Sunday funnies

This week liberal bloggers, feminists, and MSM made fools of themselves with their hypocritical and misogynist digs at Sarah and Bristol Palin. Conservative political cartoonists picked up on them. See more on page 2, all all courtesy of Townhall.com, on page 2. Vote for your favorite.

by John Cole...

cartoon 9-4 john cole.jpg

by Chip Bok...

cartoon 9-3 chip bok.jpg

by Scott Stantis...

cartoon 9-2 Scott stantis.jpg

by Robert Arial...

cartoon 9-4 robert arial.jpg

by Gary Varvel...

cartoon 9-4 gary varvel.jpg

by Glenn McCoy...

cartoon 9-4 glenn mccoy.jpg

by Chip Bok...

cartoon 9-4 chip bok.jpg

by Jerry Holbert...

cartoon 9-3 jerry holbert.jpg

by Dana Summers...

cartoon 9-2 dana summers.jpg

by Eric Allie...

cartoon 9-3 eric allie.jpg

by Eric Allie...

cartoon 9-4 eric allie.jpg

by Michael Ramirez...

cartoon 9-5 michael ramirez.jpg

by Jerry Holbert...

cartoon 9-5 jerry holbert.jpg


Comments:

The two cocktail elephants get my vote.

Posted by: carder at September 7, 2008 7:36 AM


The "Puritanical Democrats" are spot-on. What an incredible farce!

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at September 7, 2008 8:02 AM


Posted by: reality at September 7, 2008 8:19 AM


Posted by: reality at September 7, 2008 8:28 AM


Posted by: reality at September 7, 2008 8:28 AM


Reality,

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-sexed6-2008sep06,0,3119305.story

You guys have GOT to get some new material!

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:31 AM


Posted by: reality at September 7, 2008 8:32 AM


"I'm pro-contraception, and I think kids who may not hear about it at home should hear about it in other avenues," she said during a debate in Juneau.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:33 AM


Posted by: reality at September 7, 2008 8:35 AM


Keep goin' reality. You're showing the true colors of your party. We couldn't make you look any worse. You're doing our job for us.

If the media keeps this up, Sarah and John might win by the largest margin in history.

What class.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:39 AM


Hehe! Reality, keep it up. You're proving Jill's point!

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2008 8:41 AM



Haha mk, I didn't see your post before I posted.

:)

This one was my favorite:

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2008 8:42 AM


"I think I felt a tinkle" had me laughing out loud.

Posted by: Christina at September 7, 2008 8:43 AM


At least Palin could probably tell us a good bit about what type of shotgun it was, the bore, what would be a good load for ducks, etc.

Seriously, thus far I think Palin was a good choice for McCain. They both did well speaking at the convention, and indeed McCain's popularity has bounced, and the polls have tightened up.

One thing where I think Palin is really in the wrong is her advocation of higher taxes on oil companies when oil prices are higher (she has actually instituted the policy in Alaska). To his credit, McCain has always been against this type of deal.

What would Palin do - subsidize oil companies when prices are lower? She's alienated the very companies who take the financial risks necessary to get more oil and natural gas.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 8:44 AM


From the LA times link:

In a widely quoted 2006 survey she answered during her gubernatorial campaign, Palin said she supported abstinence-until-marriage programs. But weeks later, she proclaimed herself "pro-contraception" and said condoms ought to be discussed in schools alongside abstinence.

Typical flip-flopping politician, trying to have it both ways. She and McCain should get along fabulously.

Posted by: reality at September 7, 2008 8:49 AM


YEAH DOUG!

Finally, someone with a legitimate gripe! This is the kind of discussion we should be having. Not whether or not Sarah Palin wears the wrong shade of lipstick.

(Unfortunately, I can't have this discussion with you as I don't know anything about it...lol. But maybe Oliver or Hisman or one of the smarter people here could have it, and I could read and learn...)

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:51 AM


Reality, she was always pro-contraception. lol
We knew that all along.

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2008 8:52 AM


Oh Reality get over yourself.

She supports abstinence AND contraception. Isn't that what PP does? Or are they typical flip floppers too.

Take a lesson from Doug. Quit making yourself look like an a*%.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:53 AM


Mk, I agree with you about Doug's response as being legitimate! Only problem is, I don't know enough about that subject to debate it. I'm not ignoring you, Doug. :)

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2008 8:55 AM


MK and Bethany, love you both. I don't mean to make it a big deal, just thinking on a Sunday morning while working away.

I'd think that McCain's policies will still stay on course there - I just thought it was one conflict where Palin was leaning over to the "socialist" side, so to speak.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 8:58 AM


Bethany,

Reality, she was always pro-contraception. lol

So she LIED to the Eagle Forum when she told them "explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support?" y/y?

Posted by: reality at September 7, 2008 8:59 AM


Posted by: reality at September 7, 2008 9:00 AM


Um, reality. "Explicit" being the key word here...

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2008 9:00 AM


Marykay, I'm glad that I'm not the only one who feels a little bit dumb when people like Doug, Bobby, Hisman, Oliver, etc start discussions! lol They know trigonometry, for goodness sake. I couldn't touch that with a 10 foot pole. :-)

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2008 9:16 AM


Yeah, keep it up Reality. Again, you are just proving our point. Keep going, it only makes your side look worse!

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 9:17 AM


Reality is such an asset to this blog! :)

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2008 9:26 AM


Bethany, you know plenty of cool stuff too.

And speaking of Bobby, where's that rascal been?

I mean, all he has is a family, wife and daughter, college work, doctoral thesis to do... heh heh heh.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 9:29 AM


Nothing could be more encouraging than the shrill, irrational attacks of the proabort liberals against Sarah Palin. Stay the course, losers!! :D

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at September 7, 2008 9:38 AM


Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 9:41 AM


McCain looks like a cute little mushroom in that cartoon. lol

Posted by: Bethany at September 7, 2008 9:44 AM


I think both Democrats and Republicans can find humor in this one:

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 9:47 AM


Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 9:50 AM


Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 10:01 AM


I'm around ol Doug old buddy old pal! But I'm off to mass now. God love you.

Posted by: Bobby Bambino at September 7, 2008 10:04 AM


Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 10:05 AM


Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 10:08 AM


Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 10:10 AM


It's not just gay marriage that's an issue anymore:

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 10:12 AM


So you know what I don't get...why are some of these cartoons showing palin as overweight? She's in GREAT shape.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 10:12 AM


MSM:

The people of the world must be laughing at us right now.
We are at war, but pregnancy and sex-ed seem to be the main concern of the media.

We should be uniting ourselves as a country. I don't care if we have a fierce election in two month. We look like fools.

Quit your crabbin' already!!


Posted by: Janet at September 7, 2008 10:22 AM


Doug,

You and your silly pictures! Love it!

Posted by: Elizabeth (Gabriella's Momma) at September 7, 2008 10:24 AM


Luke 6:25
Woe to you who are well fed now, for you will go hungry. Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn and weep.

Posted by: HisMan at September 7, 2008 10:25 AM


well what I find most humourous and yet disturbing is how NOW and other feminista's have been telling us for years that women should have a career and a family etc. and should be able to have a "choice".
Now that we actually have someone who is savvy and has both but doesn't share their ideology - well she's not good enough.
Proves what we KNEW all along about the feminista's - they are have one issue agenda - abortion, abortion, and more abortion.

Posted by: Patricia at September 7, 2008 10:29 AM


Just sitting here fantasizing about what the reaction of the proabort far left loonies would have been if McCain had picked a weak, easy to beat candidate for VP.... wouldn't they have been happy as larks? Wouldn't they have been laughing and joking and high fiving each other?

They sure wouldn't have been going through all this rage and blind fury!

Posted by: Doyle Chadwick at September 7, 2008 10:33 AM


Here we go:

"The survey found that while most parents approved of their children being taught about using condoms and contraceptives to avoid pregnancy and disease, they did not want them being taught about masturbation, sexual fantasies and homosexuality and did not want middle schools' teaching children how to unroll condoms, all subjects in the sex education guidelines. "

quote from the NY Times. query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C07E2D6173AF930A25751C0A9659C8B63&n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/Subjects/P/Public%20Opinion

Does that help with the difference of explicit sex education and contraception education?

Posted by: Anonymous at September 7, 2008 10:42 AM


oops...

That last comment was from me.

Posted by: Valerie at September 7, 2008 10:45 AM


Doug at September 7, 2008 9:47 AM

I love that cartoon!

