August 26, 2004

TOMORROW YESTERDAY

Check it out - Tom Tomorrow compresses every Democrat talking point on the war into a single cartoon.

I must have heard this script at least fifty times in the past few weeks. The line that impresses me most is that Iraq was a "distraction" from the "real terrorists" - one presumes he means al Qaeda - who now have "time to regroup". Reading that, you might imagine that the likes of Tomorrow supported the war in Afghanistan.

They didn't, of course. Back in '01, the war against the "real terrorists" was characterized by Tomorrow, for example, as "bombing Kabul back to the stone age" and "terrorizing" the "people of Afghanistan".

Posted by Tim Blair at August 26, 2004 09:04 AM
Comments

Tom Tomorrow is a tool today.

Also, any cartoonist who has to write a novel to get his tediously doltish point across in a single strip should just pen a column, instead. Like Maureen or Margo or any writer at The Guardian.

Posted by: c at August 26, 2004 at 10:33 AM

My favorite part is the condescension at the end.
Although I only give it a B+, he forgot to mention stealing the oil.
Amateur.

Posted by: Veeshir at August 26, 2004 at 11:44 AM

Man, what a bitch. If she doesn't watch it, Biff is going to dump her.

Also what c said.

Posted by: Andrew D. at August 26, 2004 at 12:09 PM

Apart from what the others have written, this tedious unfunny cartoon says a lot about the role of the sexes in the USA: a dominant strident woman ties to assert intellectual superiority over a passive male clearly lacking in verbal skills. If the cartoon were set in Australia, Biff would have set her straight by box.no. 2, with a quick left jab, followed immediately by a right hook, thereby asserting the male's natural authority in Aussie society.

Posted by: Freddyboy at August 26, 2004 at 12:30 PM

G'day Freddyboy,

Real men, regardless of where they are from do NOT(!!!!!!!!!!!) hit women.

Posted by: Russell at August 26, 2004 at 12:32 PM

Tom Tomorrow is today's idiot. Almost equal to Ted "Pay Attention To Me!" Rall.

Posted by: The Real JeffS at August 26, 2004 at 12:33 PM

In fairness to TT, he never expressed the kind of callous indifference to the victims of 9/11 that Ted Rall did. And he has mostly shied away from the the more extreme examples of the left's "Bush=Hitler" obsession.

Still, TT's fall into "tooldom" is pretty sad. Unlike Rall, Tom was at one time capable of being very funny (at least when he keept his arrogant and/or self righteous instincts in check).

Posted by: Sean at August 26, 2004 at 01:33 PM

Amen Russell!
I hate the nannying tone of the present Australian anti-DV campaign, but even more I hate someone supporting violence against women.

Besides, Freddyboy, you are full of shite. We are a sleepy, low-violence society, full of concern for being seen to be on the side of righteousness. What is your point - do you mean that 'Tim Blair and by extension all Australians are right-wing rednecks who beat their women'? ROFLMAO.

Posted by: ChrisPer at August 26, 2004 at 01:42 PM

Freddyboy = Uli Schmaltzmeyer! Ha ha ha ha!

Seriously, I don't think he was trolling, I think it was just a stupid comment.

Posted by: Sortelli at August 26, 2004 at 01:53 PM

Too right Russell, ChrisPer and Sortelli! Some things are too just serious to ever, ever make a simple offhand joke about. Some things should *never* be said, under any circumstances.

Great to see you moral guardians on the job. Keep up the good work! You might get a fuckin' badge from the Boy Scouts or something.

TFK

Posted by: TFK at August 26, 2004 at 02:13 PM

On the other hand I took my dog to a lady vet after he was in a fight with some other wild creature.
The vet recommended I have him de balled before she ever took a look at his absessed paw.

I think it's a universal affliction of the fairer sex.

(I vetoed of course)

Posted by: papertiger at August 26, 2004 at 02:26 PM

G'day TFK,

Of course saying - "I think TFK is a f**kwit!" that should have his balls ripped off with a rusty saw is something that should be said on every possible occasion.

Posted by: Russell at August 26, 2004 at 02:43 PM

Tomorrow's column back in '01 has Americans using MiG-21's opening up some whupass on Trashcanistan. What self-respecting monopolistic world hegemon would use MiGs?

