Cartoon for March 13
Barack Obama offers hope to African-Americans that they could finally see one of their own in the White House. Hillary Rodham Clinton does the same for women. But they're not alone. Only John McCain gives old pricks something to hope for.
Barack Obama offers hope to African-Americans that they could finally see one of their own in the White House. Hillary Rodham Clinton does the same for women. But they're not alone. Only John McCain gives old pricks something to hope for.
Click on the cartoon to make it bigger.
posted by Ted Rall at
11:26 AM
20 Comments:
Going after Truman? How... random? I mean, aren't there a lot of other pricks? Or did you just feel like going after an unusual target?
Truman is one of our worst presidents. For dropping the Bomb alone, he deserves to be vilified. Now it can forever be said that there's a precedent for using nuclear weapons, and that the U.S. deserves to be hit by them since it didn't hesitate to use them on others.
His role in the Red Scare, coupled with his decision to provoke the Cold War with our Soviet allies--at a cost of billions of dollars wasted by both sides--makes him nearly Bush-like in his idiocy.
Ted, any comments on Ferraro??
I agree with some of what you say about Truman, but I think your logic about the use of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is faulty. I think it is logical to deduce that had the horrors of those weapons not been exposed through their use that one time, which was relatively mild compared to what later nukes could do, they would have been used at some point in a standoff with the Soviets, most likely the Cuban Missile Crisis. The use of those bombs during World War II also does not make, and I have never seen it used as, a justification to use them against the United States. The fear I have moving forward is in fact that the knowledge of how catastrophic they are is being lost. The real justification in using nukes against the United States is OUR unabashed threat to everyone in the world that we reserve the right to use them again, as a first strike if we so deem. The use of depleted uranium in munitions demonstrates the insanity of the American state in it's persecution of abuse on this planet. To Bush Co., nukular weapons are simply one more tool in an arsenal, because these people demonstrate absolutely no discretion whatsoever.
McCain epitomizes the type of maniac who would authorize their use. I don't believe he is mentally stable. If he picks Romney as a running mate I will actually fear him being elected.
McCain is extremely adversarial toward the Russians, and the United States is clearly to blame for antagonizing that relationship. I have corrected myself on this in the past few months. It is only in the wake of George W Bush that McCain isn't exposed as a scary tyrant.
Other than that little meta-rant, I liked the cartoon :), it's a Rall classic.
What Ferraro said isn't racist. But it's bad strategy. And it's also an absurd statement. Obama has gotten where he is despite being black, not because of it.
Hey, let's not forget the very real possibility that many more people, civilians and military, Japanese and American, would have died if we'd had to invade.
Keep in mind, also, that even after Hiroshima, hard-line elements of the Japanese military attempted to stage a coup to prevent the Emperor from surrendering.
I don't even Truman his options or his choice.
This cartoon is funny all around...
...but "Hope We Can Fear" in the last panel automatically upgrades it to hilarious. Nicely done, Ted.
I'm changing my vote from Huckabee, to McCain, I'm an old prick, now, I see that old pricks can get recognition for being something besides....old pricks!
We ascribe such powers to our elected leaders, yet they are all too human. While employed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania I watched as the racist Christianists ran a smear campaign against a black manager. Only later was I asked about his competence. The political hack who did the firing realized that they had been lied to, the hack's career was over, and that simply by asking the right question the whole problem could have been avoided.
Mold
On the subject of nuclear war, I remember the lesson of the first Superman movie. When Lex Luthor tells Superman about his fiendish plot, Luthor explains that people "Will pay through the nose" for real estate. "Luthorville, Marina del Lex, Otisburg...", that I realised how right he was. But the funny thing I learned is , If you nuke a country, you can't use the beach. Real estate is one of the major spoils of war and it's absolutely amazing that we don't even get cheap gas as pabulum. So, with that in mind, I feel that only religious whacko would start a nuclear war. Is Lahore burning?? Walle, dorme bene.
had the horrors of those weapons not been exposed through their use that one time, which was relatively mild compared to what later nukes could do, they would have been used at some point in a standoff with the Soviets, most likely the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Nukes are cheap and relatively easily deployed, but are we talking about popular perception or perception of leaders? The idea that the destruction is so sudden seems to mean a lot to everyday Joe's, but what do everyday Joe's have to do with deciding whether or not to use them post Hiroshima/Nagasaki?
I suspect that any leader with a brain knew using them was dumb and fucked up, and the US only used them at the time because they knew no one else had them yet. By the time of the Cuban Missile crisis, was MAD not in effect?
Also, didn't Truman call himself Christian? If so, it is strange that he decided to wipe out the stubborn christian comunity of Japan.
Also, did't the Soviet's refusal to leave Eastern Europe play something of a role in provoking the Cold War?
FDR and Stalin agreed to leave the USSR in possession of Eastern Europe as a buffer against a future German threat. Truman welched on the deal negotiated by his predecessor, precipitating the Cold War.
Oh. Still, got to ask: who was more in the wrong there then? FDR's appeasement of a monster, or Truman welching on same?
I really don't think our hindsight roast of Truman is very well grounded. It's possible that good people here will simply have to disagree.
This is also why I dislike the Humanities, I'm sure this isn't a new argument.
The use of nukes on Japan was a calculated decision that involved flexing a little muscle to the Soviets. FDR's appeasement was conducted in the full knowledge that the Soviets were the only ones who could actually defeat the Germans; at no time were there more than 2 million German soldiers on the Western Front. Nasty decisions where made, I think we should not be so self righteous about them now.
As far as religious wackos using nukes......if George W Bush and his core constituency doesn't represent religious wackoism I don't know what does.
Ted, you've been producing some great work lately, but this cartoon is amazing. You've got a good belly laugh in every single panel! My favorite is: Having my needs ignored by someone who looks like me would be awesome! That pretty much summarizes my relationship to the U.S. presidents in office for my entire adult life...
That first panel stands alone and is right on target. Isn't it sad that we have to automatically assume that a candidate is a liar. Such a damn shame
Aggie Dude makes some very fair points.
Still, its an uncomforatble historical reality that FDR made a deal with one devil in order to defeat another. And, by many objective rationale, the former was actually a worse devil than the latter.
So, I think it's still legit to ask whether FDR or Truman made the worse error of judgement.
Truman did a lot of good for civil rights.
"The use of nukes on Japan was a calculated decision that involved flexing a little muscle to the Soviets."
The Trinity test's photos and high speed film alone were terrifying enough. Like always, the advisers who won the day were unimaginative dolts.
Post a Comment
<< Home