Saturday, January 15, 2011

Party Crashing

READERS - Today's cartoon represents a little change of pace. It was supposed to run a week ago, before events in Tucson took over the news cycle. It was a simple piece about "symbolism" - but how could we have predicted how much symbolism would come into play for the week?

The mainstream media tried (and failed) to make Jared Loughner the symbol of the Tea Party...but he instead became the symbol of the partisan press.

And a beautiful, nine-year-old girl who tragically and senselessly lost her life became the symbol of a nation which has lived under a thick and suffocating cloud of dread since 9/11.

Symbols matter...but only if they represent something real. As do symbolic votes if they represent the will of the people.

In his (extremely) weakly address, Barack Obama called for an end to "symbolic battles" in Congress. Like, oh, just taking a wild guess week's House vote to repeal Obamacare.

Of course, the only reason that such a repeal bill is "symbolic" is because Mr. Obama has already said that he'll veto it, whether the American people want it or not.

But to be fair, the alleged president has been fairly consistent about disliking symbolism. While on the campaign trail, candidate Obama famously rejected American flag pins, saying "I won't wear that pin on my chest" because it was a "substitute for true patriotism." He has also rejected the symbolism of attending important state funerals (preferring to golf), visiting allies, or allowing the Whitehouse to become cluttered with meaningless symbols like the bust of Winston Churchill which represented the close relationship our nation used to have with England.

Still, Mr. Obama occasionally supports really, really important symbolism.

Like having his wife turn a portion of the Whitehouse grounds into a yam farm to remind all Americans that we should be thinking less about jobs... and more about becoming sharecroppers.



happytalk czar said...

Bwahaha! I LOL'd a good one thanks for the laugh.

Anonymous said...

I wonder what Obama thinks about the symbolism of both parties sitting with each other rather than separately at his State of the Union pep rally Address. I don't know if both sides have agreed to do this yet, but I can't help but agree with Rush that the dems would probably want to do this to disguise how much their cymbals (I mean numbers) have diminished since the November elections. I also wonder how many conservative Supreme Court Justices will show up considering last year's public condemnation from the alleged Healer-in-Chief.

Pete(Detroit) said...

Meaningless Symbolism? Like "hope" and "change"?
Replace 'em mebbee w/ meaningFUL words, like "work" and "responsibility"?

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Anonymous Earl- I agree; mixing the parties is intended mainly to camouflage how little support this president has (or deserves). And I think that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has already announced that he has better things to do than be attacked and lied about by Mr. Obama.

Pete(Detroit)- Or how about a really substantive phrase like "Together We Thrive," which wasn't created for the Tucson memorial, but actually came from Obama's "Organizing for America" website. Which puts the distribution of t-shirts into a very cold and clear light.

Angry Hoosier Dad said...

Stilton and Earl:
I still think that meaningless symbolism is an effort to shame the Republicans into standing when the Dems give Duh Won their scripted standing O's. When Repubs are surrounded by Dems and not seated together, the peer pressure to rise with the Dems will be greater and, knowing how squishy many Republicans are to begin with, they will not "sit" firm.

Bobo said...

Angry Hoosier Dad - I agree and my thought unfortunately is BO will have enough feel good comments & statements in his speech (i.e. the victims in Tucson, our military personnel, babies, bunnies and puppies, free t-shirts, etc.) everyone will feel it necessary to stand and clap knowing the cameras will be watching. If not, they will be ridiculed by the MSM for not showing support and sympathy for the victims and their democrat colleague. With the proper directing of camera angles and a little cut and paste of last year's stand and clap love-fest edited in here and there, Americans will think the entire body gave him a standing ovation for the course of the speech and never sat down once.

The symbolism there for the American viewing audience - Everybody likes him.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Angry Hoosier Dad & Bobo- Sadly, I'll bet you're right. I'd like to think that the Republicans would have enough fortitude to stay seated during the president's more idiotic pronouncements... but without getting support from their peripheral vision, they'll probably stand up. Which, oxymoronically, is also backing down.

John the Econ said...

It was a joy to watch the MSM take another giant leap towards irrelevancy without any outside help. I wonder what kind of second-guessing Krugman is doing this weekend in his bunker. I guess I'll have to wait a little longer to find out...

Anonymous said...

Considering how dreadfully the left and the msm mischaracterized the Arizona shootings, it's absolutely frightening to think about how they would have responded if there actually HAD been any remote connection between the shootings and conservative activists. I WISH I could think that Krugman was in hiding out of acute embarrassment, but I think it's more likely he's excused himself for simply being premature. Nutcases and political mischief makers can only be emboldened by what happened.


Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Anonymous Earl- Good point. If Loughner had even paid as much attention to the news as the average person, the media would still be frothing that he had been "influenced."

And if he had owned a tea party t-shirt, Napolitano would be rounding up a lot of folks on the Right to spend quality time at re-education camps. (And remember, it's not waterboarding if they use a Neti pot!)

Pete(Detroit) said...

Anon (Earl)(you know, if you pick name / url and type 'Earl' in the name, you don't have to be anon anymore. You too, Jeep Guy!) anyway - "excused himself for simply being premature"

Premature Interjection? Isn't there a Boston (tm) treatment for that?

Sadly, as TP gets bigger, it will attract kooks, and if pols DON'T smaller gov't and cut taxes (AND Spending!) TPs in general will get grumpier. We likely will, eventually, have a nutter in a TP T-shirt go all off...
The 'meme' at THAT time needs to be "Hey, if you had CUT, they would not have flipped out - it's YOUR fault!"

JustaJeepGuy said...

You mean like this?

John the Econ said...

Instead of following "divisive political rhetoric", it appears that Loughner focused on violent video games and heavy metal music.

Strange we don't hear any calls from the MSM for moderating violent video games and heavy metal music.

Once again, we see what the elite really thinks about "free speech" and the Constitution. Supposedly socially corrosive entertainment is constitutionally protected, but political speech must now be "moderated".