Posted on 06/12/2007 4:02:36 PM PDT by Alien Syndrome
Last week, after watching the Half Hour News Hour, I compared it to the Daily show only to realize that Fox news has once again validated one of my principles. It is my belief that only conservatives can truly understand humor at any level. For the propose of this article I will focus on one of the subjects I know best, comic strips. This is an area that conservative humor really shines through; which is easily seen since most successful comics have been written by conservatives (especially with political comics). Now there are some liberal comic strips that do well in the paper despite being (how’s the PC way put it) humorously challenged. This can be attributed to the fact that liberals are so desperate to have their agenda in the funnies that they will whine and beg to keep it in the papers. They would waste space that could be given to more deserving artists all in the name of “diversity”; this is the truest with their primary attempt to squeeze into the news print: Doonesbury.
Now let’s compare Doonesbury to the essential conservative comic Mallard Fillmore, and you can see what I’m talking about. We’ll start on how they are organized issue-wise. With Mallard Fillmore, Bruce Tinsley will tackle a wide range of topics; from economics to immigration he covers all bases. He is even equal opportunity with his wit; he will criticize President Bush and other republicans on some occasions. Now look at Doonesbury, as you can see it is only attacking bush or Iraq. It is so set on its left-wing agenda that it leaves all jokes to the wayside (half of the strips don’t even make sense). Fillmore always delivers a funny punch line, while at the same time showing his view of the world. Why can’t Doonesbury’s artist (and I use the term "artist" loosely) Garry Trudeau do this, because he like all other leftist entertainers blindly follow the liberal philosophy that it is more important to attack the other guy than it is to be funny. In fact, Doonesbury will repeat the same story or punch line over and over again just make sure he drove his point into his audiences’ heads (but to be honest, liberals are pretty slow at comprehending things).
Mallard also wins on character and story development. Tinsley’s world is populated by a multitude of deep and quirky characters (from the sharp-witted Fillmore to the absentminded Mr. Noseworthy) all of which are truthful representations of their real world counterparts. Each has their own ongoing story plotline (I’m particularly enjoying to see Noseworthy being forced to come to grips with his conservative daughter) and distinct personality. Now look at Doonesbury, characters are only as deep as they need to be in order attack conservative. Many are just one-dimensional stereotypes used to mock those who aren’t as liberal as Trudeau wants them to be. All the “non-conservative” regular characters have the same personality traits and are interchangeable in any given situation. All this finds its way back to the fact that liberals can’t see the reality of the world around them. They willfully never experience life, choosing instead to go with left-approved propaganda and therefore don’t know how people truly act.
Finally, Mallard is the better work of art. Tinsley shows an aptitude for characterization and caricatures of celebrities and politicians, showing a talent in hitting emotional variety visually as well a psychologically. Trudeau, however, only shows that he puts no work into his drawings at all. Save for hair style, all of his characters look exactly the same; no variation what so ever. The same can be said about his back grounds; most of which seems to be photo-copied from one panel to the next. Many of the caricatures are simple designs (take for example the atom that represents Bush), or are disembodied word balloons emanating from the Whitehouse; forgoing the need to draw anything at all. All this is done in order hide the fact that he has no talent what so ever.
So if anyone tries to push on you the myth that there is no such thing as conservative humor, just point Mallard Fillmore and Doonesbury and prove how very wrong they are.
Then why does Half-Hour New Hour suck so much? Surnow needs to stop wasting his time on it and focus on 24.
Mallard Fillmore seems to have as much plotline as Doonesbury (don’t read Doonesbury all that much), and in terms of drawing style, Doonesbury has more skillfully drawn characters, even if its message often isn’t good. (just giving credit where it’s due).
How long have you been reading comic strips like Mallard Fillmore and Doonesbury? While Trudeau saves most of his venom for Bush and things conservative, he has in the past unleashed his satire and sarcasm against hillary, against the hypocrisy of certain liberal activism organizations, and in a stunning and temporary socially conservative moment against the great evil that was Disco music.
As P.J. O'Rourke once said, a conservative will tell you there are some things you shouldn't laugh at, but a liberal will tell you there are some things you're not allowed to laugh at. Anytime I hear there's something I'm not allowed to laugh at, that's when I know I've struck a subject that desperately needs lampooning.
Why does anybody care?
Was it Algore or was it Clinton that was portrayed by Doonesbury as a Waffle?
Bill Clinton: When Clinton was elected in 1992, Trudeau gave his readers the chance to vote on what his presidential Icon would be. The choices both reflected Clinton’s reputation for being wishy-washy: a flipping coin or a large waffle. The waffle got the most votes and became Clinton’s official avatar. However, the waffle appeared infrequently after a while when Clinton’s “waffling” became less of a hot-button issue and fewer people got the joke. Thus Clinton was most often portrayed by the “White House Dialog” (see below).
Calvin & Hobbes - problem solved
Doonesbury was funny, sorta, a long, long time ago. Drug-addled Duke was sort of a hero to me, esp. when he was taking shots at people with his Luger...
From what I can tell of Doonesbury’s artwork is that it’s only couple pictures and panels repeated over and over again (this is especially noticeable in his “Whitehouse” comics) and what characters there are have a dull and lifeless look to them, no emotion at all. At least Mallard Fillmore has a fresh look to everyday and the character’s emotions are clearly defined.
Sucks so much? You're being too kind. The show is absolutely unwatchable. I blame that for the stupid "Jack Bauer rescues the princess he can't have" plot twist that ruined 24 this year.
“The sky is falling and we’re powerless to stop it” just doesn’t have much potential as comedy.
The pilots stunk except for the ACLU commericals, but I’ve been LMAO over the new episodes.
His venom towards the left is usually short lived and only give the appearance of fairness. He spends most of his time bashing conservatives.
Thanks for the comics, I enjoyed the PBS one. Now if only I could put some Mallard comics in my article, but I don’t know the HTML.
I agree, political correctness ruins a lot of good humor. To a liberal, it’s almost like laughter itself is offensive.
I disagree with you on one thing. I’m not into Penn and Teller (they lost my respect after they attacked the Boy Scouts)
LoL, thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.