Eileen

Posted by: Eileen at September 7, 2008 10:47 AM


I posted this before and thought it might be worth it to post again:

The Guttmatcher Institute had a 10 question quiz on how much you know about sex education. They confused their findings. They report that between 1995 and 2002 formal instruction of birth control declined among males from 81% to 61% and it declined among females from 87% to 70%. They report that along with this decline they saw an increase in abstinence education. Among males: 9% to 24%; among females: 8% to 21%. Then they report that between the same years of 1995 to 2002 teen pregnancy decreased 24%. They concluded that this decline was due to increase and correct use of contraception among teens - however less teens were being educated on contraception. So, the less education on contraception resulted in higher use of contraception? They failed to put together that the decrease in formal contraception inforamation with an increase in abstinence education resulted in a decline in teen pregnancy. Now less schools are teaching abstinence for the past several years and now we are now seeing a rise in teen pregnancy again and the CDC released that 1 out of 4 teenaged girls have a STD. I think there are now 22 states that will not fund abstinence education now. Throwing comprehensive sex education and condoms at our kids hasn't worked. BTW - condoms are not very effective against genital herpes, syphillis and chancroid and possibly HPV. These are transmitted by skin to skin contact and not by fluid transmission. It didn't surprise me to find out the Syphilis is one of the STD's that rose significantly in the past couple years.

Posted by: Valerie at September 7, 2008 10:50 AM


Patricia:

It's not about abortion, it's about power, power, power.

Abortion is a means to an end and that is why we must take away their power.

We take away their power by showing the majority in this country what the Left really is.

And the "show and tell" parade is all so evident on this site as to what Liberals really are.

The more they post, the more they are exposed, and the more people are reviled at who they are.

Thank you so much Reality and Doug, please, please keep posting.

Posted by: HisMan at September 7, 2008 10:50 AM


They sure wouldn't have been going through all this rage and blind fury!

Doyle, it's not "rage" or "blind fury." There are always going to be cartoons aimed at one side or another, and Palin has her good points as well as her bad. No matter who both Obama and McCain picked, you know there would be people taking potshots at them.

Honestly, if you want rage & blind fury, look at how some people go on about Obama.

Anyway, I get burnt out on political stuff, and there are always laughs to be had, regardless of which candidate one would vote for.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 11:08 AM


Now that we actually have someone who is savvy and has both but doesn't share their ideology - well she's not good enough.

Patricia, anybody who's not going to support the rights that women currently have isn't going to be liked by vast numbers of people. Pro-Choicers are fine with Palin having kids, a job, etc. - they want people to be free to make such decisions.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 11:11 AM


Thank you so much Reality and Doug, please, please keep posting.

You're welcome, HisMan. 12.5 neener neener neener.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 11:12 AM


Woe to you who are well fed now, for you will go hungry. Woe to you who laugh now, for you will mourn and weep.

I think that the real woe goes to those who wring their hands, and whine and moan for most of their lives. Then they die, and what did they have? A life that had extra woe in it.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 11:14 AM



Posted by: Jasper at September 7, 2008 11:19 AM


Proves what we KNEW all along about the feminista's - they are have one issue agenda - abortion, abortion, and more abortion.

Patricia, no, they don't just have one issue, but when the issue is abortion then of course they're going to have opinions.

Overall, abortion does not loom that large as an issue. I remember when Jill had a thread about what people felt was "sin" and "not saying anything when a cashier gives you back too much change" was seen as more of a sin than having an abortion.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 11:20 AM


Doug - In response to 11:11 AM post

If it is "choice" that they don't like about her then shouldn't it be "choice" that would be talking about?

All I'm hearing is how they think she should be barefoot and pregnant again in the kitchen being a servant to her husband just because she had a child with Downs Syndrom and her teenaged daughter is pregnant. I'm not hearing much about her pro-life stance at all.

Are they saying the same thing about working mothers whose teens are pregnant? nope. did you know that on average there are 750,000 teens that are pregnant? I guarentee you that some of those have working mothers and a special needs child in their home. It is insulting the way the so called feminsts have gone after her.

Posted by: Valerie at September 7, 2008 11:20 AM


Valerie, where do you really see people saying she should be barefoot & pregnant, etc.?

If anything I'd say the Pro-Choice position on Palin would be "You made your choices and that's fine; don't try and take away other people's choices."

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 11:24 AM


Doin' a great job Doug......keep posting.

Ignorance is bliss and you're proof of that.

Posted by: HisMan at September 7, 2008 11:28 AM


Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 11:32 AM


Doin' a great job Doug......keep posting.

Ignorance is bliss and you're proof of that.

Dude, you must be tired.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 11:34 AM


Doug -

Almost all liberal blogs - DailyKos is the worst one right now.

The editor of Woman's magazine was on FoxNews yesterday claiming there was a (unscientific) poll on their website maintaining that the majority of women think she should be home with her kids.

US Weekly magazine had her on the front cover with "Babies, Lies and Scandals" as the header. The only one they were right about was the Babies. They make several references to her being a working Mom and family "problems". MSNBC has just reported that they lost thousands of subscriptions in the first 24 hour of its release because of the obvious bias. The "scandel" they are referring to is about her ex-brother-in-law getting fired. Did everyone forget that he tazered his step-son? Had multiple reprimands and his been accused of drinking alcohol in his patrol car? How much of a scandal is there? Shouldn't he have been fired?

There are many more examples, however my kids feel they should be eating lunch right now.

Posted by: Valerie at September 7, 2008 12:00 PM


If you make your kids part of your campaign story - indeed integral to the campaign story, then your parenting will naturally be fodder for the campaign story. It isn't about Bristol or Track or anybody else. It's about Sarah and her failure to lead her own family.

Posted by: Yo La Tango at September 7, 2008 12:00 PM


Yo La Tango -

Did you say the same thing when Obama allowed his children to be interviewed? Shouldn't Michelle be considered a bad Mom now?

Posted by: Valerie at September 7, 2008 12:02 PM


HisMan-

All I have to say is wow. Did you just lose control or something? If you seem to be getting that angry maybe you should be taking a step back. People disagree and whatever, but going to that degree and trying to chew someone out using your own life experience isn't exactly needed to promote discussion, you just make it personal and then everyone gets angry.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 12:14 PM


Reality,

LOL. Lighten up will you? Check your own ancestry and you will likely find your are the end result of a few "shotgun" weddings in your own ancestry.

I know I'm one of the results of a little premarital romping on the part of my grandmother, which produced my mother, who always laughed that she KNEW she wasn't premature.

Was also suprised to find out my husband's grandmother had children by various men, not all of whom she was married to at the time she had them.

Oh, and 65% of colonial American brides were pregnant when they married according to a TV special I saw.

My all time favorite is the story of the Pilgrim or Puritan ladies kidnapped and held captive by a Native American tribe. They were finally "rescued" by their menfolk. The ladies obviously did not want to be rescued as they immediately fled back to the Indians at the first opportunity. Just why would you suppose they did that?

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 12:24 PM


Yo La Tango,

Exactly how has Sarah failed to "lead" her own family?

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 12:27 PM


"You and those like you have spent nearly seven years dissing our President because he at least had the courage to take steps to protect us. And you act as if there's no evil out there waiting to destroy us."

Hey HisMan, our President has caused more damage at home and abroad then all the "evil out there" put together. I used to think if McCain were elected he would come to the office with some honor, fight torture and cronyism, make adult appointments. I've lost a bit of respect for the man, but I guess he's still an improvement over the current guy.

Posted by: hal at September 7, 2008 12:43 PM



One thing this has taught us is "the sisterhood" is a crock. The "sisterhood" is about looking out for the liberal feminist cause.
Sexual harassment and assault are wrong, unless the woman is accusing someone "the sisterhood" holds dear. Paula Jones made the mistake of believing "the sisterhood" would support her.

By the way, where was Anita Hill, one of the patron saints of "the sisterhood" when the women accusing Clinton needed her support?

"The sisterhood" is about liberal politics, not women. Sarah Palin is just another example of how "the sisterhood" looks out for its causes, not women.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 12:45 PM


To Oprah Winfrey on her decision to not interview Sara Palin:

Ms. Winfrey:

Your decision to not have Sarah Palin on your show is evidence of your fear of her. Not because she's white or a woman but because you know in Whom she believes and that scares you to your core. The book of Hebrews is very clear about how hard it is to return once the flock is abandoned and traded for fellowship with darkness. Your spirit knows this because you've read it a few times in the Good Book and the seed of God's Word planted in your heart cannot ever be destroyed; only denied.

