AfterThoughtsNow

Friday, November 21, 2008

Our Pets #4: The Arrival of a Man

Primo, Cindy, the Man

next

3. Dedication

next Our Pets comic strip

previous Our Pets comic strip

first Our Pets comic strip

Thursday, November 20, 2008

My Favorite Webcomics Are...

Basic Instructions
The Book of Biff

Calamities of Nature

Garfield Minus Garfield
The Gutters

Jesus and Mo

Medium Large

My Extra Life
Pencils at Dawn

My Favorite Entertainment / Sports / SciFi / Comic Book / Comic Strip / Funny / Fun Sites I Check Out Sometimes

48MinutesofHell.com (S.A. Spurs blog)
AddictingGames.com
AVClub.com
Antarctic Press
Armor Games
Avatar Press
Barking Carnival (UT sports blog)
Bleeding Cool
Boom Studios
BustedTees.com
CBR
CollegeHumor.com
ComicBook.com
ComicBookMovie.com
ComicBooks.com
ComicPriceGuide.com
Comics.com
ComicVine.com
ComicsAlliance
DanMeth.com
Dark Horse
DeadSpin.com
DC Comics
Entertainment Weekly
FailBlog.org
Failed Smile Shirts
Fark.com
FlightsFromHell.com
FunnyOrDie.com
Gawker.com
GoComics.com
GordonKeith.com
IDW Publishing
IGN
Image Comics
Joke of the Day
Marvel
MiniClip.com
Monty Python(on YouTube)
News of the Weird
Newsarama
PeopleofWalmart.com
Psychic Chimp
Rotten Tomatoes
SyFy Channel
Seth McFarlane's Cavalcade of Comedy(on YouTube)
SomeECards.com
Star Trek
Star Wars
The Comic Chronicles
The Oatmeal
The Onion
The Ticket
UncleBarky.com
TheUnTicket.com
Top Cow
Valiant Comics
Wizard
Zeus Comics

My Favorite Political Cartoonists I Check Out (After I Have Drawn My Own Cartoons)

Ben Sargent

My Favorite Print/Traditional Comic Strips

These are strips that either I still follow or used to follow. Needless to say, I enjoy or have enjoyed these strips immensely. Also, all of these, with the exception of "The Far Side", can be found online.

"Garfield" - It was the first comic strip I started reading in the the newspaper at a fairly young age. I know some don't like it but, trust me, to me, as a kid just learning to read, it was simple and great.

"Pearls Before Swine" - It mixes anthropomorphic characters with funny and strange word play, funny. Talking animals that are are funny, so guess what, I like it.

"Non Sequitur" - A mix of weird, political and always funny. Plus it mixes formats from single panel to traditional with ongoing characters.

"Brewster Rockit" - It combines the comic strip medium with scifi satirical story lines. I like comic strips, scifi and satire, not surprisingly, I like it.

"Red Meat" - As far as I'm concerned this is the undisputed champion of the weekly-alternative-free-newspaper comic strips. Off the wall crazy. Greatness.

"Doonesberry" - The first, as far as I know, ongoing comic strip focusing on political and social issues exclusively. Still great.

"Boondocks" - Where Doonesberry couldn't/wouldn't go, it did. Sadly, its run was relatively short.

"Dilbert" - It's hard to believe no one had taken on the task of making fun of the mundane corporate life of cubicle dwellers. Well, this strip did it. And Dogbert is awesome.

"Get Fuzzy" - We have 2 cats and 2 dogs. The "hero" in this strip has 1 cat and 1 dog. So, I connect to it. As far as I'm concerned the best comic strip today.

"Peanuts" - I know some folks think it's old-fashioned and not relevant anymore. But, I think if you go back and read the strip sequentially back in its heyday from the 1950's till the 1980's (when strips inspired by Peanuts rivaled or surpassed it) you'll find it deft and socially relevant on many levels.

"The Far Side" - It's The Far Side. Nothing was quite like it before or after. One panel of absurd hilarity. Brilliant.

"Calvin & Hobbes" - For many this is their favorite strip. For me it's a close second. It reminded me that there are serious issues and things out there but you have keep them in perspective and remember to be silly.

"Bloom County" - My favorite hands down. It had everything, a talking penguin and his friends including a drugged out cat, a Vietnam vet, a politically aware kid and his friends and boatload of other characters. It was alternately socially relevant, weird, irreverent, political, immature and serious. I loved it. When the final incarnation of this strip "Opus" ended I was truly saddened.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Our Pets #2: The Players

next

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Our Pets #1: Not That Long Ago In A Living Room Not That Far Away...

Next

A Literal Version of the A-Ha Video

About Our Pets

Our Pets is a comic strip in blog format (webcomic) about, you guessed it, our pets. Our pets are our 2 cats, Cindy & Primo. Primo is named after the first born brother in the movie Big Night, and Cindy is named in honor of another great cat, Cindy I who has passed on to the next plane); and there are our 2 dogs, Gilda & Gene. Gene is a boy by the way. Gilda and Gene are named after and in honor of Gilda Radner and Gene Wilder. I hope you enjoy it.

Click here for the first "Our Pets" comic strip

Click here for the latest "Our Pets" comic strip

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

W.'s biggest regrets

Or alternate title, "Let me outta here!"

So W. did an interview about, at least in part, his biggest regrets.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20081112/pl_bloomberg/ahlrnlvfhsmc

He mentioned the "Mission Accomplished" banner and the old west poster statement as regrets. Of course there are other things that could be brought up but, I'm not going to.

Believe it or not I have not seen the movie "W." however, I have read that W. is portrayed as almost a sympathetic figure defined by circumstances beyond his control. That may be true however, great figures are not defined by their circumstance, a great person changes and defines their circumstance. Perhaps that is the greatest lesson of the W. presidency, you get what you pay for. Folks wanted a president that they wouldn't mind having a beer with. That may seem like a great, down to earth criteria for selecting a president to some. When I heard that criteria going on 9 years ago I thought it was a terrible idea. And it still is. And so you have a president talking about the regrets of his presidency, while he's still in office, as if the circumstances of his presidency were beyond his control. Maybe, given these circumstances and this president, they were beyond his control.

Saturday, November 8, 2008

Conservative Leader Blames "Moderates" For Loss

Or alternate title, would Reagan recognize this GOP?

Bizarrely, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council and religious conservative Republican blamed the presidential and congressional losses on moderates.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/07/conservatives.election/index.html

Wow. This Republican is blaming moderates for not getting on board with social conservatives' agenda and wants to move the GOP farther right. Wow again.

Yes, some states passed amendments to ban same-sex marriage, or made English its official language or tried to ban affirmative action. Those types of issues are what Perkins is clinging to. Those issues work great for the GOP in state and local elections sometimes. And they help the GOP nationally when we're at peace and the economy is booming but not so much now or any time in the near future given our economic outlook and the fact that we're fighting two wars. The days of those "social" issues dominating the political landscape may be gone. The economy, taxes, foreign affairs, the issues that used to dominate elections, holds sway now.

For example, let's look at two of the religious conservative Republican's (I call them Pat Roberston Republicans, PRR's, as opposed to Barry Goldwater Republicans, BGR's) favorite red herrings in election years that they use to rally the base and scare the electorate generally, namely abortion and immigration. (see this blog post #22 for more on PRR's) Case in point, from 2000-2006 the GOP controlled the White House, and the Congress and arguably had a 5-4 majority in the Supreme Court but couldn't overturn Roe v. Wade. Furthermore, the GOP arguably doesn't try very hard to address the red herring issues they campaign about. How many test cases did the GOP get in front of the Supreme Court from 2000-2006 to try to overturn Roe v. Wade? They scare folks about immigration, but again from 2000-2006 didn't pass anything to punish employers that employ illegal immigrants, instead they talked about building a fence. A fence along the entire USA/Mexican border! And most of the Republicans, especially the PRR's, eat up these red herring campaign issues hook, line and sinker!

The fact of the matter is that McCain did pander to the GOP base, scaring them as best he could, at the expense of moderates, moderates that can be described as Reagan Democrats or Clinton Republicans. Moderates that don't see combating immigrants, abortion rights, gay rights, affirmative action, stem cell research ect., as the most important of the fights out there. I guess Perkins is frustrated that moderates weren't as easily scared as they were in 2004 by the bogeymen of a terrorist attack, the destruction of marriage, immigrants flooding across the boarder, ect, if a Democrat was elected. (Quick aside: does the state allowing same sex marriage mean that your individual church or faith has to allow it? No. Does it mean you have to attend every same sex wedding? No. Is the difference between a "civil union" and "marriage" semantics regarding a state providing a license for it? Yes.)

