The State Journal-Register has published a cartoon about Aaron Schock that, judging from recent reporting in the Journal Star, we’ll never see in Peoria. You can check it out here.
The cartoon is hilarious. Now, I wish he would draw a follow-up cartoon showing baby Jim McCono-whatever, crawling in front of the TV in 1962… filling up his diaper quicker because he is so distraught over the Cuban Missile Crisis. Turnabout is fair play, you know.
Who finds nuclear war funny? Certainly not the editorial cartoon artist. I think it’s pretty clear that he doesn’t find it, or Schock’s cavalier attitude toward nuclear proliferation, very funny at all.
Schock’s cavalier attitude about nuclear proliferation.
There’s a well researched statement based on???????
CJ,
I was at the speech. I heard what was said. There was nothing cavalier about it.
Paul
I believe (because I refuse to search through a tedious 30 page speech again) that he said something to the effect, China will abide by the nuclear non-proliferation act or no one will.
China is a lot more prickly about Taiwan than we ever were about Cuba. The United States never considered Cuba to be an integral part of our country. If we tried to give nukes to Taiwan, China would go to war. Guaranteed.
Therefore, cavalier doesn’t even begin to describe the level of irresponsibility demonstrated by Schock’s statement. Cute little Schocky-Wocky has emitted his “Dean Scream.” He’ll never live this down … his opponents (Democrat or Republican) won’t let him.
It also doesn’t help the Schock campaign when he continues to make idiotic statements like the fact that he’s “not rich” when he’s worth a million bucks and makes a 132K annual salary. It’s also begs the question (asked in the first comment to Billy’s post on the subject): since Schock has been a public servant since age 18, where did he get all that money??? If two cents were diverted from any of his campaigns, his political career is even further down the toilet drain.
I agree with Paul… that there was nothing cavalier about Shock’s speech. It was just plain idiotic. In fact, it was almost as idiotic as the idea of even sending him to Washington!
The cartoon was well done and had at least two layers of meaning.
The first layer was a reference to the two atomic bombs dropped by the U.S. on Japan near the end of WWII. These bombs were nicknamed “Fat Man” and “Little Boy.”
The second layer of meaning referenced the character portrayed by the actor Slim Pickens in the film, Dr. Strangelove (a political satire released in 1964). At one point in the film, Pickens’ character rode a nuclear bomb, waiving his cowboy hat in the air, and exclaiming “ya-hoo.”
Turning to the PJS editorial page this morning to find not only the cartoon, but a very well-written editorial criticizing Schock’s remarks was a real surprise. Up to this point, the PJS has pursued a very “soft” attitude toward Schock, and Karen McDonald’s article on page 1 was clearly an attempt to mitigate the political effect of Schock’s comments.
Congratulations to Gatehouse for making the decision to publish these two items. Peorians deserved balanced, objective coverage of political issues and political candidates.
The cartoon is hilarious. Now, I wish he would draw a follow-up cartoon showing baby Jim McCono-whatever, crawling in front of the TV in 1962… filling up his diaper quicker because he is so distraught over the Cuban Missile Crisis. Turnabout is fair play, you know.
I don’t think Schock is advocating nuclear war, and don’t find nuclear war one bit funny.
Never let the facts get in the way
Who finds nuclear war funny? Certainly not the editorial cartoon artist. I think it’s pretty clear that he doesn’t find it, or Schock’s cavalier attitude toward nuclear proliferation, very funny at all.
Schock’s cavalier attitude about nuclear proliferation.
There’s a well researched statement based on???????
CJ,
I was at the speech. I heard what was said. There was nothing cavalier about it.
Paul
I believe (because I refuse to search through a tedious 30 page speech again) that he said something to the effect, China will abide by the nuclear non-proliferation act or no one will.
Sounds pretty cavalier to me.
China is a lot more prickly about Taiwan than we ever were about Cuba. The United States never considered Cuba to be an integral part of our country. If we tried to give nukes to Taiwan, China would go to war. Guaranteed.
Therefore, cavalier doesn’t even begin to describe the level of irresponsibility demonstrated by Schock’s statement. Cute little Schocky-Wocky has emitted his “Dean Scream.” He’ll never live this down … his opponents (Democrat or Republican) won’t let him.
It also doesn’t help the Schock campaign when he continues to make idiotic statements like the fact that he’s “not rich” when he’s worth a million bucks and makes a 132K annual salary. It’s also begs the question (asked in the first comment to Billy’s post on the subject): since Schock has been a public servant since age 18, where did he get all that money??? If two cents were diverted from any of his campaigns, his political career is even further down the toilet drain.
That would be “It also begs the question” not “It’s”.
I agree with Paul… that there was nothing cavalier about Shock’s speech. It was just plain idiotic. In fact, it was almost as idiotic as the idea of even sending him to Washington!
Oh. How does he feel about changing Peoria’s logo?
Nuke ‘em all?
The cartoon was well done and had at least two layers of meaning.
The first layer was a reference to the two atomic bombs dropped by the U.S. on Japan near the end of WWII. These bombs were nicknamed “Fat Man” and “Little Boy.”
The second layer of meaning referenced the character portrayed by the actor Slim Pickens in the film, Dr. Strangelove (a political satire released in 1964). At one point in the film, Pickens’ character rode a nuclear bomb, waiving his cowboy hat in the air, and exclaiming “ya-hoo.”
Turning to the PJS editorial page this morning to find not only the cartoon, but a very well-written editorial criticizing Schock’s remarks was a real surprise. Up to this point, the PJS has pursued a very “soft” attitude toward Schock, and Karen McDonald’s article on page 1 was clearly an attempt to mitigate the political effect of Schock’s comments.
Congratulations to Gatehouse for making the decision to publish these two items. Peorians deserved balanced, objective coverage of political issues and political candidates.
Definitely a move in the right direction.
[...] PrairieCelt: The cartoon was well done and had at least two layers of meaning. The first layer was a reference to the… [...]