Michael Ramirez by Michael Ramirez

Michael Ramirez

Comments (23) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. DGF999

    DGF999 said, almost 3 years ago

    Awesome cartoon!

  2. jack75287

    jack75287 said, almost 3 years ago

    Great, this is GREAT. I forget who but somebody on uclick admits that he wants to marginalize conservatives. This shows where it comes from.

  3. Tim Culberson

    Tim Culberson said, almost 3 years ago

    FANTASTIC Carttoon, the art is wonderful, the script fantastic and the combination of the two caputres not only the moment, but the entire concept of the Democratic party.

  4. lonecat

    lonecat said, almost 3 years ago

    Podesta has apologized. Will Ramirez apologize for the lies he tells about Democrats?

  5. Zuhlamon

    Zuhlamon GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    This cartoonist is adept at perpetuating a cycle of endless divisive propaganda. What’s dismaying are the numbers of people who just can’t get enough of it.

  6. D PB

    D PB said, almost 3 years ago

    So, are you saying that Podesta didn’t make the comment?

    Are you saying that some of the policies he supports and promotes couldn’t be viewed as socialist in nature?

    You see, propaganda contains some truth and some lie. So please enlighten us, which part of this cartoon is a lie?

  7. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, almost 3 years ago

    I wonder how many people crying “socialist” have ever looked up the definition of the word.

    Let’s try this: do you have insurance of ANY type? If so, then you are a socialist.

    Everyone in the insurance pool puts money in the pot. If you need the money (you get sick) and the insurance company “death panels” decide you should have coverage, you get money to get well. If you don’t get sick, you lose your contribution to someone who needs it more. This is the very definition of socialism.

    Every economic system has value, and also detriments. The trick is to find a balance to emphasize the good points and minimize the bad ones.

    Can we possibly move past this? It’s only causing division that is unnecessary. We have enough problems to overcome without creating artificial ones.

  8. D PB

    D PB said, almost 3 years ago

    @I Play One On TV

    Really? Let’s let Merriam and Webster help you out here.


    1 any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

    2a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

    b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

    3 a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

    Your insurance analogy fails on all points of the standard definition.

  9. lonecat

    lonecat said, almost 3 years ago

    @D PB

    But by your definition (which is not the only one, by the way), Democrats, including Obama, are clearly not socialists. I’m a socialist, Obama is not.

  10. Zuhlamon

    Zuhlamon GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    @D PB

    So, are you saying that Podesta didn’t make the comment?
    No, I said that Ramirez’ toons consistently foment divisiveness through propaganda.
    Podesta quickly apologized for the comment, but Ramirez is using guilt by association to paint all Democrats as socialists (what’s with that?), and equally offensive (with the seals) and hyperbole (“Here, drink some more Kool-Aid”).

  11. D PB

    D PB said, almost 3 years ago


    You did notice that the definition was from Merriam-Webster? Most would agree that the definition contained within a dictionary is pretty much the standard.


    Just as amusing as always. I notice you’re still accusing the opposition of your same faults and failings, you really should do some inner reflection.

  12. emptc12

    emptc12 said, almost 3 years ago


    It gets under my skin, too, but only when I let it. Look at this way: This site always delights to present Obama as HE Who Gets Slapped. It is the cartoonist’s shtick. Why expect anything else?
    I remember a bit of dialog from the movie “Harvey.” Mrs. Whosits says at a ladies gathering, “Oh, is that Mrs. Whatsits? Doesn’t she look ghastly? I must get a closer look.”
    That’s what this cartoonist counts on. And a little bit of his drawing leaves its stain in your brain. If you react, he has had an element of control over you.
    Actually, part of an editorial cartoonist’s role is to stir things up for discussion even if it means to be borderline unfair. I think this cartoonist often goes over that borderline but I don’t think he cares about my opinion. And I don’t care about his, but isn’t it ghastly, I must have a closer look.

  13. pirate227

    pirate227 said, almost 3 years ago

    The problem for the GOP is that what he said is true.

  14. D PB

    D PB said, almost 3 years ago

    @ Radish

    Comprehend much?

    I quoted a definition from a dictionary.

  15. D PB

    D PB said, almost 3 years ago


    Ah, so Liberal leaning political cartoons don’t foment divisiveness through propaganda, use guilt by association to paint political opponents in a negative light or engage in over the top hyperbole?

    I find it fascinating how the Liberal dittoheads want you to accept an apology for a gaff as honest and heartfelt while at the same time demonizing their political opposition for similar gaffs and apologies. While at the same time glossing over the obvious hypocrisy.

    Fascinating . . . .

  16. Load the rest of the comments (8).