Pat Oliphant by Pat Oliphant
- August 29, 2009
- From Beginning
- Previous feature
- Show Calendar
- Next feature
- Current
Editorials A-Z Navigation
Jack Ohman by Jack Ohman
Joel Pett by Joel Pett
About Pat Oliphant
Called "the most influential cartoonist now working" by The New York Times, Pat Oliphant occupies a unique position among today’s editorial cartoonists: Widely considered the dean of the profession, he is one of its sharpest, most daring practitioners.
© 2009 Universal Press Syndicate - All Rights Reserved.
Comments (50) Jump to Comments Form
nomad2112 said, 2 months ago
Gomez: Leather straps…red-hot pokers…
Morticia: Later, my dearest.
Buzzy-One said, 2 months ago
Rather than wasting all that precious money investigating we could just give uncle Dick to the taliban.
believecommonsense
said,
2 months ago
ahh ….. the hero of so many posters who pat themselves on the back daily reveling in their glorified understanding of the teachings of Christ
senorbullwinkle
said,
2 months ago
EXCELLENT IDEA BUZZY, I’m jealous ! Why didn’t I think of it ? We need you in Washington to investigate.
You know how to make those republicans talk.
HUMPHRIES
said,
2 months ago
senior, making republicans “talk” is not a problem. Telling the truth or just sometimes getting them to shut-up, now that’s tough.
bosco
said,
2 months ago
there sure are a lot of narrow minded people around here who cast the problems of their own party on to the right. neither side is perfect but at least the right wants freedom and not socialism, marxism, or communism. its all been tried around the world and only freedom works.
believecommonsense
said,
2 months ago
the right wants freedom? I think not! The right values conformity, practices false piety, denies history, worships profit over human compassion and would turn down the content of the bill of rights if it was brought up for a vote.
they’ve forgotten the ideas and ideals our great nation was founded upon
maybe we should send them all back to school until they can pass a civics course
hoyacougar said, 2 months ago
bosco, we’re still waiting for any country in the world to try real freedom for all their people. all countries pretty much practice a mix of socialism and capitalism; each draws their line between a little differently.
meetinthemiddle said, 2 months ago
As a libertarian friend of mine put it “Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats like the Bill of Rights - they just object to different numbers.”
Devonshade
said,
2 months ago
I sure would like to have “freedom” from blathering idiots such as bosco.
ezdeb said, 2 months ago
The thing about bosco et al, is that they think Uncle Dick and good ol’ boy W would never never use any executive power against their own people, right?? Cheney was all about protecting America. Power doesn’t corrupt for Republicans, I guess.
Simon_Jester said, 2 months ago
The people who think all Dems are Marxists and/or Communists get that idea from the most infallible source of all:
“Jeezus? If all Democrats are NOT dirty commies, turn this water into wine!”
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
For God’s sake you left-wing morons! Please read (if that’s possible) as much of the writings of Thomas Jefferson as you can find. You MIGHT discover how far from his great ideals this nation has strayed!
fennec said, 2 months ago
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
And just what do you on the far right think “establish Justice”, “insure domestic Tranquility” and “promote the general Welfare” mean? We on the so-called left have a clear idea of what it means, but I tend to think that you on the right just skip over these inconvenient phrases.
motivemagus said, 2 months ago
bikemaster - Jefferson believed in a state run by independent, educated, rural farmers. We haven’t been that for a while, if ever. And later in life did his best to rationalize slavery (no wonder, since he was sleeping with his and ultimately selling his children with her). Furthermore, he was willing to abandon his ideals instantly when he was in office.
And of course, he’s not the only source of insight into the ideals. Look at John Adams, and of course Madison.
Lincoln’s interpretation was interesting, because he took the Declaration of Independence as his direction, and by those standards I don’t see how Obama is in violation of it, and that was (mostly) Jeffersonian!
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
Okay fennec, let’s try this one more time…..”please read AS - MUCH - OF - THE - WRITINGS - OF - THOMAS - JEFFERSON - AS - YOU - CAN - FIND .” This will require library time, research time, a fair amount of intellectual effort, but it will give you the context and understanding needed for proper interpretation of the constitution. He penned it, but it was modified by others and in the end he was not truly happy with what we have.
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
motivemagnus…..Jefferson wrote constantly of his belief that slavery was wrong. The economics of his time, world-wide, seemed to be based on it. He attempted to end it as a Virginia legislator, but was always outvoted. The rest of that bleeep about sleeping with his slave is probably little more than an attempt by the contemptuous left to smear this great man. It is typical of them.