You are afraid that your faithful and deceived followers will see something in her that they don't see in Obama. Sarah Palin is a person of authenticity, simplicity, yes, a woman of great faith who has actually found God's purpose for her life and promotion based on faithfulness, not self-serving "community activity". She is a Proverbs 31 woman you should be applauding but instead are silent at her attempted execution. Perhaps you never heard that faithful Christians even conquered the vicious lions of Rome?

You were destined for true greatness too Oprah, not celebrity, greatness, until you sold out. You abandoned your first love and were seduced by the love of this world. It's a shame, exchanging the temporal for the eternal.

The sum of it Ms. Winfrey is that what you do or do not do doesn't really matter, for apart from Him you can do nothing of real value. Not all of us are as self-deceived as you are to think that ignoring Mrs. Palin really matters. So, this letter is really for you and not an appeal to have Ms. Palin appear on your show.

If Sarah Palin was a black woman, your outrage and fury at her treatment by the media would be uncontainable and your retribution swift against all that would attack her and her family. You would have given new meaning to the phrase...."hell hath no fury........Well; I just guess you don't feel her pain.

As a supposed defender of woman, your behavior or lack thereof, is despicable. And yields further evidence that both you and the movement that enabled your success, really aren't what they claim to be; pro-woman. How can you be, how can the movement you've embraced hide, when the fear is made so plain? You've obviously conquered nothing in your journey of personal discovery and I might add, personal wealth, when you are afraid of the truth and instead embrace a lie. I guess we do reap what we sow Oprah.

In fact, as time goes on, and the more you reveal who you are by what you support, who you support, what you believe and who you avoid, says more about you than anything you could ever say.

"By their fruits ye shall know them".


Posted by: HisMan at September 7, 2008 12:46 PM


Sorry, Hisman, but the post was borderline acceptable until that very last sentence. Lewd.

Doug has never addressed in that manner that I recall, and I don't think he deserves it to be handed to him like that.

Posted by: carder at September 7, 2008 12:48 PM


HisMan,

Correction. If Ms.Palin was a LIBERAL woman, black, white, or purple, and Obama's running mate, Oprah would do everything but canonize her.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 12:50 PM


Hal: "Hey HisMan, our President has caused more damage at home and abroad then all the "evil out there" put together. I used to think if McCain were elected he would come to the office with some honor, fight torture and cronyism, make adult appointments. I've lost a bit of respect for the man, but I guess he's still an improvement over the current guy."

Hey did you know that Obama is now saying he likely wont change the Bush tax cuts? Hes afraid they help the economy too much and that if he changes them, that it will hurt the economy.

Man, hes Bush's twin!

Posted by: Oliver at September 7, 2008 12:51 PM


Carder,

I recall there was a HisMan imposter. Could that have been him?

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 12:53 PM


I just wnated to make a comment about people saying this is only a "liberal" hypocrisy. It isn't. The Daily Show played a nice clip the other night showing the sudden changes in attitude now that conservatives have a woman running. It went from "stop playing the sexism card, itll make you stronger" advice to hillary to the conservatives playing that card themselves. However, my personal favorite display of hypocritical change (at least I'll see it that way unless he rescinds his previous comment(s)) had to be Bill O'Reilly blaming the parents of Jamie Lynn Spears saying the parents were to blame, but now that it's a candidate he supports its a personal matter. I'd bet all the money to my name that if Obama's daughters were older and one of them got pregnant he'd be all over Obama claiming that the event officially proved he was incapable of leading because he couldn't control his own family.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 12:57 PM


Here is the clip/video I'm referring to.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 12:58 PM


Hey did you know that Obama is now saying he likely wont change the Bush tax cuts?

Hey Hal, would you like to try again to tell me what the heck the man stands for?

Other than that 160 billion to "educated" newborns?

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 1:05 PM


Here are some cartoons, but it won't let me 'copy' it so I'll link it:

http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=26017

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 1:40 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=26015

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 1:43 PM


Almost all liberal blogs - DailyKos is the worst one right now.

The editor of Woman's magazine was on FoxNews yesterday claiming there was a (unscientific) poll on their website maintaining that the majority of women think she should be home with her kids.

Okay Valerie, I hadn't seen any of that. Personally, I don't feel she "should" be home with the kids, or not in politics, etc. (anymore than I think Pelosi, for example, should be).

If others do feel that way, then I don't agree with them. That is still not the same as being against her having five kids in the first place, and if people would be saying that she "shouldn't have had kids" or had that many, etc., then that's just not being Pro-Choice in the first place.

That said, I realize there are all sorts of liberal wingnuts as well as those of the conservative stripe. I'd think that if Palin were Pro-Choice, then the liberal comments about her, as you have mentioned, would decrease a lot, i.e. abortion and women's rights certainly is a factor.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 1:44 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=10322

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 1:45 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=19118

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 1:46 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=18157

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 1:49 PM


Dan: HisMan - All I have to say is wow. Did you just lose control or something? If you seem to be getting that angry maybe you should be taking a step back. People disagree and whatever, but going to that degree and trying to chew someone out using your own life experience isn't exactly needed to promote discussion, you just make it personal and then everyone gets angry.

HEY I never even saw what he said! The generator we were using ran out of fuel and quit so I had to loosen the injector nuts and bleed the lines and crank the poor starter a whole bunch of times and amid vast oceans of oaths and imprecations the engine finally ran again.


HisMan: Ignorance is bliss and you're proof of that.

"Dude, you must be tired."

I just meant that wasn't much of a comeback. Didn't mean to get you all fired up - it seemed to me you weren't much fired up at all.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 1:50 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=7081

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 1:54 PM


PIP, great cartoons.

A crazy site, definitely not for everyone since there's profanity and themes which some would find very offensive, is hyperdeathbabies.com

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 1:55 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=26242

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 1:59 PM


Dan,

I'll give you the Carl Rove one...that was pretty funny, but I think Bill O'reilly had a point. Jamie Lynn got pregnant right after all the stuff about Brittney was going down and their parents do indeed have issues. I'm not sure, because I didn't see the whole clip or it's context, tho, that O'reillys comments were more about both girls being out of control while the mother and father were basically messed up themselves.

But touche' on the Rove one. THAT one at least, dealt with a very real issue. Her qualifications to be a VP.

As I said, I am not opposed to discussing serious reasons for objecting to McCain or Sarah Palin. But I'm not going to discuss her pregnant daughter or her hairstyle.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 1:59 PM


I have a few more left in me, lol, I'm almost done..

http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=26016


Doug, I'll check it out!

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 2:01 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=26013

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 2:03 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=25552

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 2:06 PM


I love elephants. Why must they be a political symbol?

I want to own an elephant, but there's a no-pet rule in my building. Damn...

Posted by: Leah at September 7, 2008 2:08 PM


http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=26359

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 2:09 PM


Alright I'm done! Today just got me inspired!

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 2:10 PM


Dan,

Concerning Bill O'Reilly. He one time blamed the parents of a child kidnapped from her bed and murdered by a next door neighbor. Apparently the parents were not vigilant enough for Mr. O. and thus responsible for what happened to their daughter. I was so enraged, as if the parents weren't in enough anguish, I e-mailed him. He has a history of being very unfair in this area.
Jamie Lynn Spears was a celebrity in her own right, constantly in the public eye. She went public with her pregnancy and like any celebrity, including Halle Berry and Angelina, is going to be the focus of much publicity. She willingly posed for and was interviewed by magazines. That's a tad different than the situation with Bristol Palin.

Also Dan, by supporting Sarah Palin "the left" would have had a golden opportunity to stick it to "the right" about their alleged hypocrisy.
Instead, they have only shown themselves guilty of the very hypocrisy and double standard they accuse "the right" of.


Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 2:32 PM


yeah...after that first one, I'm going to have to pass on anymore of PIP's hilarious cartoons, thanks.

"Denying 'enemy' combatants a trial..."

I love how they put the word "enemy" in quotes like that. I guess the airplanes flown into buildings on sept. 11 were just mass hysteria, and my husband's friend just imagined the guy that shot him in the neck and killed him.

The real world is filled with plenty of adults dealing with very real dangers and threats posed to our nation and its citizens daily. Whenever you like, you're welcome to grow up and join the rest of us here. There's plenty of room.

Posted by: xalisae at September 7, 2008 3:00 PM


I'm sorry you are afraid to view the rest of my political cartoons, xalisae. But you are welcome to view them whenever you like. They'll be here.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 3:11 PM


Afraid? Ha. More like not willing to willing to waste my time in dreamland.

