Mallard Fillmore

krabapple · Postby **krabapple** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 3:51 pm

Is there a reason the duck is named after the president widely considered to be the worst in US history?

Bennett Cerf · Postby **Bennett Cerf** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:57 pm

Today's strip is an improvement over the Coburn strips, since it is at least an attempt at actual political commentary. Of course, it also demonstrates that Tinsley doesn't have a clue what "profiling" is. (It's not "profiling" to judge a government based on its record and policies.)

I also suspect that the line about "no matter which side you were on" is Tinsley's sneaky way of not quite admitting that he disagreed with Bush on the issue.

Xenu · Postby **Xenu** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:43 pm

lukpac wrote:What business does Ann Coulter have on a site called "Jewish World Review"?

I used to wonder that myself (in fact, I thought Coulter was Jewish for a long time because of that).

I assume it's her pro-Israel stance.

czeskleba · Postby **czeskleba** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:58 pm

krabapple wrote:Is there a reason the duck is named after the president widely considered to be the worst in US history?

The duck is named George W. Bush? (insert rimshot here).

As far as I can guess, there's no significance. President Fillmore is best-known for the Compromise of 1850, and Tinsley strikes me as the type that would consider any compromise to be wishy-washy. The Whigs in general supported the idea of a strong Congress and a weak President and government spending on business development and infrastructure, which I would think Tinsley would tend to oppose. Although I see that President Fillmore lowered postal rates during his term, and Tinsley has devoted strips to bitching about the postal service, so maybe that's the connection.

Bennett Cerf · Postby **Bennett Cerf** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:00 pm

Today's comic is actually reasonably competent. It's not funny or insightful or original or anything like that, but at least it doesn't seem completely unworthy of being published.

Bennett Cerf · Postby **Bennett Cerf** » Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:40 am

Ummm, what?

krabapple · Postby **krabapple** » Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:51 am

Will someone please pay Jim Borgman to beat the living crap out of this idiot?

Rspaight · Postby **Rspaight** » Fri Mar 31, 2006 2:07 pm

I'm sure the fact that he's making a living at this drives countless struggling cartoonists to suicide.

Ryan

MK · Postby MK » Fri Mar 31, 2006 4:56 pm

Amen. It's probably what killed Charles Schulz.

Bennett Cerf · Postby **Bennett Cerf** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 9:31 am

Postby **lukpac** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 2:06 pm

Do people like Tinsley not think global warming exists, or do they just not care?

Rspaight · Postby **Rspaight** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:25 pm

They're not worried at all about climate change. They're only worried about "liberals" taking away their SUVs and regulating emissions.

Therefore, they insist that global warming is a "natural" process, and not "brought on by us thoughtless humans and our consumer-oriented lifestyle," so that industry can go unrestrained.

As with everything else, global warming is only important insofar as how it affects them directly right this minute.

Ryan

MK · Postby MK » Tue Apr 04, 2006 3:43 pm

I never realized climate scientists were referred to as liberals. Except for those working for Exxon, of course.

czeskleba · Postby **czeskleba** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 12:48 am

lukpac wrote:Do people like Tinsley not think global warming exists, or do they just not care?

I think the standard conservative position is that global warming has not yet been proven. And as long as there is at least one scientist somewhere in the world who is willing to question it, it will never be "proven" by their standards. By those standards, I guess it also has not been proven that the Earth is not flat.

MK wrote:I never realized climate scientists were referred to as liberals. Except for those working for Exxon, of course.

Don't you realize anyone who is not overtly promoting the Conservative Agenda is a liberal by default?

krabapple · Postby **krabapple** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 10:42 am

czeskleba wrote:
lukpac wrote:Do people like Tinsley not think global warming exists, or do they just not care?

I think the standard conservative position is that global warming has not yet been proven. And as long as there is at least one scientist somewhere in the world who is willing to question it, it will never be "proven" by their standards. By those standards, I guess it also has not been proven that the Earth is not flat.

As best I can tell, the 'standard' conservative position goes something like this:

Global warming hasn't been proved to be occurring.

or if it has, human contributions haven't been proven to be significant, so there's nothing we need to do to cut back on greenhouse emissions

or if they have, global warming will actually benefit the world economy, so there's nothing we need to do to cut back on greenhouse emissions.

And besides, those scientists were wrong about global cooling back in the 70's, nyah, nyah.

for further details, see George Will.