Simon_Jester said, 2 months ago
bikemaster, since you claim to know so much about Jefferson’s writings, let’s see some quotes from those writings to back up your contentions, instead of all this “Jefferson was like this coz I SAY SO!”
One more thing, the stuff on Sally Hemmings and Jefferson came mostly form a disgruntled member of his own camp, a man named James Callender, who’d been dishing dirt on the Federalist Party on TJ’s behalf.
http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/James_Callender
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
Simon_Jester…..my information on Jefferson came from reading four volumes of his actual, published letters, reading several biographies, viewing videos from several sources (including your beloved, left-leaning Nation Public Television). It’s not “coz I SAY SO”, it’s because it’s history. But of course, we all know that “Those who refuse to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it!” READ IT FOR YOURSELF!!!
senorbullwinkle
said,
2 months ago
Didn’t bush say, ” See, that was then, this is NOW”, that is old, that was a long time ago, things change !
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&VideoID=20331058
Simon_Jester said, 2 months ago
I asked you for quotes, not CLAIMS bikemaster…you say you read these things, lets see WHAT you read.
And which Jefferson biographies are you taling about? Did you read Passionate Sage, by Joseph Ellis?
fennec said, 2 months ago
Boy, I just love these single source experts! Has it occurred to you, bike, that there were more people than just Jefferson setting up our constitution? Has it occurred to you that they may have had a better handle on some things than Jefferson? Of course, for you to do this would “require library time, research time, a fair amount of intellectual effort”.
HUMPHRIES
said,
2 months ago
bikee, suggest you tour Montechello, Virginia before making more posts.- - PS, Bosco your “right” has a lopsided definition of “Freedom”
senorbullwinkle
said,
2 months ago
What did Jefferson say about abortion ?
What did he say about wiretapping ?
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
Hey , lefty-loonies , quotes & sound-bites are easy & simple, but they give NO context and are usually used to distort,change or pervert meaning. Jefferson is one of many great thinkers and writers among the founders of our REPUBLIC. I’ve studied & read as much as time would allow on this period of history. FINAL WORD TO THE FENNECJESTERBULLHUMPH CROWD….sober up, wise up and …..SHUT UP !
Jase99 said, 2 months ago
Bike, read up on the Patriot Act (well, the parts citizens are /allowed/ to read) and give us Jefferson quotes to support them. Don’t forget to list your sources.
Bosco, if “at least the right wants freedom,” why did they work so hard to curtail them under the Bush Administration? The Republican controlled Congress and the Bush Administration gave the government the power of warrantless wiretapping, warrantless search and seizure, and indefinite incarceration without benefit of trial based on the “belief” the person /may/ have information “valuable” to the government. Thanks to those “protectors of freedom,” the government has the right to know what library books you check out, what internet searches you perform, and who you call on the phone. Sure they have to “believe” you have information “vital” to national security, but “mistakes” are bound to happen.
Fairportfan said, 2 months ago
bikemaster said
Hey , lefty-loonies , quotes & sound-bites are easy & simple, but they give NO context and are usually used to distort,change or pervert meaning.
So, in other words, “I’m not going to bother to back up what I say because I don’t think I ought to have to.”
Typical demagogue’s position, on either (or any) side.
However, in true discourse, it is up to the one making a claim - any claim - to provide evidence to support his assertions.
So far, all you’ve done is to make the same assertions, speaking more slowly and loudly. This is the tactic of someone either unwilling or unable to examine his own beliefs critically, or of one not sure of his ground who has made an assertion that he now fears he cannot back up.
deadheadzan
said,
2 months ago
bikemaster maybe doesn’t care that originally only white owners of property were allowed to vote. This changed when Andrew Jackson became President. Also Jefferson’s biracial mistress, Sally Hemmings was believed to have had children fathered by him. In fact, genetically this was proved a few years ago. I read about it in Time Magazine. At any rate, even the Constitution is not a perfect document and it was never meant to be.
Simon_Jester said, 2 months ago
Still no quotes, bikemaster?
You know what?
I think you haven’t read ANYTHING by Jefferson; you’re only parroting back what you heard about him on RW talk-radio.
charliekane said, 2 months ago
Hey bike:
TJ “penned” the Constitution? That’s gotta be news to Jimmy Madison! TJ was our minister to France at the time.