Posted by: xalisae at September 7, 2008 3:16 PM


xalisae,

I know you made it abundantly clear you don't want to waste time on issues like human rights and genocide. Lucky for you, I put some more lighthearted ones near the end. Again, there if you want to look. I'm not making you, though. Just sayin.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 3:28 PM


Also,

if you are partial to light-hearted candidate-type banter, x, I'd be happy to post some videos. So much less depressing.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 3:30 PM


"Oh, and 65% of colonial American brides were pregnant when they married according to a TV special I saw."

Mary I heard that too. And I'm pretty sure they had nothing but abstinence only education. Looks like that worked out well.

Posted by: Jess at September 7, 2008 3:34 PM


Jess,

What else was around in colonial America? Condoms?

Posted by: Elizabeth (Gabriella's Momma) at September 7, 2008 3:40 PM


Jess,

Its also possible they had no education at all and no clue as to where babies came from. They were just having fun! :)

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 3:40 PM


Well, as an American, I think it just makes a little more sense to try and stop American deaths first, before getting our panties in a wad about other people-particularly those other people who could prospectively be attempting to cause or in any way facilitate those deaths. If you have a problem with people who can actually look around and understand where in the world they live, and prioritize accordingly, maybe we shouldn't be wasting resources trying to protect people like you, and you should be urged to GTFO and head to places that would be a little more "humanitarian" for your your liking. Just sayin.

Posted by: xalisae at September 7, 2008 3:40 PM


Mary @ 2:32,
Thank you.

Posted by: Janet at September 7, 2008 3:44 PM


Elizabeth 3:40PM

I heard the ancient Egyptians used crocidile dung as a diaphram.
PEEEUU. I can sure see where that would work!!

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 3:44 PM


Janet, 3:44PM

You're very welcome.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 3:47 PM


x,

Darfur thanks you for your interest.

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 3:49 PM


Actually Elizabeth, the idea of condoms have been around for a long time. I was reading about primitive condoms in 18th century france not too long ago! Crazy!

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 3:51 PM


Its also possible they had no education at all and no clue as to where babies came from. They were just having fun! :)

It was Spring Awakening! ;)

Posted by: Alexandra at September 7, 2008 3:52 PM


LOL Alexandra

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 3:53 PM


Xalisae, 3:00PM

Are you referring to the same people who slice off people's heads with dull knives while they scream in agony and terror? They even video it for all the world to see.
"Suicide" bombers who blow up marketplaces and funeral processions full of women and children?

True combatants at least have the courage to meet their equals, other armed and trained soldiers.

These are nothing but thugs.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 3:57 PM


Mary,
I'm ROTFL! Crocodile dung?

Posted by: Janet at September 7, 2008 3:58 PM


PIP 3:51PM

I heard very early condoms were made of sheep intestine. In Burma I believe, condemns had little bells which chimed during lovemaking.
One had to hope a husband didn't return home unexpectedly and hear bells ringing, or for that matter a wife either.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 4:01 PM


Janet 3:58PM

You'd certainly think the smell of it would put the damper on romance. Maybe that's how it worked.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 4:03 PM


Yeah, I don't like to think about the logistics of sex before running water.

Posted by: Oliver at September 7, 2008 4:17 PM


oops that was me.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 4:19 PM


Mary, 4:01,

LOL. That would be an interesting sound to hear after a long day's work..

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 4:21 PM


Pip, I wonder if that was the intention.

If you hear the bells a'ringin' you better get a'packin'.

LOL.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 4:24 PM


haha...

"NEW! Now with croc dung!"

Posted by: prettyinpink at September 7, 2008 4:34 PM


Doug, supporting abortion as a "women's rights" issue only works for women who think of a dead baby as a right that they want to embrace.

For the rest of us it's three pronged:

1. It's a human rights issue. People are being denied legal protection based on age, size, location, and degree of dependence. To embrace the status quo (that it's okay to kill fetuses because they're young, small, in the womb, and totally dependent upon their mothers) is utterly abhorrent to us, and defending the status quo as a "women's rights" issue is like defending slavery as a property rights issue.

2. It's a women's rights issue in that women are being treated as second-class citizens who need surgery to be equal to men.

3. It's a women's rights issue in that women are treated as the means through which to achieve other ends, i.e. eugenics, population control, racism, etc.

To simply say that endorsing abortion "supports women's rights" makes as much sense to a prolifer as saying that no White man is free in a world without Black slavery.

Posted by: Christina at September 7, 2008 4:42 PM


I'd say the Pro-Choice position on Palin would be "You made your choices and that's fine; don't try and take away other people's choices."

Would you say the same thing to John List, Doug? He made an agonizing choice, and never once did he try to take away choice from others. No. He just made his agonizing choice, in consultation with his conscience, and built a new life for himself, free of the burdens that had been making his old life a living hell.

He's a prochoice role model, that John List!

Posted by: Christina at September 7, 2008 4:47 PM


Intellectual Inconsistency

I was once charged with trespass for refusing to move from the doorway of a building where pre-natal humans were being killed. In the subsequent trial I was interviewing perspective jurors. They all answered questions under oath, understanding that lying would be perjury, a crime. I read the part of the 14th amenndment to the U.S. Constitution which states: 'nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

I asked each perspective juror which of these three rights was pre-eminent, life, liberty, or property. Each one of them said liberty was the most important. I then asked them how you could possibly enjoy liberty if you had been denied life. They all said you could not. I then said, 'If that is true, then you would have to say the right to life trumps all others, would you not?' Each one of them, in turn, agreed. Life is numero uno/number one.

Now here is the interesting part. I could only interview one juror at a time. The remainder of the jury pool was present and heard me ask all the previous persons the same questions. But when it came their turn, each one of them answered the same way. Initially, liberty was the most important right, but when asked how you could enjoy liberty without life, logic dictated that the right to life is our most valuable right.

All the perspective jurors answered the questions honestly. But initially they were all honestly wrong. When required to exercise logic they had to acknowledge the truth: Without life every other right is meaningless.

What kind of embryo/fetus was in your mother's uterus when she was pregnant with you?

Here are some clues: not bovine, not feline, not canine.

I know this is really difficult for some of you. You do not want jeopardize your bliss by giving up on your willful ignorance.

Are you smarter than a fifth grader?

And all the fifth graders said, "Human!"

What do you say?

ps: They convicted me of criminal trespass. I believe they would have voted to execute me if the penalty had been available. I know some of you would have.

Posted by: kbhvac at September 7, 2008 4:53 PM


I couldn't help myself so I just had to look up the history of condoms:

http://www.webmd.com/content/article/71/81244.htm?action=related_link

What I found interesting is that condoms were used to prevent the spread of disease instead of pregnancy. It wasn't until 1734 that there was a condom used with the purpose of contraception. Those were usually made of lamb intestine.

Just an FYI to put this conversation back to the topic at hand.... The colonial years ended around 1776, and the first condom contraception wasn't until 1734. And these were people who traveled a long way from home and may have been unfamiliar with the local plantlife for medications.

Here is the croc dung -

1850 B.C.
Meet the pessary. It's the earliest contraceptive device for women. Pessaries are objects or concoctions inserted into the vagina to block or kill sperm. By 1850 B.C., Egyptians used pessaries made of crocodile dung, honey, and sodium carbonate. Crocodile dung is alkaline. But its use, note contraceptive historians Malcolm Potts and Martha Campbell, "perhaps reflects Freudian more than pharmacologic concerns."

****
Here's another thought. There is evidence the use of some sort of contraception going back to 600BC with the first oral contraceptive. Here we are over 2,000 years later and we still can't control our reproductive system even with such great advances in science. Isn't it time to realize that no matter what we do there will be unwanted pregnancies unless we learn to refrain from sex at specific times in our lives. And that STD's will still be spread no matter what percautions are taken so it would be best to live a monogomous life. It looks like Nature is screaming at us, yet we are refusing to listen to her.

Posted by: Valerie at September 7, 2008 4:54 PM


Christina 4:42 pm

I love it! Especially point #1.

Excellent!

Posted by: Valerie at September 7, 2008 5:02 PM


This will only add to the legend of Sarah Palin, which has already prompted a website of Sarah Palin Facts in the tradition of Chuck Norris. My favorites:

-- Death once had a near-Sarah Palin experience
-- Sarah Palin is the reason compasses point North
-- Sarah Palinís enemies are automatically added to the Endangered Species List

Posted by: HisMan at September 7, 2008 5:03 PM


My all time favorite is the story of the Pilgrim or Puritan ladies kidnapped and held captive by a Native American tribe. They were finally "rescued" by their menfolk. The ladies obviously did not want to be rescued as they immediately fled back to the Indians at the first opportunity. Just why would you suppose they did that?


Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 12:24 PM
...................

My guess would be the preference for a matriarchal society.

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 5:15 PM


Ok guys I have a nerdy confession. Guess my favorite genre of literature...Historical Fiction. I am *so* cool. Anyways, I mention this only because I LOVE stories about early relations between Indians/settlers.

Now you all know that I'm a big nerd. Carry on.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 5:36 PM


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2075650/posts

Posted by: Kay at September 7, 2008 5:36 PM


Sure Sally, 5:15PM

That was my first thought as well. :)

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 5:41 PM


Sure Sally, 5:15PM

That was my first thought as well. :)

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 5:41 PM
........................

My grandmother has been said to descend from Eunice Williams. Captured by Indians and the French(Eunice, not my grandmother), she refused to be 'redeemed' and her Mohawk descendents retained the name Williams. Her grandson Eleazer attempted to pass himself off as the Dauphin of France. Interesting stuff! : )

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 6:03 PM


What else was around in colonial America? Condoms?

Elizabeth, in those days before central heating, there was that practice of "bundling" where suitor and intended would get into bed to keep warm, the "bundling board" or some dang thing like that in-between them.

It didn't always work.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:09 PM


Ok guys I have a nerdy confession. Guess my favorite genre of literature...Historical Fiction. I am *so* cool. Anyways, I mention this only because I LOVE stories about early relations between Indians/settlers.

Lauren, I bet you like the Allan Eckert books - "The Frontiersman" series. If not, if you ain't read 'em, you'd like 'em.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:12 PM


MK-

I do think the focus on Bristol and her pregnancy ludicrous and unneeded. However I do think that in a sense the Jamie Lynn and Bristol comparison of O'Reilly's reaction holds some water, both were (or would soon be in the case of Bristol) in the public eye, forcing the announcements or waiting until some one else noticed. Making the announcement for oneself would likely be less damaging in each case (Jamie Lynn given her sister's issues at the time and Bristol for eventual PR and sadly, yes, political issues as well). I think blaming the parents in either case is honestly ridiculous, and always have been. You aren't with your kid 100% of the time, something very well could happen to anyone, they have their own minds and do what they want to do whether it means listening or disobeying. Preferably they'd follow their parent's advice/rules, but we all know that doesn't actually happen. They live and learn for themselves.

As for Carl Rove, I thought that was hilarious as well. Backtracking is being done on both sides based on previous assessments and whatnot. Though I did find that statement by Palin at the end of the clip ironic, you'd think she'd come out and try to dispel that notion, or at least welcome it and give a big screw you to the media and say I dont care, do your worst. Would actually probably help her more in the end, but I'm not paid to be a political advisor. One day maybe

As for hypocrisy, each side is guilty. If it turned into a battle over who has been the most hypocritical it would never end, so it wouldn't be advantageous to either side to turn it into a battle like that. If that happens perhaps a third party candidate would win ;)

Anyway, I really should be doing my Spanish work...ugh. I'll be back later on, I hope lol.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 6:14 PM


Oh So Pretty In Pink: Actually Elizabeth, the idea of condoms have been around for a long time. I was reading about primitive condoms in 18th century france not too long ago! Crazy!

In days of old, when knights were bold,
And condoms not invented,
Upon their *****
They put wool socks,
And babies were prevented.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:16 PM


Ok guys I have a nerdy confession. Guess my favorite genre of literature...Historical Fiction. I am *so* cool. Anyways, I mention this only because I LOVE stories about early relations between Indians/settlers.

Now you all know that I'm a big nerd. Carry on.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 5:36 PM
..................

There is nothing nerdy about liking historical anything Lauren. Do keep in mind that fictionalized historical references may be just that. Fictionalized.
Perhaps some from Illinois have visited Black Hawk Statue near Oregon. While named after Black Hawk, the statue is certainly not in his likeness but rather a romantisized concept of the 'Noble Savage'. IMO, the real likeness in such dimension might have been a bit frightening.

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 6:17 PM


Mary @12:24,

My guess on why the women wanted to go back - to be with their children that the Indians had fathered. Is that what you're saying too?

HisMan @ 5:03,

I saw that Sarah Palin Facts website the other day. Who has time to write all that?

Posted by: Janet at September 7, 2008 6:18 PM


1. It's a human rights issue. People are being denied legal protection based on age, size, location, and degree of dependence. To embrace the status quo (that it's okay to kill fetuses because they're young, small, in the womb, and totally dependent upon their mothers) is utterly abhorrent to us, and defending the status quo as a "women's rights" issue is like defending slavery as a property rights issue.

2. It's a women's rights issue in that women are being treated as second-class citizens who need surgery to be equal to men.

3. It's a women's rights issue in that women are treated as the means through which to achieve other ends, i.e. eugenics, population control, racism, etc.

Christina, there's no agreement that the unborn are "people" who are entitled to rights to the extent that we'd deny a pregnant woman her desire for an abortion. Women have the right to choose to continue or end pregnancies, to a point in gestation, and you are against that - and you better believe that many people aren't going to go along with it.

Women "treated as second-class citizens" - that makes no sense to me, though perhaps you just need to explain more.

Pro-Choicers are for women making their own best choice, and not being dependent on what others think, i.e. eugenics, population control, (and also the reverse, of course) etc.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:21 PM


kbhvac: What kind of embryo/fetus was in your mother's uterus when she was pregnant with you?

Not the issue in the first place.

You also get penalties for spamming the same lame stuff over and over across several threads.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:23 PM


I want to own an elephant, but there's a no-pet rule in my building. Damn...

WOO HOO! Leah! Where you been, woman?

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:25 PM


What else was around in colonial America? Condoms?

Elizabeth, in those days before central heating, there was that practice of "bundling" where suitor and intended would get into bed to keep warm, the "bundling board" or some dang thing like that in-between them.

It didn't always work.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:09 PM
.......................

Child minders! They had these papoose looking things they put infants into and hung from a hook on the wall. And a contraption simular to that which donkey's were hooked up to in order to grind meal or whatever. The toddlers were strapped in and could only walk round and round in circles.

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 6:26 PM


The not-quite-household name Mike Gravel would have made a heck of a Veep choice for McCain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1PeZDHXgsw

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:29 PM


lauren,

I love historical fiction although I haven't read much. If you are interested in Old Florida, try "A Land Remembered" set in the Everglades.

Posted by: Janet at September 7, 2008 6:31 PM


I've read and enjoyed some historical fiction (I prefer non-fiction/analysis myself), but I'm not a huge fan, though I did enjoy Their Eyes Were Watching God. While on the topic of books, not a big fan of Sci Fi but Orson Scott Card did well with his Ender series, actually fairly deep in philosophical nature, very interesting read. Takes some getting into in some of the books, but it's well worth it.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 6:34 PM


Sally, we have those now...Ever seen the new "safe" walkers where the poor kid just gets to walk around in circles? Also, I like historical nonfiction as well, but it depends on the author to how much I can really "get into it".

When I was a kid I was really into Avi. He wrote lots 18th/19th century historical fiction and I was smitten. In fact, I was so smitten I actually went to a book signing 3 hours away to meet him. Need it be said that I was definitely NOT one of the cool kids? (But who's laughing now...huh?! :) )

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 6:40 PM


Doug-

personally I kinda wanted someone to choose Chuck Hagel, whether Obama or McCain wouldn't have mattered much to me, but I could respect/admire that choice by either candidate. It would've fit more with McCain in terms of ideology but he would've fit Obama's message as well so he really should've been on both's short lists imo.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 6:41 PM


Avi!

I had to read the Confessions of Charlotte Doyle back in 6th grade, to be honest I don't remember much of it but I'm a pack rat, espescially with books, so I'm sure it's lying around here somewhere.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 6:43 PM


On the topic of loving (any kind of) books, I thought I'd share this short story, since my nerd confession is that I am secretly a comic book -- ahem, "graphic novel" -- fan. I actually once wrote a term paper comparing the central themes of the graphic version of Paul Auster's City of Glass and those of Italo Calvino's (text-only) If on a winter's night a traveler. I got away with it, too. Anyway, someone was nice enough to translate this comic into English from Croatian, and I thought it was beautifully done:

http://community.livejournal.com/scans_daily/5408800.html

Posted by: Alexandra at September 7, 2008 6:44 PM


Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:48 PM


Wow Alexandra - Italo Calvino, one kick-butt writer.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:50 PM


Sally, we have those now...Ever seen the new "safe" walkers where the poor kid just gets to walk around in circles? Also, I like historical nonfiction as well, but it depends on the author to how much I can really "get into it".

When I was a kid I was really into Avi. He wrote lots 18th/19th century historical fiction and I was smitten. In fact, I was so smitten I actually went to a book signing 3 hours away to meet him. Need it be said that I was definitely NOT one of the cool kids? (But who's laughing now...huh?! :) )

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 6:40 PM
.............................

I prefer to believe that I redefined what was cool. ; )

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 6:50 PM


"not a big fan of Sci Fi "

Oh goodness now you've gone and gotten me started! There is alot of really, really bad Sci Fi, but if done right it is sooooooo great.

Here are my recommendations.

The Dispossed by Ursula Leguin or anything else by here you happen to pick up. I like The Dispossed the best. She's super pro-choice, but she's really interesting.

Also, if you can stomach some pretty vulgar language and/or situations William Gibson is awesome. "Neuromancer" is a truely great novel. It's pretty intense though, so I definitely wouldn't recommend it for anyone under the age of 18 or those who are offended by some very graphic descriptions of a depraved individual.

Philip K. Dick is pretty much the king of Pulp Sci Fi. If you've ever read much Kurk Vonnegut, he reminds me of the "Kilgore Trout" character. Dick's novels have inspired lots of loosely based novels.

Of all the genre's of Sci-Fi I like "cyber punk" the best. Basically, think "Blade Runner". Gibson's a great example here.

Anyways, maybe this will help you become a bigger fan:)

As for historical non-fiction. The Unredeemed Captive by John Demos was very good.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 6:50 PM


Alexandra-

Amazing but so sad :(

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 6:50 PM


Woah, Sally I just put it together that the Unredeemed Captive is about your distant relations...that's really cool.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 6:52 PM


Alexandra, I've recently started being more interested. Actually, my husband and his little brother are thinking about colaborating on a graphic novel. We'll see if that comes to be.

Dan. Oh MY GOODNESS. I loved Confessions. It was what got first interested in historical fiction. Well, that or Johnny Tremain.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 6:56 PM


http://community.livejournal.com/scans_daily/5408800.html

[sniff]

Beautifully done indeed.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:56 PM


Dan: While on the topic of books, not a big fan of Sci Fi but Orson Scott Card did well with his Ender series, actually fairly deep in philosophical nature, very interesting read. Takes some getting into in some of the books, but it's well worth it.

Dan, I don't know squat about Chuck Hagel, but you're darn right about the Ender series. Awesome.

Posted by: Doug at September 7, 2008 6:59 PM


Woah, Sally I just put it together that the Unredeemed Captive is about your distant relations...that's really cool.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 6:52 PM
....................

I'm thrilled that you are familiar with the story of Eunice and her family! This genealogical connection is one my most frustrating brick walls.

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 7:01 PM


Ohmygosh! Ok, I'm not exagerating at all that I just got SUPER excited that Avi has a series of early readers. My son just started (as in, he can sort of sound out words) reading and this will definitely be on the list of books to get him. Anyone have any good books for early readers?

We have alot of the "clasics" but I'd love to hear any of your family favorites.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 7:01 PM


Are you a fan of Calvino too, Doug? I squirm whenever someone asks me to name a favorite writer, but if someone really pins me down (I always feel like a butterfly in situations like that) it's often his name I pull out of the hat.

Lauren, I love the comic book genre and the possibilities it opens up. There is some really excellent stuff out there!

Posted by: Alexandra at September 7, 2008 7:02 PM


Doug-

You have no idea how excited I was to learn there was more after Ender's Game, lol. Of course I couldn't find Xenocide ANYWHERE so I was stuck on Speaker for the Dead for awhile, so I picked up the Ender's Shadow series. Finally got Children of the Mind yesterday and finished it about an hour or two ago. Astounding.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 7:11 PM


Doug,

You are a nutburger.

Why won't you let me,
what I want to say,
Power to the People,
Give peace a chance...!

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 7:13 PM


Doug, meet Chuck Hagel via Wikipedia, lol.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Hagel

It says hes rumored to be Sec of Defense if Obama wins, something I hadn't heard before which has me excited.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 7:14 PM


Reading the comments of Libs on this site gives new meaning to the "dumbing down of America".

Posted by: HisMan at September 7, 2008 7:17 PM


HisMan-

That isn't uncalled for or anything.

/sarcasm

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 7:33 PM


Ohmygosh! Ok, I'm not exagerating at all that I just got SUPER excited that Avi has a series of early readers. My son just started (as in, he can sort of sound out words) reading and this will definitely be on the list of books to get him. Anyone have any good books for early readers?

We have alot of the "clasics" but I'd love to hear any of your family favorites.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 7:01 PM
...........................

Island of the Blue Dolphins. Ghost in the Noonday Sun. Encyclopedia Britanica(just kidding!)

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 7:36 PM


Haha, yeah he'd do great with those LOL.

The problem with most of the books we have, is that he already has them memorized so he's not really "reading" or they're too advanced for him to start out on.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 7:43 PM


Haha, yeah he'd do great with those LOL.

The problem with most of the books we have, is that he already has them memorized so he's not really "reading" or they're too advanced for him to start out on.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 7:43 PM
....................

Something about HM's comment made me think of Three Billy Goats Gruff? Sorry, it's been a loooong time since my kids were that young. I'm no help at all.

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 7:49 PM


"Doug,

You are a nutburger.

Why won't you let me,
what I want to say,
Power to the People,
Give peace a chance...!

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 7:13 PM"

Hi MK:

Have you ever had a nutburger for lunch? They taste a lot like robertbergers.

Dan:

You've really got unmitigated gall.

Perhaps you haven't seen some of the Palin cartoons posted by Reality and Doug on this thread today.

Where was your outrage and concern?

And let's not forget how fond Doug is of posting doctored anti-woman photos on this site.

Posted by: HisMan at September 7, 2008 7:50 PM


Lauren,

I kind of collect kids books. How old is Avi? I think the books I collect might be too young. They aren't really early readers. More for 3 and 4 year olds. But I do know some for 5 year olds.

One of my favorite is "What do Snowman Do at Night?"

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:00 PM


I have seen some of the cartoons, and there were one or two reality posted I wasn't too fond of, and I really couldn't find fault with any of Doug's choices, that I noticed at least (I just scrolled up to try and be sure but who knows, maybe I missed something). I thought the comics (for the most part) were what they were meant to be- funny! I found them as humorous as some of those posted that poke fun at democrats, you have to be able to laugh at most of this stuff HisMan. It eases tension, they're not meant to be taken in literal/complete seriousness. It's commentary that is meant to be funny.

As for the "anti-woman" photographs, I found none. I saw Doug posted one with a picture of a U.S. gymnast being compared to a cartoon mouse, and I thought it was a bit comical/cute, but I would argue that isn't anti-woman at all. At least, certainly not intentionally. He too was trying to ease tension and post something funny.

I think you've been letting yourself get too riled up to be honest. You seemed to snap earlier today for whatever reason. You shouldn't be letting the debates/discussions here get you that angry or upset, simply walk away. Everyone has to do it sometimes, it happens.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 8:00 PM


I'm actually looking for 3-4 year old books. I guess "very early" readers.

I think Avi started writing in the 90's and writes mostly for the 10 and up crowd. It looks like even his 'early readers' are going to be too advanced...for now.

I'd love to hear more of your favorites!

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 8:02 PM


Hisman

I cringe at even seeing Doug and Reality's name put together.

Seriously, Doug is frustrating and he's probably goin' to hell in a handbasket (sorry Doug) but he doesn't have a mean bone in his body. He was just goofin' around.

And don't you think Dan is right that we too, engage in some rather nasty "fun" at the expense of "liberals"?

I think Dan was trying to show that it's not just there side that can be ridiculous. So can we.

He knows that rippin' Sarah Palin to shreds is wrong. But he also knows that we give as good as we get sometimes...although like you, I believe that for the most part the other side harbors a lot of anger.

But anyway, I think Dan was not putting Sarah down. Rather, he was making the point that on one is innocent in the game of politics.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:05 PM


You bet I'm angry.

I'm angry that my sister in Christ and her family is being ripped to shreds by the media, by Liberals and by many on this site.

You can bet that this anger which is felt throughout the country will not go unexpressed in a major landslide by McCain-Palin.

You all had your shot with Hillary and you threw her under the bus and treated better than a baby targeted for abortion.

Anyway, Obama is consistent. Just like he voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, I understand he also voted against the HCAWFPA or the Hillary Clinton, A Woman, For President Act, aka, contract with Bill.