Perkins claims that he is attempting to go back to a Reagan-esque GOP. Really? Reagan advocated and passed the decriminalization of marijuana in California as governor. As president Reagan advocated and got passed the Earned Income Tax Credit for the poorest in our nation and amnesty to illegal immigrants in the USA who met certain criteria. I don't think Perkins really knows what Reagan stood for when it came to social issues. Reagan was arguably the most progressive on social issues of any president since LBJ, remember Clinton cut back on welfare when he "reformed" it. Reagan was actually consistent in advocating smaller government on economic issues as well as social issues. Reagan also balanced socially progressive stances by being a hawk.

So Perkins' solution to the GOP's poor performance in not only the presidential election but in congressional elections the last two cycles is to move farther to the right on social issues. Good luck with that. Dems, I'm sure, are quietly hoping the GOP follows Perkins' plan.

Sidenotes:

McCain versus Palin - McCain aides say that Palin, 1) didn't know what countries were parties to NAFTA, 2) didn't know Africa was a continent and not a country, 3) resisted coaching before the Couric interview.

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-palin6-2008nov06,0,5597211.story

Palin wanted to address the crowd before McCain's concession speech, McCain aides said no.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/07/mccain.palin/index.html

Crunching the Election's Numbers Nationwide & in Texas

Or, alternate title: I was under the impression there would be no math involved in tonight's debate

As is usually the case George Will wrote an excellent article about what warning signs the Republican Party should acknowledge in the aftermath of the presidential election.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/11/a_few_gop_brightspots.html

If you look at the electoral college map coupled with what has occurred in the Congress, you have a party without any meaningful presence in the Northeast or West. Let's start by looking at the Northeast. Dems hold all 22 New England House seats now after Nov. 4 (New England not including NY). But NY doesn't get much better, out of 29 House seats Repubs hold only 3 and only one seat from an urban district. The House and Senate losses by the Repubs in the last two election cycles are the worst since 1930 and 1932.

And of course the far West (California, Oregon, Washington) is solid blue. What has to be troubling for the Repubs is that the Southwest, namely Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado went to Obama. Plus, Arizona has a Dem governor that may challenge McCain for his seat. Some are attributing Obama's success in the region to his draw of Hispanic voters:

ttp://www.usnews.com/articles/news/campaign-2008/2008/11/06/behind-obamas-victory-a-major-swing-by-latino-voters-back-to-the-democratic-fold.html

While he did capture roughly two thirds of the Hispanic vote Obama and the Dems also did well in growing urban (code for big cities) areas and did especially well with not only Hispanics voters but voters across the board that live there.

Now what does that mean for Texans? Let look at some numbers in Texas generally and specifically in key counties:

Texas went for McCain by a large margin about 55% to 44% and 4.5 million versus 3.5 million.

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_state.htm

Now lets look at some key counties:

Dallas: Obama 57% vs. McCain 42%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county56.htm

Bexar (San Antonio): Obama 52% vs. McCain 47%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county14.htm

Harris (Houston): Obama 50% vs. McCain 49%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county100.htm

Travis (Austin): Obama 64% vs. McCain 35%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county226.htm

Nueces (Corpus): Obama 47% vs. McCain 52%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county177.htm

Jefferson (Beaumont) Obama 51% vs. McCain 49%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county122.htm

Lubbock: Obama 31% vs. McCain 68%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county151.htm

Potter (Amarillo): Obama 30% vs. McCain 69%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county187.htm

Midland (Midland Odessa): Obama 21% vs. McCain 78%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county164.htm

El Paso: Obama 66% vs. McCain 33%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county70.htm

Laredo (Webb County): Obama 71% vs. McCain 28%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county239.htm

Cameron (Brownsville) Obama 64% vs. McCain 35%

http://team1.sos.state.tx.us/enr/results/nov04_141_county30.htm

Ok so that's a lot of numbers but, what do they mean? I'll tell you what I think the numbers mean. First, Texas has been a red state since 1980 but these numbers in big towns in 2008 have to be alarming to Repubs. Keep in mind that since 1980 a Bush has been on the Repub presidential ticket each time, except in 1996 and now in 2008, and let's face it, Texans are loyal to other Texans (even fake ones like H.W.). However, looking at the 2008 county numbers it is obvious that McCain won by picking up the smaller counties, albeit at a tremendous rate.