I’m a great fan of TJ. Been to Monticello on several occasions. Times, society and America have changed over the past 240 or so years. What you find great in his thoughts and writings is probably most indicative of your point of view. My major paper in college dealt with FDR making a New Dealer out of TJ.
Back to the ‘toon: love the monkey!
motivemagus said, 2 months ago
bikemaster - Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, dude, not the Constitution, which was a collaborative effort.
And for the record, DNA analysis has pretty well nailed down the fact that Jefferson produced children by Sally Hemings, enough so that some of her descendants went to the last Jefferson family reunion. It is somewhat forgivable in that Hemings was almost certainly Jefferson’s late wife’s half-sister, and he completely adored his wife. (Yes, two generations of sleaziness – Jefferson’s father-in-law probably fathered Hemings).
Your view of history is limited indeed if you think economic conditions worldwide were built on slavery; they were not. As I said, Jefferson’s views changed over the years from ardent critic to rationalizer. “Economic conditions” did indeed make it hard for a Southerner to release his slaves. But Washington did it. And the man who wrote about “we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor” might have found a way, don’t you think?
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
GOOD JOB, MOTIVEMAGUS! I…uh…deliberately said that to…uh…see if any of you pinheads knew who ACTUALLY wrote the constitution…yeah…that’s it, that’s the ticket! And…DEADHEADZAN & SIMPLE SIMON, we’re all truly sorry that you suffer from severe comprehension disorder (SCD). Now, no more naughty posts. You’ve hurt my feelings and made me feel bad!
believecommonsense
said,
2 months ago
bikemaster, well you just proved my comment about the rabid right being deniers of history …. (not to mention your errors of substance) … it was proved some ago that Sally Hemmings was TJ’s mistress and she bore his children
if you choose to deny history, perhaps you should keep it to yourself or at least state why you choose to disbelieve proven fact … t’would be more honest …. do you know what that word means?
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
“Rabid right?” So…anyone who seems to be presenting viewpoints you don’t like are automaticaly labeled, categorized and no doubt pictured in your vile, narrow little minds as….oh…let’s see…how about, “gun toting, Bible thumping, Rebel flag-waving, yellow-snag-toothed, moonshine-swilling, cross-eyed neanderthal”. That about do it? Now, about your obsession with Sally Hemmings. Tom was heartbroken over the death of his wife. Sally is described as being exceptionally pretty. They are in France. He’s lonely. She’s flirtatious. He’s a great thinker, writer and statesman, BUT HE IS STILL JUST A MAN! If you have difficulty understanding such things as NORMAL sexual urges between MEN and WOMEN, counselling is available.
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
HEY, SIMPLE SIMON You want a quote from T.J.? Try this one: “I must not omit the important rule of never entering into dispute or argument with another. I never saw an instance of one or two disputants convincing the other by argument. When I hear another express an opinion which is not mine, I say to myself, he has a right to his opinion, as I to mine, why should I question it? Be a listener only, keep within yourself and endeavor to establish with yourself the habit of silence, especially on politics.” This is particularly good advice when one is dealing with lazy, uneducated fools. I wish I’d remembered this before engaging all you hate-filled, invective-slinging, DEMOCOMMIENAZIFACSISTOTALITARIANS!!!
HUMPHRIES
said,
2 months ago
^ The stupider they are the harder they try to prove it. Present an opinion but quit crying when you’re called out on a slur.
believecommonsense
said,
2 months ago
bikemaster, first you write of Jefferson: The rest of that bleeep about sleeping with his slave is probably little more than an attempt by the contemptuous left to smear this great man.
then you write that he had relations with Sally Hemmings because he was horny. So you are now admitting he slept with/had a relationship with Sally Hemmings?
like I said, one characteristic of the rabid right is denial of history
senorbullwinkle
said,
2 months ago
Jeffersons family,
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1G1GGLQ_ENUS298&ei=huaaSsvFE56-tAOjvODaBg&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=thomas+jefferson+and+sally+hemings+and+dna&spell=1
U.S. News and world report http://tinyurl.com/nt39qh
motivemagus said, 2 months ago
Back to Jefferson: the reason why I have increasingly felt contempt for Jefferson is because he was not in a normal relationship. bikemaster, your comment that he was lonely and she was flirtatious implies they were in a relationship of equals. Nope. He brought her to France deliberately. She was his slave. He owned her and her (his!) children, and never even managed to free them upon his death. That’s the reprehensible part – a man who, early in life, fought so hard against slavery, ultimately took advantage of the condition in the worst possible way. She may have cared for him, but she had no choice in the matter either way, and that is the part that is wrong. It goes a lot further than a great man having a personal flaw – it goes to the heart of everything Jefferson is claimed to be, and everything *he* claimed to be.