Posted by: HisMan at September 7, 2008 8:21 PM


King Bidgoods in the Bathtub and He won't get Out
And there is my all time favorite tho it is really, really hard to find. It actually doesn't have any words...but man is it powerful. It's called "A small Miracle" by Peter Collington. Guaranteed to make you cry.

http://www.amazon.com/Small-Miracle-Peter-Collington/dp/0679887253

And "This is the Star" by Joyce Dunbar
The pictures are BEAUTIFUL and the words are simple but powerful. I remember the first time I saw the angel...I was blown away!

http://product.half.ebay.com/_W0QQtgZinfoQQprZ37976

There is another one called "Dog"...really sweet, but you gotta practice your Irish Brogue for that one...

http://shopping.yahoo.com/p:Dog:3000214955;_ylc=X3oDMTB1c21tcDhkBF9TAzk2NjMyOTA3BHNlYwNmZWVkBHNsawNib29rcw--

Unfortunately, most of those three are gonna be hard to find. But well worth it. Especially the first one. If you never buy another Children's book, buy that one.

Snowmen at Night is really cute and funny...look for the hidden pictures.

http://www.amazon.com/Snowmen-at-Night-Caralyn-Buehner/dp/0803725507

Glasses, Who needs 'EM?...also very, very funny.

http://www.amazon.com/Glasses-Who-Needs-Picture-Puffin/dp/0140544844

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:27 PM


Hisman,

I understand that anger. I boiled over myself a few times this week. I just don't think Dan or Doug were doing that.

Reality on the other hand...oh yeah. She's just being mean and petty and nasty.

Once again, I'm ashamed to be part of the human race. We can be so ugly sometimes.

All we can do is continue to pray and correct the lies and misinformation that is out there. And of course, we can VOTE!!!! OH YEAH!!! WE CAN VOTE!!!!

What is it that Doug said earlier? Oh yeah...neener, neener, neener...

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:31 PM


Lauren,

Those books were obviously meant for you in the above posts. I told you I only do 3,4,and 5 year old books. I thought Avi was your sons name...lol.

Posted by: mk at September 7, 2008 8:36 PM


Seriously, Doug is frustrating and he's probably goin' to hell in a handbasket (sorry Doug) but he doesn't have a mean bone in his body. He was just goofin' around.

Yeah, Doug is just a goof most of the time! Don't take his posts seriously (sorry Doug) ;-D

*The problem with most of the books we have, is that he already has them memorized so he's not really "reading" or they're too advanced for him to start out on.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 7:43 PM

Lauren: memorizing is part of the learning to read process.
one of our pages at the library yesterday showed me an article about babies as young as 3 months learning to read! I would not have believed it if I did not read this piece.
I am wondering if my middle daughter may have learned to read as a very young child (as in between 1 and 2 years of age). She knew how to read at age 3 and I wish that I could say that I taught her!! My dad would read to her when she was a baby and he would print words and say them to her.
I don't know how old your son is but he might like the Little Bear series by Else Holmelund Minarik and Maurice Sendak. These are really cute early reader type books that my children loved.
There are also the Step into reading books which have levels, level 1 being the easiest. Some of the nonfiction ones are interesting for boys in particular - I think there are ones about volcanoes and ancient greece and rome for example!

Posted by: Patricia at September 7, 2008 9:15 PM


Sally 6:03PM

Very interesting indeed. The tv program I saw this on gave the impression that the ladies enjoyed the more sexually uninhibited Indians and I'm sure the freer less stodgy life. For some reason I never pictured Puritan and Pilgrim men as very uninhibited. Maybe that is why Eunice refused to be "redeemed". I thought the whole account was hilarious.
I don't know if the ladies concerned themselves so much with a matriarchy or just enjoying life a lot more.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 9:16 PM


Patricia-

I loved little bear! though like most books now a days i found out about it from a t.v. show based on the books, so I read them when I was probably a couple years too old for them but eh.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 9:18 PM


Doug 6:09PM

Maybe they discovered that friction would keep them a lot warmer!

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 9:19 PM


Janet 6:18PM

Uh,...no.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 9:26 PM


Patricia-

I loved little bear! though like most books now a days i found out about it from a t.v. show based on the books, so I read them when I was probably a couple years too old for them but eh.

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 9:18 PM


haha that's cute! (sorry Dan - I know guys hate the word cute!)
My son who's now 18 also loved Little Bear. We were very close when he was just a whipper snapper and Little Bear and his mommy where pretty close too as I remember!

Posted by: Patricia at September 7, 2008 9:28 PM


haha Patricia, it's ok. Yeah, I think Little Bear has always been a fairly popular children's book series. Can't really beat it lol :p

Posted by: Dan at September 7, 2008 9:34 PM


Patricia, we have little bear. In fact, like the first month we found out we were pregnant with our first child my husband went out and bought it because he "loved little bear and our child HAD to have it" lol!

I loved it too. In fact, I remember when they used to show it on Nick Jr. when I was too old for Nick Jr. I watched it in secret and wouldn't tell my friends. LOL.

MK, thanks so much for all of the recommendations! I'll definitely be looking into them.

It's so funny right now because HOlden (my son) likes to "read" goodnight moon to me. I'm actually impressed, he has it better memorized than I do. LOL. He really likes books, so I'm trying to get him as many as possible that he can read.

Posted by: lauren at September 7, 2008 9:41 PM


Sally 6:03PM

Very interesting indeed. The tv program I saw this on gave the impression that the ladies enjoyed the more sexually uninhibited Indians and I'm sure the freer less stodgy life. For some reason I never pictured Puritan and Pilgrim men as very uninhibited. Maybe that is why Eunice refused to be "redeemed". I thought the whole account was hilarious.
I don't know if the ladies concerned themselves so much with a matriarchy or just enjoying life a lot more.


Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 9:16 PM
...........................

Seems obvious to me that the matriarichal societies introduced to these girls/women were condusive to enjoying life because they were matriarichal. I'm sure it wasn't lost upon them that the ability to participate in tribal government was vastly different than any role they were allowed to play in European settlements of the time. Not to mention that constant gloom and doom, going to hell no matter what you do attitude of the Puritans. Women were burned as witches for 'deviant' behavior. Women weren't simply repressed, they were demonized.
I imagine that many women found being 'captured' out and out liberating if not life and sanity saving. Enjoying sexuality would probably be an extension of the freedom to take joy in life rather than the only benefit. Don't you think?

Posted by: Sally at September 7, 2008 10:21 PM


WOO HOO! Leah! Where you been, woman?

Hey Doug. I've been... around.

You know how those crazy liberals are always saying such nonsense as "If this country doesn't shape up, I'm moving to Canada!"?... but no one really does.

I did. I moved to Lethbridge, Alberta. That's where I've been.

It's very easy to find my flag on the poll map. Unlike in Michigan.

But it's true. My landlady won't let me have a pet elephant. Oh well... she's forgiven.

Must go. I have ingredients for a Chinese stir-fry that are calling my name (especially since it's Ramadan and I don't eat all day).

Good chattin to ya. Feel free to email... if you know my address... it's pretty straightforward: leahdarland@hotmail.com.

Posted by: Leah at September 7, 2008 10:21 PM


I forgive my landlady, by the way, because she bought me these little elephant figurines that were handmade in Africa. I've names the two smallest ones so far: the bigger of the who is Bahati, and the teensy one is Kamili (luck and perfect, respectively, in Swahili). The mommy and daddy elephants have yet to acquire names.

Posted by: Leah at September 7, 2008 10:32 PM


Anyone else catch that Olbermann and Matthews were taken off the election coverage supposedly due to "unbiased" reporting?

Also, McCain has taken the lead back again. Considering that Obama is now regreting his abortion comment and he is also claiming he may not undo Bush's tax cuts because it would hurt the economy, I wonder what it all means...it would be nice if it signaled the begining of the end for his meaningless campaign.

Posted by: Oliver at September 8, 2008 12:23 AM


Cut and paste:

"[S]ome argue instead (or alternatively) that Sarah Palin's credentials are adequate. These arguments are mostly laughable. We are told that she was a courageous whistle-blower. But whistling-blowing isnít evidence of leadership skill, administrative ability, or familiarity with vital policy issues. We are told that Palin challenged an incumbent governor and called him out for his corruption. But mounting an insurgentís campaign for governor isnít evidence of fitness for the presidency either. We are told that she is responsible for her stateís national guard and visited its troops in Iraq. How this amounts to foreign policy or national security experience, or otherwise qualifies Palin for national office, is unclear.