What about Texas counties with statistically significant minority populations generally and Hispanic populations specifically? First, keep in mind that generally such counties are also among the fastest growing in Texas.

The presidential election offers some insight into the changing landscape of Texas voters. McCain generally did not win in counties that are growing and/or have statistically significant minority populations. McCain's only win in a county of any size that has a statistically significant minority population is Nueces County (Corpus Christi). But, I think the large military presence there can account for his narrow victory in Nueces County. But, again it was a narrow victory. Contrast Nueces County with Bexar County (San Antonio) which has a statistically significant minority population especially when taking into account both the Hispanic and African American populations. San Antonio also has more military bases than most towns have McDonald's. But, Obama actually won Bexar County. McCain's loss in San Antonio has to be concerning not only to Repubs in Texas but on a national level.

Hispanic voters, in my experience, are very loyal to their chosen candidates whether they be Republican or Democrat. And I believe to some extent there is a generational gap in the Hispanic voting block. Certainly, there were Hispanics that voted for Reagan H.W. and W. that voted for Obama. However, the increase in Hispanic voters under 40 years old in Texas in the last 20 years cannot be underestimated and those Hispanic voters overwhelmingly voted for Obama.

As it stands, the Repubs couldn't defeat the openly gay, Hispanic, female Democratic Dallas County Sheriff. If you would have told me that even 10 years ago I would have thought you were crazy. All the above says something significant about where the Texas Repubs voting base is and isn't. The Repubs voting base appears to be in small, rural counties. The Repubs cannot take for granted winning in the growing, ethnically/racially diverse big cities in a statewide elections. But, McCain did demonstrate that in a statewide election if you win the smaller counties handily you can win statewide with a decent showing in the big, diverse counties. On the flip side, if, on a statewide level, the Dems can put forward a good/great candidate that is appealing, even somewhat, to rural white voters the Repubs could be in serious trouble.

Don't worry Repubs, Texas is still red. But, if the Texas Dems find a candidate for a statewide office that is appealing in the slightest to rural Texas voters Texas could elect a Dem to a statewide office for the first time in a long time. We'll have to wait and see if the Dems can find such a candidate.

demographics of Texas

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/48000.html

Friday, November 7, 2008

We're Not in Kansas Anymore

Missles, Russia, and START, oh my...

Russia puts missles on the Polish border

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5090077.ece

Then Russia backtracks and will study the US defense system and think about START

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-36379120081107

Thursday, November 6, 2008

A Terrible Campaign (for McCain)

Or, alternate title: Post Mortem

In 2000 I thought McCain was going to win the Republican nomination after New Hampshire. Then, McCain fell victim to Rove's, "dark arts," tactics (see this blog, post # 8) and lost the 2000 nomination to W. In 2008 he won the nomination and was leading in the polls immediately after his convention. But, after the economic crisis hit McCain and his camp never had an overall theme to his campaign or consistent talking points. Whereas, Senator Obama had his theme down, namely, "Change" and talking points such as "middle class tax cuts," "McCain equals Bush," "McCain is out of touch".

Why McCain lost can be summed up with the below talking points/attacks/missteps by McCain, Palin and Republicans generally, in no particular order. Keep in mind that all of these points/attacks/missteps were made after the Republican convention.

1)elite(s)

2) Ayers

3) Joe six-pack

4) Joe the Plumber

5) liberal

6) socialist

7) communist

8) inexperienced

9) we're for change

10) Bridge to Nowhere

11) Alaska Independence Party

12) reform

13) pork barrel spending

14) Barack Hussein Obama

15) country first

16) un-American

17) real America

18) Khalidi

19) national security

20) for the bailout

21) McCain got the first version of the bailout passed

22) the first version of the bailout is voted down

23) the bailout was a bad idea

24) maverick

25) fundamentals of the economy are strong

26) suspend the campaign

27) postpone the debate

28) economy in crisis

29) Obama will raise taxes

30) how many houses does McCain own

31) Palin/Couric interview

32) Gibson interview

33) Palin's clothes

34) the prank call

35) "that one"

36) air quotes regarding a mother's health

37) Reverend Wright

38) "my fellow prisoners"

40) at a rally McCain asks Joe the Plumber to stand up, Joe's not there

41) Palin is a "diva" (from a source in the McCain campaign)

42) Palin is a "whack job" (from a source in the McCain campaign)

43) Palin is going rouge

44) Palin 2012

45) Palin

46) Cheney endorsement the weekend before the election

That's alot. There are more but, that's all I could think of off the top of my head, please, let me know if you think of any others. A campaign cannot win with even a handful of the above much less all of them. Obama could essentially sit back and let McCain's campaign implode, each day was seemingly a different talking point/attack/misstep resulting in a disjointed, muddled and rudderless campaign.

