An anonymous reader called me to say that he thought that today’s editorial cartoon was a bit out of line. His point was that editorial cartoons should provide at least some degree of insight and analysis of an issue. This one, he said, merely called the board a bunch of monkeys and Phelps pond scum, in other words, mere name-calling. I thought the cartoon was saying, granted in a somewhat juvenile fashion, that the board and Phelps were indeed harmful to Kansas’ image. It may not be the deepest thought ever expressed, but it was at least a tiny bit analytical. Or am I guilty of letting my inner 12-year-old take over my drawing board yesterday? He does that every now and then.
Posted by Richard Crowson
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- writerdog on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Let immigrants run
- Heckler on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Let immigrants run
- okobserver on Let immigrants run
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
62 Comments
Richard, I, for one, got it.
Don’t worry about your inner 12 year old, for “out of the mouths of babes….”
They are a bunch of monkeys. As far as Phelps goes, pond scum is too good for him and his ilk.
I find this cartoon very insulting. Monkeys don’t deserve to be compared to the likes of creationists. There are hairy backed, shit slingers, then there are the monkeys.
I agree with Doug. I would also note that pond scum does serve a useful function, as for Pharisee Phred …
Yikes, you might wish to head for the bunker there, Richard Crowson. You wouldn’t want the Kansas Taliban to issue a fatwa aginst you and the Eagle.
V.L.R.B!!
Good post, Ian. First time I ever thought I could say that!
Where humor is concerned there are no standards – no one can say what is good or bad, although you can be sure that everyone will…..John Kenneth Galbraith
Steven!!DON’T FEED THE IANS
Sorry, Tracy. I thought it was noteworthy that he did not utter his usual stuff. But, you are probably right.
Actually, I may have written the same thoughts, ummmm…..without the V.L. whatever it is.
You gents needn’t worry about “feeding” me as my wife throws me some raw meat in the morning after letting me out of my cage. That tends to keep me calm for most of the day.
V.L.R.B!!
Problem is, in order to get from pond scum to monkey, the school board would have had to evolve- something they so far have absolutely refused to do.
All right.We’ll keep the monkeys and the scum,BUT THE BOE HAS TO GO!!
I thought is was mildly amusing.
what would be even more funny is if Crowson compared Sebelius to medusa, or the wicked witch…or to a decomposing body (because that’s what she looks like)
or just a liar. that would fit well too.
or how bout a madem in a brothel – after all, she has nicole coccoran in the office….
Dear Richard,
I’ve never really considered you a very deep thinker, you seldom disapoint me.
However, even though our politics may differ a little you ocassionally post a cartoon that really gets to me.
Don’t change a thing, you’re doing OK. I think that you have something for everybody. (sooner or later).
Hank
Your cartoon was right on target. The embarrassing antics of the board’s right-wing deserves any criticism and ridicule hurled their way!
Around 70% of the population at least has doubts about Darwin.I am guessing that more than 70% of the population thinks Phelps is a jerk.It is unfair to link everyone with religious viewpoints to Phelps, whose actions are clearly not supported by many outside of his cult.As stated previously, I do not believe that evolution and Genisis are in direct conflict, but there are radicals on both the right and the left who do believe such a conflict exists.There are radical atheists who see evolution as a way to “disprove” religion.Those radicals deserve a cartoon, too, don’t you think?
My comment would be that one of the arts of politics is to somehow link your opponent to someone or something universally reviled.
BTW, did anyone else notice that Richard Crowson and BTK both like to draw pictures?
The Op-ed page isn’t supposed to simply support the status-quo, which is what The Eagle’s op-ed page too often does.
Was the cartoon over-the-top?
No, right-on.
I agree with your cartoon, it’s perfect.
You cartoon was perfect for the mental age group
‚Ä¢ Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. — Albert Einstein (1879 – 1955)
As an aquaintance of Fred Phelps for over 30 years, I am slightly offended that you compared him to the KSBOE.
Don’t know why my /sarcasm off tag didn’t appear on the previous post.OOPS!
Anybody notice that Charles Manson and outlander both have belly buttons?Hmmmm……….
Tracy
Just for you.
http://i.euniverse.com/funpages/cms_content/13180/HillaryCondi_HoDown.swf
Ed that is beyond funny.I don’t care wich side of the isle ya’ sit on,THAT’S FUNNY!
Forgive Ed, Lord.And please help feed all them starvin’ pygmys down in Indonesia.
Maybe there should be an outcry over this cartoon and we should go muslim fuckin crazy over it.
JIHAD!!!!!
Ordinarily he was insane, but he had lucid moments when he was merely stupid…..Heinrich Heine
Pall,”Around 70% of the population at least has doubts about Darwin.”I wonder what percentage of the population in 1491 were convinced the earth was flat? How many people in 1694 would have considered your car to be evidence of witchcraft?Science is about knowledge, not consensus.
You mean my car _doesn’t_ run on magic? How does it go, then? I thought it ran on that demonic rock-oil stuff…?
Oh, yeah, and the earth _is_ flat. I stuck it with an ice pick, Nyah.
Well, it was worth posting my cartoon just to get Ed’s link.Viva la Hillary and Condi Song!
Duh. Guess I should learn to spell my own name. Hey. I’m into drawing, not spelling. There goes what little shred of crebidility I had…
Spellink heck, woo nedes it? Eye kin rede (reed).
Good cartoon Richard. Spot on.
Ed – great link – just got a chance to watch it!
Over the top? Nawwww…not at all. You cannot over emphasize what disgusting filth phelps is.
Besides, both phelps and the BOE DO make Kansas a laughing stock. I was leaning against Sebelius, but after she came out with her ideas about changes on the BOE, she has my vote.
The existing BOE as well as the cult from Topeka are embarassments to our state.
Stupid cartoon. The governor’s statement was stupid also. I have yet to hear a rational argument why the SBOE was wrong in reworking the science standards. “Well gee, other states will laugh at us.” First of all, they aren’t watching Kansas that closely, second, when is that a reason to not do something that is correct?
I enjoyed the cartoon, satire is good to digest. However, the use of monkeys are technically wrong, the theory is that man descended from apes, not monkeys.
However, I find monkeys more humorous and…
Anyone have a banana?
Ed, I concur with Ben; just had the opportunity to watch it, also; my ribs are aching from laughter.
If the Gov is so pissed that the Phelps and the BOE make Kansas look bad. Then why the contiuned employment of the Phelps children with the state?
If the right-wing nuts are upset about the cartoon then the truth must have hit a nerve!
I feel sorry for the monkeys being compared to the right-wing idiots. At least monkeys are generally cute.
Putting Phelps and the current BOE in the same category is insanity. It might have been funny to you and your leftist following~ but last I checked we were a representative form of government in KS…and that majority elected the present BOE. These fine folks might not grace the blogs…..but they outnumber those who do. And who gives a rats ass what any other state thinks. It’s not about them.
Let the conservatives go ape over it!
I’m sick of hearing what other states think of us. Get real–do you really believe that someone in California or Florida is thinking or cares what we are doing. The answer is no, they are thinking about what movie they’re going to rent, or what drive-through they’re going to go through tonight.
I’m sure it is hard to come up with a editorial cartoon everyday, but this is crap.
The board owes Kansas an apology!
Can one of you (or Crowson) tell me what was so wrong about the new science standards? No you can’t because you have never bothered to read them. You just want to appear more intelligent than all those other “stupid Kansas hicks.” If you actually read the standards you find that they merely expand the discussion on where life came from. Maybe Crowson can tell us?????
tyler,Okay, the jig is up. The reason for the cartoon showing monkeys as the KBOE is because of the show and tell law: Neocons cannot understand the written language as it appears in the newspaper, so they must be shown, in cartoon form, exactly what the board looks like. This is to make it easier for the neocons to recognize the monk . . . er . . . people they vote for.
You see, jack and jill ran up the hill to . .. well, it surly wasn’t to devolve.
Creationists have an entire day dedicated to them – Sunday. From morning to bedtime Sunday is respected by society as the day when religious/creationists can gather and tell each other how smart and divine they are.To let that mindset bleed over into public schools might be okay if it is offered in an elective class that runs completely separate from a science course. There is no proof – zero – to support creationism other than believe in the bible. That is not science. That’s literature.No religion should EVER compromise the secular set-up of public schools.As for these Kansas wing-nuts, they should be skewered for they are pigs.Of all the things our children need in schools, creationism is the last.Adults are such pussies.Crowson – please edit yourself as you see fit but don’t let the Kansas Board of pig fuckers ever intimidate you.
I TRY to respect others their faith even though I do not share it.
That said, the “God” some of you worship must be rather impotent if he and his followers are threatened by a cartoon.
These people whining about the ridicule need to read about science and science education, instead of falsely accusing us of not knowing what the board did.What a bunch of whiney BS!!We’ve been over the standards time and time again, word for word.
The REAL bottom line is that the supporters of this scheme have an unspoken agenda. That unspoken agenda has ONLY ONE LOGICAL CONCLUSION. That conclusion is to bring christian dogma to the classroom, wich eventually leads to evangelizing.
You cannot “expand the discussion” of the origins of life in scince class with creationism, AND DON’T TELL ME THAT’S NOT THE INTENT, to say so is just breathtakingly inane. There is absolutely NOTHING scientific about creationism.
Jim G. has it right:”Creationists have an entire day dedicated to them – Sunday.”They can also have their discussion in a philosphy class, a bible as lit class, a comparative religion class, etc, etc.
leah–”but last I checked we were a representative form of government in KS…and that majority elected the present BOE.”
That majority is also booting out the offending members. We will not have an evangelistic majority. The voters are SICK of all the attempts to have ‘man made from mud’ stuck into science class.
If you want your children to believe creationism then get them into a religious school and quit trying to dump your views on our (the majority) kids.
If one believes one way or another about eveolution or creation, what does it matter? Which is true? How do you know? If there is a God who created the universe, so-called ‘evolutionists’ would seem to deny investigating the truth. So if you refuse to investigate the truth, what would that make you?
If there is no God, then creationists will eventually be proven wrong. All of their silly and perverse arguments will be shown for what they were. To not allow study and discussion appears to be fear that one can’t win the argument, not defense of what’s really the truth.
As for the cartoon, if you don’t do one the other way, please never call yourself objective. But then this was an editorial cartoon. Next do one about the Muslims.
Why won’t you? They are far more aggressive in pursuing their agenda than other religions.
Dear pm(s) . . . . . .
NOTICE: no one since my posting discussed what was wrong with the new science standards. Only name calling.
As far as no evidence for God:
“I think that the most impressive arguments for God’s existence are those that are supported by recent scientific discoveries…I think the argument to Intelligent Design is enormously stronger than it was when I first met it…It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.”–Dr. Antony Flew, “a leading champion of atheism for more than a half-century.” Someone who believes that we should, “follow the evidence, wherever it leads.”
But we can’t do that can we? We will look silly!!!
tyler – the thing wrong with those standards is that they mandate teaching theological concepts as science. They should be kept separate.
I would favor teaching all sorts of ‘concepts’ of how we got here – in philosophy or camparative religion. However in science we should teach science. ID is NOT science.
As for the existence or non-existence of God – that is not in the realm of science. That again belongs in philosophy/religion class.
‚Ä¢ Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. — Albert Einstein (1879 – 1955)
Thank you Ben. I don’t agree with everything you say, specifically that the standards mandate what you say, however, I appreciate you actually trying to make a substantial argument rather than name calling and all this BS about how stupid we will look.
tyler – since my computer at home is from the stone age (pre-evolution?) I am usually only online at the office. Thus I ‘cut out’ about 6 PM typically.
What are you talking about Jed? Science is all about consensus that exists in the scientific community!
So when will we be expecting the cartoons ridiculing Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and Satanism?
Answer:Never
You guys seem to think that by making fun of Christianity you’re being “controversial,” but here in the U.S. ripping on Christians is about as uncontroversial as talking about the weather! You see, Madonna tying herself to a cross is not controversial in any way, but her straddling an image of the Prophet Muhammed, now that would indeed generate “controversy!”
The cartoon, of course, was not “making fun of Christianity.” But feel free to make your canned point anyway, Will (I know you were dying to say that!).
Rage,Your intellectual dishonesty is apparent!
“Rage,Your intellectual dishonesty is apparent!”
Only to you.
Representing the Kansas State Board of Education conservatives as monkeys does not represent a broad based attack on Christians or Christian belief. It’s making fun of politicians who claim Christianity as the basis for their actions. If you argue that Crowson’s as “making fun of Christianity”, then by that definition there are political cartoons that make fun of of Islam all of the time by negatively depicting terrorists or figures like bin Ladin who claim that Islam is the basis for their actions.