search
top

We’re in Trouble Now

Bloomberg is recruiting the best cartoonists in the world for the cause of gun control. Oh, if only to be so rich as to be able to impose my preferences on the rest of the world. It must be nice for billionaires. Of course, if I had that kind of money, I’d be spending it on a law degree, and then helping the underprivileged sue the government pro-bono. I think that would be more meaningful.

16 Responses to “We’re in Trouble Now”

  1. Bloomberg and cartoons go together.

  2. jbiros says:

    He is a near insane control freak. Pretty soon he is going to start building a huge wooden airplane just like H.Hughes.

    Anyone who wants to control people as bad as this guy is crazy.

    • SAS 2008 says:

      “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” C.S. Lewis – The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment

  3. Exurbankevin says:

    I foresee the NRA doing a “Mimes for Guns!” campaign in response. Or maybe “Tactical Interpretive Dance”.

  4. Archer says:

    He can hire whoever he wants. Collectively, they won’t be as funny or effective as Michael Ramirez, and I’m not sure he’ll be bought.

  5. Andy says:

    If I had that kind of money, I’d send you to law school.

  6. Billll says:

    If I could draw, I think I’d draw Obama, Reid, Pelosi. and Schumer doing a joyful rite of spring dance around a maypole consisting of a Jenga stack of small coffins, leaking blood out onto the ground.

  7. Billll says:

    Sorry, substitute Bloomberg for Reid.

  8. Andy B. says:

    The trouble with their approach is — and this is ideology neutral in my opinion — the perception of “best” political cartoonists is usually biased by whether you agree with their sentiments or not. People who already agree with the anti position will think they clever as all hell, and we’ll think they’re mostly dumb. Very few people will be persuaded by them one way or another. They are another example of a medium that is useful only for propagandizing those who already agree.

    My case-in-point is cartoonist Tony Auth, political cartoonist for the Philadelphia Inquirer. (Is he still? I haven’t looked at an issue of the Inky in years!) Auth won tons of prizes as a political cartoonist, but I never saw a single cartoon by him that I didn’t think was adolescent — about the quality I’d expect from a talented high school sophomore. And, I am capable of acknowledging when a well-drawn cartoon is clever, even when I hate its sentiment. But, Auth was/is rewarded for his ideology, despite his lack of talent.

  9. Clay says:

    How the hell does Gary Trudeau count as one of America’s best cartoonists?

    • Crotalus says:

      His strips are well-drawn and clever. However, he’s a committed socialist, when you look at the ideology in his cartoons.

    • Andy B. says:

      As I said above, I can acknowledge when a cartoonist whose sentiments I hate is clever and talented, so I agree with Crotalus. But as an example, your sentiment also illustrates what I said; a cartoonist’s messages will not be persuasive if you don’t already agree with him.

      Though I think Trudeau can be clever, I don’t follow his strip at all.

  10. Justin says:

    Most of these look like the cartoonists just sent in artwork that they already had laying around.

    I have to say, it’s a good thing that Bill Keane is on the list, because The Family Circus is fucking terrible, and everything Bill Keane stands for is also, likewise, terrible.

    Art Spiegelman, on the other hand, should really know better.

top