And poor, honest, committed John Adams doesn’t even have a statue, let alone a memorial in Washington.
churchillwasright said, 2 months ago
^ I appreciate how you feel, but there is a term for your argument. It is called historian’s fallacy: a logical fallacy that occurs when one assumes that decision makers of the past viewed events from the same perspective and having the same information as those subsequently analyzing the decision. It is not to be confused with presentism, a mode of historical analysis in which present-day ideas (such as moral standards) are projected into the past.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historian%27s_fallacy
Just my two cents worth.
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
Thank you CHURCHILLWASRIGHT for your comment. Unlike the others, you have added a sensible idea without attacking me personally. My original intention was to present an IDEA for the commenters to chew on. In typical fashion, they went on FULL PERSONAL ATTACK mode, rather than considering the actual merits of the IDEA. Would it have made any difference to them if I had invoked the names of Jefferson’s fellow founders? I suspect that the “Rabid Left” would have gone equally crazy looking for every little mistake made by me or any perceived flaw in the character of our “founding fathers”
charliekane said, 2 months ago
MM:
I hear ya’.
For years I had the notion that JA was a slightly misguided frumpy old schoolmarm.
From watching the HBO miniseries, I gained great respect for him.
motivemagus said, 2 months ago
church’ - I am well aware of the concept (or both concepts, actually, though I once heard the last one as “nowism”) – I read a lot of history – but I don’t think it applies here. It was Jefferson contravening his own beliefs that caused me to gain contempt for his personal behavior, however admirable I found (and still find) his intellect, his espoused values in the Declaration, and other accomplishments. Being a slaveowner in the slavery-dependent South and thinking slavery was bad – that much I could handle. But selling his own children, who were born into slavery to a woman he probably knew was his wife’s half-sister - I’m sorry, there’s no way I can accept that. That is simply reprehensible even by the standards of the time. Only a man of his intelligence could have reasoned around this. And if I remember correctly, there are zero references to Sally Hemings in his voluminous writings, which suggests to me that he was making a concerted effort not to think about what he was doing.
On a side note, it is particularly ironic how many people want to claim blacks are inferior to whites in some genetic sense (see the comments on The Bell Curve on another cartoon) without acknowledging the fact that virtually every African-American of slave descent is probably nearly as much European as African.
And bikemaster - seems to me you went on full attack mode, too! I would like to think I tried to respond more thoughtfully. (And Jefferson does arouse my ire more than, say, Washington, Adams, or even Franklin, who had his own issues.)
striper77 said, 2 months ago
Seniorbullwinkle,
Robert Kennedy did wire tapping on Martin Luther King, Jr.
bikemaster said, 2 months ago
motivemagus, excellent contribution. Yes, I admit to throwing it back, however, it was done in a spirit of levity. My investigation into Jefferson was prompted by the Presidential Dollar Coin program. I wanted to find out if it was possible to really understand this complex man. Reading those volumes of his letters did indeed give much insite, and the several biographies added to the picture, but in the end one is left with many questions & a sense that he cannot be fully understood. Wouldn’t you agree?
senorbullwinkle
said,
2 months ago
^ Watch this Bikey, Federalist Tommy has a change of heart ! And Federalist “Of His Day”, didn’t like it !
http://www.history.com/video.do?name=americanhistory&bcpid=1676043206&bclid=1716449817&bctid=1533029325
video #2
http://www.history.com/video.do?name=americanhistory&bcpid=1676043206&bclid=1716449817&bctid=1533029328
Striper, do you know you difference between Legal and Illegal. It’s true until he found out MLK was for real and not a subversive rabble rouser
MOTIVE, I believe he freed his own blood, the others not so Lucky. The 16th paragraph makes me think that’s what happened..http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jefferson/slaves/stanton.html
ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago
Jefferson was all for states rights and a small wek central government until something happened that changed his mind.
He became President!
Then he overrode the wishes of Congress and went ahead with the Louisianna Purchase anyway.
So much for a weak central government with a weak president.
senorbullwinkle
said,
2 months ago
Hit&run, how long are you staying this time ?
motivemagus said, 2 months ago
Oops, quite right, señor. What did I read? Hm.
bikemaster - most people are inexplicable at some level, but I think given time we could noodle most of it out!
ReasonsVentriloquist said, 2 months ago
Till about three minutes ago.