Posted by: steve at August 26, 2004 at 02:54 PM

That's more like it, Russell! Sensitivity training worn off already, has it? As a member of the Balled-Australian community, I take deep offense at your suggestion.

Which should make you pretty damned happy! This is the blog of a Right Wing Death Beast, after all.

TFK

Posted by: TFK at August 26, 2004 at 02:59 PM

Amazing how sarcasm can be misunderstood by the morally righteous !

Posted by: Freddyboy at August 26, 2004 at 03:03 PM

Steve. The MIG 21 usage was a Freudian slip. His true Home Team would use MIG's. Trashcanistan!! Just somewhat elitist don't you think. No doubt an East coast leftie.

Posted by: YoJimbo at August 26, 2004 at 03:24 PM

Hey, no worries. We Yanks know all you Aussie men wrestle crocs by morning and wenches by night.

Still, how does Helen Reddy figure in?

Posted by: hear me roar at August 26, 2004 at 03:29 PM

Some things are too just serious to ever, ever make a simple offhand joke about.

I prefer my simple, offhand jokes to be funny.

Posted by: Sortelli at August 26, 2004 at 03:42 PM

FreddyBoy, Russell Because Real Women know that even Real Men have to sleep sometime...

Posted by: richard mcenroe at August 26, 2004 at 04:02 PM

Russell

As Noel Coward once said: "Some women should be struck regularly, like gongs."

BTW there are very few things that one should not joke about. This came home to me the other day when I read that there were no jewish jokes in nazi Germany; the nazis were too darn serious about exterminating the jews to amke jokes about them.

Posted by: Toryhere at August 26, 2004 at 04:16 PM

Any kind of joke can be funny, even one about slapping your dishwasher. I mean woman. Eeeh? Eeeeeeeh? LAUGH! LAUGH, DAMN YOU!

To be clear, I just don't think Freddyboy was trolling when he made a joke about it, like ChrisPer suggested. The only commenter 'round these parts that I ever thought was a lefty in RWDB's clothing trying to smear by association was that retard Endgame who mysteriously worked peacenik/lefty talking points into every "pro-war" argument he made. But even he might have been genuine.

Genuinely stupid! Eeh? Eeeeeeeeeeh? *hauled off stage*

Posted by: Sortelli at August 26, 2004 at 04:31 PM

This comment will undoubtably be taken in the wrong way -- but can somebody actually logically build up the reason why women should be treated differently to men when it comes to the use of physical violence?

Obviously, being a physical mis-match is an inadequate answer because people seldom complain about physical mismatches between two guys and it is possible to have an even fight between some guys & girls.

Posted by: John Humphreys at August 26, 2004 at 06:27 PM

why women should be treated differently to men when it comes to the use of physical violence?


I think Frddyboy may have some insights on that topic,over to you bruiser.

Posted by: gubbaboy at August 26, 2004 at 06:50 PM

G'day John Humphreys,

I don't think of it as "logically build up the reason " sort of thing. Either it sits in your gut or it doesn't.

I used to work with a female power-lifting champion who could have easily broken me in half - but even the intellectual knowledge that she didn't need to be protected could dull the urge to try to keep her from harm. I know that some men actually enjoy hitting women - some people like to eat shit - I can't understand either group.

Posted by: Russell at August 26, 2004 at 08:01 PM

Mr Hitler may come in handy,in the debate over Islam.God its an ugly topic.I support Israel and wish them well.

Posted by: Larado at August 26, 2004 at 08:38 PM

"some men actually enjoy hitting" is true but there's no need to be sexist by adding "women" to it.

I suggest that you "dull the urge to try to keep her from harm" down to the same level as your other peers.

Unless your only posturing to try and get laid, in which case, "Go Ahead!"

Posted by: Rob Read at August 26, 2004 at 09:10 PM

Ive never punched a woman.It IS NOT RIGHT,because men hurt,and damage what they hit.
Ok,,, I would like my life to live in the world of fantasy land,sea and all the loveley things that we can dream of.

Posted by: Larado at August 26, 2004 at 09:29 PM

This whole thread has become as disorganized and confused as one of Miranda's posts. PULL YOURSELVES TOGETHER, boys!

Posted by: ushie at August 26, 2004 at 10:15 PM

Why?