Oh, and by the way, Obama ran an almost gaffe-less campaign after the Dem convention (with two big expceptions, Obama "spreading the wealth" and Biden's assurance of an "international crisis" to test Obama's mettle). And the economy (stupid) hurt McCain (especially the way he handled it) and helped Obama.

Sidenotes: Why didn't McCain learn from Hillary

How Hillary Clinton lost:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1738331,00.html

And McCain didn't learn from Hillary

What if McCain had hit hard on Wright?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15191.html

McCain's pastors would have been talked about:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/22/mccain-rejects-hagee-endo_n_103143.html

Tuesday, November 4, 2008

Obama Wins

Or alternate title, "It's Over, Smoke 'Em If You Got 'Em"

Monday, November 3, 2008

GO VOTE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Or, alternate title: Don't Be a Spectator

No matter your political affiliation, no matter what, go vote. Be proud of the fact that you live in the greatest nation on earth that affords you the right to vote. I know some may say that the electoral college cancels/drowns out a vote. That may be the case concerning the presidential race, especially here in Texas and other non-swing states. However, in every state, in every county, in every district, that is not the only election going on. Educate yourself on your state and local elections and vote. Becoming informed on the state and local candidates and issues is relatively easy if you just take about one hour out of one day and use this awesome invention called the internet. With this massive, groundbreaking, information providing tool called the internet one can quickly and easily become informed on the issues. For example, here is a voter guide for those of you in Dallas, it's a good starting point:

http://z8.thevoterguide.org/a-dallas/?sfr

Here's another voter guide from CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/your.races/index.html

And you should inform yourself and vote. Why? Because unlike some other places and unlike not long ago here you can inform yourself and vote, without impediment and influence.

Another reason. This may be a groundbreaking election at the top of the ballot, and no matter who you vote for you can say to youngsters years from now that you participated and were not a spectator. So, go vote.

Saturday, November 1, 2008

Sarah Palin Prank Phone Call

Gov. Palin thought she was talking to the president of France. It was in fact some Canadian DJ's pulling a great phone prank.

McCain on War

Or, alternate title, USA, love it or leave it

McCain continues to speak of "winning" the war in Iraq. What "winning" means to McCain has not been explained by him or his campaign, he just says he knows how to "win" and he'll bring the troops home after we have "won" the Iraq war. I'm not even going to go into the whole, "Mission Accomplished" speech by W. years and years ago on the aircraft carrier which seemed to be a declaration of victory, or that W. and McCain predicted we'd go in, be greeted as liberators and then get out. Or that the case made for war, WMD's, was misrepresented to Congress and the American public. Let's just look at just some facets of McCain's views on war generally.

Read the below article for some insight into what McCain's idea of winning a war might mean.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/05/12/mccain/

The McCain idea of winning a war is outdated and inapplicable in Iraq, outdated because we have not employed such tactics as described by him since arguably Korea but definitely not since WWII and inapplicable because the current Republican administration is already in talks to withdraw from Iraq, a withdraw that is eerily similar to what Obama has been advocating for 20 months. So again, what does McCain mean when he says he is going to "win" the war in Iraq?

Lastly, McCain's disregard for dissent at home with U.S. foreign policy, especially regarding the use of force abroad, is alarming to say the least. McCain seems to think that domestic disagreement with a war is "irresponsible," and no constraints should be placed on how the war is prosecuted. What is alarming is McCain's lack of respect for "irresponsible," disagreement at home. Domestic public discourse regarding the validity and execution of armed conflict being termed irresponsible is fundamentally contrary our rights of freedom of expression. McCain apparently would disagree.

Side note: Palin was prank called by two French-Canadian radio dj's, one of the dj's pretended to be French President Sarkozy. Who is running Palin's staff? This was not Palin's fault. But it's further proof that this campaign is not being run very smoothly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4aHL12vtEM

AfterThoughtsNow - ATN

menu bar