Mike Luckovich by Mike Luckovich

Mike Luckovich

Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Dale Netherton

    Dale Netherton said, over 2 years ago

    Another dumb cartoon.

  2. goweeder

    goweeder said, over 2 years ago

    @Dale Netherton

    “Another dumb cartoon.”

    .If smart people read smart cartoons, what kind of people read dumb cartoons?

  3. echoraven

    echoraven said, over 2 years ago

    Protecting the climate (aside from the obvious) has other benefits.
    Solar panels will (not soon enough) become more cost effective to use in one’s home, and electric vehicles will become less expensive to own, and they are far more cost effective than gas and all that is good for the common man.

  4. Doug Stegenga

    Doug Stegenga said, over 2 years ago

    liberals want people to starve AND mass genocide… now that IS new.

  5. curtisls87

    curtisls87 said, over 2 years ago

    Quite frankly, you’re mixing apples and oranges. Yes, the world got along without oil pretty much up to the beginning of the 20th century, but since then, the abundant energy output of oil has put millions of cars on the road, and helped generate the electricity that is used by us all. I’m all for developing alternate energy, but we need to be realistic when we say that we can easily replace oil. I suggest reading Physics for Future Presidents, by Richard A. Muller, a professer at Cal Berkeley. He does a very good job of explaining the innate energy capability of each kind of energy resource.

  6. Crow Nobo, fol de rol de riddle

    Crow Nobo, fol de rol de riddle said, over 2 years ago

    @Doug Stegenga

    What are you talking about?

  7. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    It should be noted that “Big Oil” is now big energy, as they’re hedging their bets by betting heavily, and investing in alternate energy sources. If you don’t believe it, just check out their more recent TV ads, even Exxon Mobil, and BP are trying to show how “green” they are, BP even changed their logo to a graphic flower.

    No matter what pocket you pick your energy from, you’ll find they’ve been picking it first.

  8. curtisls87

    curtisls87 said, over 2 years ago

    First, I would point out that I’m not a conservative. Second, I am not a Malthusian(who are, actually mostly progressives), either, by any stretch of the imagination. the statement I made about apples and oranges still applies. The world’s population in 1800 was 1 billion. By 1900, it was about 1.7 billion. It is now over 7 billion. At no time in human history has population growth parabolically expanded like now(note that most scientists believe it will rise to about 11B and then come back to a steady state at 9B). At the same time, first coal, then oil has made energy cheap, thus we have a confluence of population and energy use that has actually never been seen before. There is no parallel to this in history. Having said that, I am by no means objecting to alternative energy, I’m actually all for it, and as the market shifts to make it viable, it will slowly take over. What I’m not in favor of is government actually enforcing some market initiative that will result in more damage than it’s worth. BTW, I favor ending subsidies to oil companies, just like I favor ending subsidies to all business.

  9. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    Tigger: change occurring over a period of two centuries is NOT “same exact temperature changes” as those taking two to five MILLENNIA (or even longer) to occur.

    Considering one asteroid wiped out most plant and animal life on Earth that couldn’t quickly adapt to changing climate, what impact can one expect from SEVEN BILLION cause agents at work, with their machines, and demand for access to ever more “energy” whatever, or however costly, the source. And, let’s not forget our impacts on water supplies that endanger not just fish and marine species, but in the end or own profligate ignorance of water facts when dealing with agriculture, or sewage disposal, and drinking water.

  10. friendlygardens

    friendlygardens GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    you might as well throw a donkey for the democrats in that pocket too, they use their positions for power just like the R’s do, sometimes even worse (Al Gore anyone?). Call it truthfully Luckovich, your democrats aren’t angels at all.

  11. 38lowell

    38lowell said, over 2 years ago

    Try looking into the National Teachers Association building. At least you can get into the Capital building.

  12. goweeder

    goweeder said, over 2 years ago

    “…..Big oil is what America runs on. IDIOTS.”
    I like the way that you lump us ALL into one simple category: ‘idiots.’
    How does it feel to be the only non-idiot in the world?

  13. goweeder

    goweeder said, over 2 years ago

    “….Not one Democrat has been able to explain why we had theses same exact temperature swings long before oil was discovered and long before we had the industries we have today.”
    But I’ll bet that most Dems would agree that the temperature swings of the past
    didn’t affect the air quality substantially.
    Now, as time goes by, the air has become more toxic than it was in the past. Check out the pictures of fog that lingers constantly over China.
    Coincidence? I think not.

  14. desertBoomer

    desertBoomer said, over 2 years ago

    “Liberals keep telling me the Titanic is sinking but my side of the ship is 500 feet in the air.”


  15. emptc12

    emptc12 said, over 2 years ago

    Some people casually say, well, the world will always survive whatever damage humans do. As if that assumes that our kind will continue on rather than destroy itself in the process.
    Certainly the world as a planet will continue, but what type? Its atmosphere might become unbreathable to us, its fresh water supplies tainted. Many conditions for our type of life might change, but still life will find a way. Even if the surface is scoured clean, there are bacteria deep in the crust still surviving that might continue evolution to the level of sentience again.
    Re-boot Earth life. It’s been done before, several times. But this time we almost reached the stars.
    Steve Huntley is the designated Conservative Republican columnist of the Chicago Sun-Times, and holds most of the official party views. He once wrote we should let climate alone. Just as Neanderthals became extinct and modern humans came along to replace them, climate changes would challenge our present survival abilities and lead to something better.
    It’s circular reasoning. What we do is good, or it will lead to something good – and that’s good. So whatever we do, is good. And so on.
    It’s a smug, selfish argument, in my opinion. If bacteria were self-aware, that might be their reasoning as they fuzz over the entire planet.
    How many ecologies and species is it permissible to allow to vanish in pursuit of human proliferation? Sure, over 98 percent of species have disappeared in Earth’s existence. But it happened not of their own choice.
    We have a choice, and it seems to lead toward having ourselves the only large existent life form. That is the future: Among the largest life forms (whales, elephants, rhinos, tigers, lions, and bears) it is probable that none of those, outside of zoos ,will be around after another century. If we become victims to ourselves, whose zoo will preserve us?
    I don’t think the world is here solely for our entertainment and comfort and exploitation, despite what religions and commerce imply. Other life forms are not here to all end up as our food or toys. We are co-inhabitants, as eco-freaky as that sounds.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (4).