Posted by: Larado at August 26, 2004 at 10:21 PM

John H,

Smart men don't hit women because they know their eyes could get scratched out or things lobbed off whilst they sleep. This is called asymmetrical domesticity. Moral men don't hit women because it's usually not a fair fight (at the time, but see previous point). Family oriented men don't hit women because females help make and incubate their babies, and non-medievalist men protect their progeny by keeping mothers healthy and happy. Last, real men don't hit women because they'd rather earn the respect of women with their insights on 'toonists. (This always works for me.)

Posted by: female at August 27, 2004 at 02:38 AM

Some women enjoy being hit.

Posted by: aaron at August 27, 2004 at 02:45 AM

OK, aaron, bedroom games and the whores on 7th Ave. But what does battery have to do with the more fascinating topic of Tommy Tool Tomorrow??

Posted by: female at August 27, 2004 at 03:11 AM

TT's argument was used on me by some twit c**t from Connecticut. I then suggested that she had been drinking some Michael Moore kool-aid from the punch bowl. And boy did her indignation start to flow. I guess I struck a nerve!

How do people presume to be so smart, and all knowing, when they're purposefully ignorant of so much information? It's like a little game, to them. And they're sooo serious about their concerns.

I mean, come on, it's not like Kerry's gonna invade France, and then spend $1 trillion on health care, while forcing the middle class onto Medicare, and only raising taxes on the top 1%--because we can balance the budget with higher spending and higher taxes. We know the best route to a growing economy is through bigger government--doncha remember? Hillary proved when she was last in charge, but it's my turn now!!! (The France part was a joke. I know, kinda lame.)

Posted by: Forbes at August 27, 2004 at 03:24 AM

My favorite - from people who do think terrorism is a big problem but who hate Bush: "Bush alienated our allies, so we need a change of admin so Kerry can now reach out to our allies who will take over in Iraq so we can bring our troops home."

When you ask them what about all the allies who are there now, they say they are not the "real" allies, or they are coerced in some way.

Then you can point out to them that Kerry said the same, therefore dissing the allies we have now, so how is he going to get them on our side later? And since the allies we have there now have more troops than the allies we don't, who is Kerry going to replace them with? You can also ask them if they really think the UK and Australia are 'coerced or bribed." Then you can ask them if they really think Kerry - whose points go down every time he makes a public appearance - is really going to mount an effective international charm offensive. Then you can point out that last week both Arafat and Kim Jong Il expressed a hope that Bush would not be re-elected, and ask them if that's the kind of allies they had in mind?

Posted by: Yehudit at August 27, 2004 at 04:22 AM

Let's see: They protested against taking out the Taliban; they went bananas when we ultimately bypassed the UN and "angered" Chirac; they got hysterical over our unseating Saddam; they claim to support our troops but call terrorist killers in Iraq "freedom fighters"; they are outraged over the fact of Gitmo; they endlessly rail against the Patriot Act; they hallucinate over imagined library spying and invasions of privacy; they scream about racial or religious profiling; they accuse Bushitler of turning America into a fascist police state; they give speeches, write books and make movies that our civil rights and freedom of speech are quashed; they blame America for why terrorists targeted us in the first place; they charge that Repubs have exaggerated the terrorist threat for electoral advantage and to give themselves more powers; they insist that if we have federal security workers that they all be unionized...

and then they say any further terrorist acts against us would mean that Bush has failed to protect us. Leftist logic is a cartoon. No wonder Tomorrow, Rall, Oliphant, Bell and others are drawn to the medium.

Posted by: c at August 27, 2004 at 05:20 AM

2006:

Democrats called on President Bush to "stop this absurd rush to war" over Iran's declared nuclear ambitions.

"We supported Bush over Afghanistan and Iraq, but this is too far!"

:)

Posted by: Quentin George at August 27, 2004 at 12:46 PM

More communist, terrorist idiocy in the form of a cartoon strip

Posted by: bongoman at August 27, 2004 at 12:59 PM

Look, bongoman just discovered Get Your War On.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at August 28, 2004 at 12:30 AM

female, I have no idea how we got to this point.

Posted by: aaron at August 28, 2004 at 04:02 PM

I think you do, aaron.

Posted by: female at August 28, 2004 at 06:25 PM

WTF? I've not been laughing at Get Your War on for years now. At least it's occupying the children.

Posted by: Sortelli at August 30, 2004 at 05:27 PM