth is AGAPE damn

i think thats her upper lip

Move the last one from 'batshit' to "unfortunately very accurate and realistic"

Well, firstly Europe's offer of help in Afghanistan occurred under Bush. And also http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/ukfs_news/hi/newsid_7900000/newsid_7901000/7901078.stm , combined with individual states (ie Britain wanting to increase their troop levels) makes the second part bullshit. I wish we'd said no to Bush, on both Iraq and Afghanistan, and I wish we would say no to Obama about more body bags coming home. But that's not 'accurate or realistic'.

There are 30,000 European troops in Afghanistan, which considering the people of Europe thought it was stupid is either commendable or deplorable depending on your point of view. But I live in a small village attached to a military base, from a military family, and most of my friends are in the forces, having served (usually multiple times) in Afghanistan, and I find this 'unhelpful Europe' meme to be insulting. Especially as I have yet to meet a member of our forces who thinks we should be there at all, yet are willing to leave their families to serve.