Whatís clear is that if Democrats made these sorts of arguments on behalf of a candidate for national office, conservative commentators would excoriate them for it," - Paul Mirengoff, Powerline.

Posted by: hal at September 8, 2008 1:28 AM


Hal,

No one is upset with the MSM for questioning her credentials or experience. Are you just not getting this????

Posted by: mk at September 8, 2008 5:46 AM


Lauren, memorization can be really useful for young kids, I think. I suck at kid-education stuff, but I know that when I was 3 or so, I memorized my favorite book (it was not as classy as Goodnight Moon, either -- it was something about bears starting a band, and the drummer got chewing gum all over his drum set) and I in turn memorized what each word looked like on the page, and applied that to other places where I saw the same words and eventually just the same letters. It's not like I could read Tolstoy by age 5, but I could sound out billboards or children's books by the time I got into kindergarten.

Of course, then I was super confused as to why I had to learn the alphabet. My teacher kept being like, "So you can read!" and I was remember thinking, "I can read!" Haha.

Posted by: Alexandra at September 8, 2008 6:43 AM


Janet 6:18PM

Uh,...no.

Posted by: Mary at September 7, 2008 9:26 PM

Of course, I know "matriarchal" has a completely different meaning than my point.I didn't word my question very well. Hypothetically, don't you think the women would have gone back for their children? Would the Puritan men have let them bring them back?


Posted by: Janet at September 8, 2008 7:01 AM


Doug said: "Doyle, it's not "rage" or "blind fury."

Doug, the Palin nomination has lifted my spirits so much that I have lost the urge to strongly refute the lies and half-truths being told by the proaborts these days. I no longer fear that anyone with average common sense will be deceived by them.

So, to your comment specifically, I will only say that if you can't see the rage and blind fury now being exhibited by those attacking Sarah Palin, it really doesn't matter to me. I know that anyone of average common sense can see it clearly.

And I believe they can see the motivation behind it as well.

Posted by: Doyle at September 8, 2008 7:17 AM


"Iron my clothes now!"

hehehe

Posted by: Louise at September 8, 2008 7:28 AM


Are you a fan of Calvino too, Doug? I squirm whenever someone asks me to name a favorite writer, but if someone really pins me down (I always feel like a butterfly in situations like that) it's often his name I pull out of the hat.

Alexandra, indeed. I love the way he describes his growing up and the relationship with his father, difficulties and all.

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2008 7:53 AM


You have no idea how excited I was to learn there was more after Ender's Game, lol. Of course I couldn't find Xenocide ANYWHERE so I was stuck on Speaker for the Dead for awhile, so I picked up the Ender's Shadow series. Finally got Children of the Mind yesterday and finished it about an hour or two ago. Astounding.


Dan, yeah - I gotte see what he's written in the past ten years or so.

I liked the "Tales of Alvin Maker" series too, but I thought he had just dropped it.

Haven't read anything of the "Shadow.." books so thanks - now I have something to look forward to.

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2008 7:57 AM


MK: You are a nutburger.

We all have our moments, Sis.
.....


Why won't you let me,
what I want to say,
Power to the People,
Give peace a chance...!

I think that we have "peace," now, inasmuch as it's never going to be that "everybody's happy."

I have heard what you (and others) have said, and I've changed a little since I came to Jill's blog.

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2008 8:02 AM


Janet 7:01am

No problem Janet. I was trying to be funny. I'm sorry if I came across any other way. Actually, watching the TV program about this event the implication was very strong that the ladies enjoyed their sex lives with the Indians and were not anxious to return to their stodgy husbands andd the more sexually inhibited wife of a Pilgrilm/Puritan wife and mother. It was probably the first time in their lives they had had so much fun.
The ladies fled back to the Indians, they weren't sent back by rejecting husbands. Whether or not there were children involved I have no idea.
Also, not all Indian societies were matriarchal.
However, its seems that whatever tribe had them, the ladies enjoyed far more freedom and frolic.

Posted by: Mary at September 8, 2008 8:04 AM


Sally 10:21PM

Not all Indian societies were matriarchal, some were male dominated. Please refer to my post to Janet (8:04am).
Its more likely this was the first time these ladies had had so much fun.

Posted by: Mary at September 8, 2008 8:08 AM


HisMan: Reading the comments of Libs on this site gives new meaning to the "dumbing down of America".

I guess you could say that, since it's "dumb" to pretend that your one small niche of belief necessarily applies to other people.
.....

And let's not forget how fond Doug is of posting doctored anti-woman photos on this site.

[a good second of eyeroll]

Seriously, where have you ever seem me post anything that's "anti-woman"?

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2008 8:14 AM


I saw Doug posted one with a picture of a U.S. gymnast being compared to a cartoon mouse, and I thought it was a bit comical/cute, but I would argue that isn't anti-woman at all.

Dan, yeah - US Olympic gymnast Shawn Johnson and "Topo Gigio" from the Ed Sullivan Show. There was controversy about it - TMZ.com came out with it and some people got mad as all get out.

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2008 8:18 AM


MK: One of my favorite is "What do Snowman Do at Night?"

They go out to the middle of the lake.

You know why?

Because†snow man's an island.

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2008 8:22 AM


Thanks Mary. Just a little insecurity on my part. Reminds me of "Dances With wolves" That was such a good movie!
. . . . . . . . .

Doug,

HisMan: Reading the comments of Libs on this site gives new meaning to the "dumbing down of America".

I guess you could say that, since it's "dumb" to pretend that your one small niche of belief necessarily applies to other people.

"Small niche"? Would you care to explain what you are referring to, before you have a whole lot of people coming down on you?

Posted by: Janet at September 8, 2008 8:27 AM


I will only say that if you can't see the rage and blind fury now being exhibited by those attacking Sarah Palin, it really doesn't matter to me. I know that anyone of average common sense can see it clearly.

Doyle, fair enough. There's always going to be a fringe element that acts nutty, though, on both sides.

I think that when all is said and done, neither VP candidate is going to have really changed things, overall. People of common sense know that politics is a strange animal, and a usually-unchanging one.

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2008 8:28 AM


"I guess you could say that, since it's "dumb" to pretend that your one small niche of belief necessarily applies to other people."

Janet: "Small niche"? Would you care to explain what you are referring to, before you have a whole lot of people coming down on you?

I think it's pretty self-explanatory, Janet, but how about "a small slice of the pie," then, as in a pie chart? "A whole lot" of people?

Posted by: Doug at September 8, 2008 8:32 AM


Janet,

Just thinking. I have to wonder how the Native ladies felt about this arrangement. Their menfolk frolicking with these "exotic"(how the Indians would likely view them) white women while they're stuck with the everyday drudge work.
I would think in a matriarchal society, these guys would end up with a fanny full of buckshot!

Posted by: Mary at September 8, 2008 9:19 AM


Doug,
I know what "niche" means..... don't you want to answer my question?

Posted by: Janet at September 8, 2008 1:39 PM


Hmm... elephants are so peaceful. I want to reincarnate as an elephant. Or maybe run away to Thailand and be an elephant trainer.

This political mumbo-jumbo makes me poor 'ead spin.

There is a reason I'm not a poli-sci major.

Posted by: Leah at September 8, 2008 4:12 PM


Ramirez, hands down.

"Trickle run down my leg..." LOL!!!!!

Posted by: Tony at September 9, 2008 1:47 PM


I know what "niche" means..... don't you want to answer my question?

Sure, Janet, but as I said, I think it's pretty self-explanatory. For a person to take the Bible literally, to flatly deny evolution, to be against abortion even in cases of rape and incest, etc., puts the person in a small minority.

Doesn't really matter just how small - the point is that while said beliefs may be fine for the given person, that in no way means it applies to other people nor that it'd be good for society as a whole to be subject to it.

Posted by: Doug at September 9, 2008 8:03 PM


"In the individual, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs, it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzsche

Of course, Mr. Nietsche himself eventually succumbed to insanity and died in A.D. 1900. He said that the West had finally killed God, but he wondered whether the West would be able to survive without Him. Mr. Nietsche was not a Christian, but he might not have been an evolutionist, either. He was a brilliant man, but the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.

Democracy is the tyranny of the majority. Minorities like pre-born children don't necessarily get a say. Might only makes right in the sense that God determines reality. God created all things.

Where does evil come from? I don't know. I don't think anyone does.

When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

Don't be deceived, my dear brothers. Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows. James 1:13-17

Posted by: Jon at September 10, 2008 1:25 AM