Comments (20) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   dtriedel said, 6 months ago

   Very funny.

2. 

   Kylop said, 6 months ago

   Now, now. I think we all know that
   1) Ms Politically Correct universe wouldn’t wear make-up.
   2) The contetants would have a wider range of body image
   3)Would not compete in a pageant.
   4) Would be turning on each other for not supporting the “one true cause (mine)”.

3. 

   NoFearPup said, 6 months ago

   Hey those ladies post on Stayskal’s page!

4. 

   TheGreatSatan said, 6 months ago

   Kind of reminds me of the Saudi’s “Miss beatiful morals” pagent.

   Show how much you follow liberal orthodoxy and win a prize!

5. 

   oldlegodad said, 6 months ago

   ME TOO! JUDGE.

6. 

   foxglove16 said, 6 months ago

   Politically correct? How about just correct? Except don’t hug a bear unless it’s a stuffed animal or you want your face torn off.

7. 

   Wraithkin said, 6 months ago

   PC != Correct. All of these things in this comic are paper tigers, especially global warming, inflated to importance above their true value. We are a fart in the history of the world. One volcano eruption eclipses all of mankind in a single shot.

8. 

   fritzoid said, 6 months ago

   So equality, human rights, and environmental protection are paper tigers? Well, then, what DO you consider a major issue? Your inalienable right to take all that you can grab?

9. 

   Tigger said, 6 months ago

   This will happen when Pigs replace The Space Shuttle for all of our Space Missions.

10. 

    oldlegodad said, 6 months ago

    Some diptweeb asked her opinion, she gave it. Her right, whether anyone else agrees or not. Its called FREEDOM of SPEECH.

11. 

    cdward said, 6 months ago

    This was a stupid beauty pageant, not an election! Each of the contestants signed a contract agreeing to follow the pageant’s rules and abide by their decisions. The pageant is a private organization and doesn’t have to give free speech to its contestants. Nobody made them participate. So get off the Free Speech kick.

12. 

    cdward said, 6 months ago

    And if you don’t like the direction of the questions, just don’t watch it. Nobody’s forcing you.

13. 

    LibrarianInTraining said, 6 months ago

    Kylop, how true.

    I wish they’d get off the beauty pageant kick.
    A. It’s getting old.
    And B. I hate the whole concept. As I said before, if these people were to be representing the country, I’d want them so busy with their “causes” they didn’t have time to go to tanning salons, get breast implants, highlight their hair. They should barely have time to put on deodorant and brush their hair.

14. 

    oldlegodad said, 6 months ago

    Libintraining Why not Nakid too? No waxing allowed just raw nature.

15. 

    fennec said, 6 months ago

    Oldlego, you’re sounding your old sparky self again. Glad to see it.

16. 

    josh358 said, 6 months ago

    What an idiot.

    And, I’m glad to say, what a dinosaur, because last I checked, the anti-gay bigots were dying off, action against global warming was a done deal, and torture was NEVER condoned by real Americans (remember that thing called the Bill of Rights?).

17. 

    Wraithkin said, 6 months ago

    Ok, so is polygamy (sp?) okay? What about same-family marriage (Brother/Sister)? Because if you say no, then you are putting a restriction on who can be married, and you’re no better than your-termed “anti-gay bigots.” Then you’ll just turn into “Anti-Polygamy-bigots.” Or perhaps “Anti-incest bigots.” You deviate from the norm (man-and-woman marriage), and you hit a point of “where do we stop?” And if you do find a point to stop, what justification do you have for that stop? That’s why I call it a paper tiger. It’s only for a group of people who represent I want to say (no proof on this) less than 1% of the US population. That 1% (hypothetically) is arguing to have their case, and in some states, getting it.

    And if you think I’m exaggerating about polygamists wanting to have marriage rights, look up Hawaii. It’s already starting.

18. 

    LLeRay said, 6 months ago

    Wraithkin, governments can define marriage any way they want because the government (us) allocates benefits and enforces obligations based upon that definition. If you want to use a different standard for the manifold relationships covered therein, come up with a different name, and apply it fairly across the board. Remember that many of the responsibilities must be made quickly (e.g. health care) that one adult should decide.

19. 

    Corosive Frog said, 6 months ago

    actually, I consider myself a liberal and I agree with this toon. I don’t share miss California’s opinions, but she is entitled to them.

20. 

    cdward said, 6 months ago

    CF, I believe she’s entitled to her opinion, too. It’s just that in a privately run contest, she has no right to complain if they don’t like her opinion and hold it against her. Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances.