« May 2007 | Main | July 2007 »
June 30, 2007
When Pellucid Smears
Before I launch into my analysis and criticism of today's Prickly City, I'd like to take a look at something Pellucid said in the Wikipedia argument that's raging over whether or not Shrubville warrants a mention on the PC page. This is in response to someone named Dystopos saying that Shrubville should be included since we've been around two years, have been mentioned in a major newspaper's blog, and we're the only site that talks about Stantis and his sorry excuse for a comic (the guy doesn't even have a fan site, the poor schlub):
Nonsense. Shrubville consistently makes huge errors in its analysis and fails to consider standard comic book conventions. It is not notable; it has almost no following and generates almost no commentary that has any impact on Prickly City or the world. Just because it was mentioned in passing in a long list of "things on the internet" does not make it notable enough for inclusion. --Pellucid 03:58, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm always fascinated by how people on the right side of the political spectrum escalate a debate not based on facts, but based on exaggerating their own false claims in the first place acting as if there is no doubt - no doubt! - that what they said in the beginning is true, and you're an idiot if you don't agree. For example, what are these HUGE errors that Pellucid is talking about? Is Shrubville a runaway truck filled with lies and mis-statements? Well looking back through the wiki discussion, he points to my entry commenting on Stantis and his "carbon indulgence" strip. I wasn't familiar with what the heck Stantis was talking about since as a good Catholic boy I had never heard of the concept before. That's why I started the post with the following:
WHAT DOES THIS EVEN MEAN?!?!?
If Pellucid had taken the time to read through the comments for that post (which we know he has a problem with - see below), he would have seen that I apologized for not understanding an obscure reference that Stantis put out there to entertain the masses. So does that mean we're guilty of making HUGE errors, or is Stantis guilty of making obscure references that most Americans won't understand, much less find amusing?
And speaking of not taking the time to read through the comments, Pellucid once AGAIN accuses me of not understanding "standard comic book conventions" when I showed in the comments the other day that he was the one mistaken about Sunday strips, not me. But that sure as heck didn't stop him from using that as a reason why we should be dumped from the wiki page.
As for Shrubville having no impact on Prickly City, unless Scott Stantis admits it we'll never know for sure if we've influenced the strip. However, I spent several months criticizing Stantis for not seeing storylines through and only spending a day or two on big issues and wasting the rest of his time on celebrities. Over the last few months Stantis has dumped that platform, and instead is now focusing full weeks on political stories and Winslow is STILL running for President. This is from the guy that early last year said Carmen and Winslow would run against each other for mayor but he never followed through on it. Is it just a coincidence that we criticized him repeatedly for not following through and now Winslow is weeks into his campaign? Possibly, and thanks to Charles Brubaker we know that Stantis's right hand man Toby is aware of the site, and I wouldn't be shocked that Stantis has taken some of our analysis to heart.
And that brings us to today's strip, where Winslow is back behind the podium. The campaign continues on, but the nonsense continues.
Winslow, he of the $60 million dollar bankroll, brings up campaign finance reform. He then brings up invading Canada, to which even Stantis (as a reporter) points out "that doesn't make any sense." Winslow then says the following: "Made you stop asking about campaign finance reform, didn't it?" Then there's a lame punchline about math hurting Winslow's head.
Think about that for a minute (Pellucid, you might want to take a few hours since you apparently have a trouble with simple reading and comprehension). Winslow brought up the issue - none of the reporters were asking him about it. Why didn't Stantis have a reporter ask him about the issue in the first panel instead of having Winslow say it's "out of whack?"
This is why we're so critical of Stantis here at Shrubville. We're not smearing him when we point out that he lacks basic skills as a professional comic strip writer. Today's strip lacks simple logic, and it's yet another case of Stantis coming up with an idea and ramrodding it into four panels, leaving out things like logic and humor. Has the whole "invade Canada" thing ever been funny? Why bring up campaign finance reform if you don't have any jokes to tell about it? Alright, it's an issue you're just now starting to realize is a big deal - why not take some time and actually come up with some jokes while you're trying to search for insights? Is that too much to ask of a professional writer?
And you know what? It is. It is too much to ask Stantis to actually put some effort into what he does. Why should he? He's going to get paid anyway, and as a conservative he's locked into a spot on the funny pages until a funnier conservative comic strip writer comes along.
Sorry if it's a "smear" for me to point that out. But really it doesn't matter to guys like Pellucid - being critical = smear. And he'll just lie and continue to lie to make his point until he's blue in the face. If there's anyone doing a smear job around here it's you, Pellucid: quit lying about Shrubville. You want to debate me on the merits of our site? Let's do it. I would like to quote our President one more time: bring it on. Yes, that's a challenge. If Pellucid can truly prove that we've made "huge" errors and don't understand the comics industry, then I'd be quaking in my boots. But I know that's not the case. He stumbled upon our site a few days ago, looked back through a few weeks of posts, and thinks he's an expert on how we're a supposed smear site. He then points to one error I made - an error I acknowledged and apologized for - and somehow that's supposed to make us irrelevant. Well I'm sorry, but no. People debating you on the wiki site have repeatedly asked you to provide proof of your accusations, and you still haven't done it. Instead it's the conservative mantra "tell the lie and then repeat it until somebody believes it," and you're still doing it.
When you're ready to be a man (or a woman) Pellucid, I'd be more than happy to debate you on the merits of Shrubville. Just remember that I'm not going to stand by idly while you smear OUR site with your lies. We have a few years worth of experience here pointing out the lies of conservatives like you. Ask Scott Stantis about it sometime.
June 29, 2007
Marker Huffer
Sensory overload!
Touch: the newspaper! Grimey!
See: Carmen wearing a Cleveland Browns helmet! (Her part just can't be that thick...it just. can't. be.)
Smell: a Supreme Court ruling!(?)!
Hear: Jim Henson...from beyond the grave!
Taste: a nice, crisp beer in order to kill brain cells to lower the number needed to enjoy the touch, sight, smell, and sound of Prickly City!
June 28, 2007
Labyrinthine
Monday: Llamas!
Tuesday: Boat!
Wednesday: Llamas!
Thursday: Dinosaur! Snake! Plane!
I think we all know what this means. The issue of timeliness that has plagued Prickly City is now gone. The Supreme Court took up the issue of campaign finance reform on Monday, and here we are on Thursday with it all wrapped up nicely.
The llama strips on bordering the boat strip represent McCain and Feingold jockeying for position around the Swift Boat ads. The past (dinosaur), present (molting snake), and future (plane flying above) are represented today. I guess we can all pack up and quit Shrubville now.
----------
Once more to address the baffling inconsistencies regarding wikipedia. Pellucid, if that's his real name, argues on June 25, 2007 in defense of the establishment of a wikipedia page for "BlameBush!" based on the fact that it was referenced in James Taranto's blog, noting that "[[James Taranto]] isn't a blogger, he's a respected journalist and is notable enough for his own Wiki article."
Well, if that's all it takes, Shrubville was referenced in Eric Zorn's blog, and Professor Zorn is a more better respectabler journalist and also worthy enough to have his own wikipedia entry.
You have done enough. Have you no sense of consistency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of consistency?
Posted by Sacki at 09:14 AM | Comments (1)June 27, 2007
Donehille
Mid-week status check!
Monday: Dancing Llamas!
Tuesday: Operation Swift Boat!
Wednesday: Dancing Llamas!
'Prickly City' Readership: Perplexed!
Wikipedia: Link to Shrubville gone!
Seriously, if anyone has a spare minute, make sure to catch the update on the Wikipedia talk page regarding the inclusion (or not) of a link to Shrubville on the Prickly City Wikipedia site. It's really rather amusing.
For the record, I don't know who Orat Perman is. It's not me, Furnace or Sacki. It's no one we dispatched to be our defender. But he/she has taken on this Pellucid character and defended our inclusion. Thank you. I don't use the word 'hero' very often but you are the greatest hero in American history.
It also looks like our old friend Charles "Chuck" Brubaker came out of hiding and jumped on the Pellucid/Anti-Shrubville bandwagon. Brubaker, as many of you may recall, used to be a Shrubville reader and frequent commenter until he dropped off the face of the earth. In case anyone was wondering why he left, I suppose I should publish an email he sent me in November of last year.
Let me first preface this with a big, giant [SIC]:
To Whom it may concern:You may know me. I used to comment alot in Shrubville posts early this year. I admit, while I had mixed feelings about the strip then (now, the strip is my guilty pleasure), I came across [your site] and decided to check it out on daily basis. I generally liked it and even agreed it, the same way I do to "Prickly City" strips itself.
Then it went donehille. Starting with Furnace's posts. I don't know why he's been getting under my skin with his posts, but they started to make me irritated, so I decided to stop visiting the site. In fact, I only visit the site just to see what certain strip were rated by other people (either because I really liked it or because it was very unusual).
Then few days ago, you used an masturbation fantasy to explain the surgery the cartoonist had to get. What the hell? You complain about how the cartoonist makes fun of a politician's appearance, but you use such a SICK SICK fantasy to explain the surgery the cartoonist had to get, for reasons which may not be his fault (and don't you dare to use the "but he did it, so why can't I?" excuse)
I'm sorry to say this, but that's the straw that broke the camel's back. While other people may complain about strips going downhill, I think your website has gone downhill.
I will occasionally check it out on certain strips, for reasons I already explained, but one thing's for sure, I lost my respect for Shrubville.
I don't expect a reply from you or your defense on what I have written, but rather, I am writing this to express what I feel now.
Charles Brubaker
It was a sad day at Shrubville. Our audience is small enough as it is; we don't like to lose precious readers. We welcome everyone here, from Stantis fans to Stantis detractors.
I tried to reach out to Charles that day. I wrote a heartfelt reply to his note:
Hey, Charles. Thanks for writing. We've missed your presence around Shrubville. It's nice to have someone representing rationale thought with respect to Scott Stantis. I know you're a fan of his work. And contrary to how it might seem, I have respect and admiration for Stantis' strips. I can't imagine the pressure to produce a daily strip, especially one that purports to be topical. He's got to react to current events where storylines could change by the time the strip goes to print.Anyway, in terms of your reaction to the post in question, I won't try to justify its existence or my use of shocking imagery. It is what it is. Some days I'm angry at 'Prickly City,' some days I'm amused. It's a snapshot in time.
Sorry you've lost respect for Shrubville. Frankly, I'm surprised you
had any to begin with. We've been pretty tough on and unfair to Stantis. But that's what we do.So, we'll continue to be profane, mean, uncalled for, and sick. And our rapid descent downhill will continue. All the same, I hope you do check in from time-to-time.
Best regards,
CJo
(By the way, the post in question which drove Brubaker away is here.)
We certainly harbored no ill-will toward Charles Brubaker. We welcomed his presence in the comments. We appreciated his appreciation of Stantis. We loved his l'il typos.
But now this. Now he's joined the growing anti-Shrubville chorus on Wikipedia. He's a loyal member of Pellucid's Posse. And we shall be stricken from Wikipedia forevermore.
Jesus wept.
Posted by CJo at 01:45 PM | Comments (5)June 26, 2007
Four Blocks Of Unfunny Desert
"Efficiently."
Today's gag hinges on one word. A word that didn't have to be in there, but for some reason Stantis decided to include it.
Overall it's a decent gag. Now that Winslow has plenty of cash as the frontrunner, he goes for the biggest, gaudiest form of transportation he can find: a boat. See, he's in the desert...blah blah blah. But that said, for Stantis this is as good as it gets.
Until you see that word: efficiently.
Why does Winslow say it? Why not say "in style" or "like the big boys?" It takes the reader completely out of the gag. Is Winslow that stupid? Not just that he's buying a boat, but he uses THAT as his justification? It's one thing to go overboard (sorry) with his spending, and it's silly to buy a boat in the desert, but because that's the most efficient means of travel he could come up with? I guess Stantis can't draw a monster truck or a harrier jet.
But I guess it's irrelevant and a smear for me to point out that Stantis is one of the worst writers in comics today.
Posted by The Furnace at 08:31 AM | Comments (1)June 25, 2007
Just a quick re-cap for those who are checking in after a long weekend...
On Saturday it is revealed that Winslow has raised $60 million for his presidential campaign.
The Furnace complained about a lack of punchline in the strip.
Our new friend and Wikipedia link-deleter-extraordinaire Pellucid stopped by the comments section and complained about The Furnace's complaint asking, "...did you ever consider that because there's no real punchline in this strip that it could be a setup for tomorrow's strip?"
Tomorrow [Sunday] rolls around and, as you might expect, it's a one-off piece about nothing in particular, avec moon, sans blimp.
The Furnace talks about being disappointed, since Pellucid get all our hopes up that Sunday's strip would offer a payoff from Saturday's setup.
Pellucid stops by the comments section and lectures us all: "If you knew anything about comic strips, you'd realize that most cartoonists break storyline for Sunday strips because some papers only carry them on Sunday."
Mmm hmm. Thanks, pal.
Which brings us to today's strip, the long-awaited payoff, the line that packs a punch after Saturday's setup: Lameass. Oh, wait. That was a typo. Llamas.
Winslow raises $60 million for his campaign and decides he needs dancing llamas.
Commence laughing in 5-4-3-2-None.
Posted by CJo at 07:50 AM | Comments (6)June 24, 2007
Stantis Still Can't Draw The Moon
TODAY'S ONE PANEL NON-POLITICAL STRIP
Dangit. Pellucid stopped by the comments section yesterday and got my hopes up by suggesting that there would be a hysterical payoff today to this week's lame, non-sensical storyline. I got all ready to laugh and instead got "coyote karaoke." So disappointing. But hey, Winslow in a powder blue tux is funny, right? Right?
Earlier in the year I criticized Stantis for not spending enough time actually discussing politics, and when he did it was for storylines that only lasted a day or two. Over the past few months he's made more of an effort to not only be more political, but also devote an entire week to a single political topic. Bravo. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean things have gotten any better.
We got a full week of Winslow at the Democratic debates (which he referred to as the Democrat debate, just like a Republican would). That gave us the bold insights "Hillary is a witch, Obama is shallow." Stantis spent a week with an elephant that had fallen over, with no real thoughts as to what exactly that means other than "the Republicans stand for something, but since they've failed at everything I don't want to stand for those things anymore." We got a week of Carmen floating in the air because she didn't know what she stood for anymore, which sounds awfully familiar to the elephant storyline. And this week Winslow went from unknown to frontrunner because the Prickly City caucus (note to Stantis: comedy "K" sounds, and caucus is a funnier word than primary) was moved up to next month.
In other words, meh.
Anyone else get the feeling that Stantis is just treading water with this strip? Is there nothing else political Stantis could have tackled? He's completely ignored the U.S. Attorney scandal. No mention of Scooter Libby's conviction. I don't think he's brought up the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan in months. And mysteriously enough one of Bush's biggest supporters hasn't gushed over Mr. 28% in ages.
What gives? Where's that daring political commentary that isn't necessarily Republican or conservative? Wondering why the Republicans are such monumental failures at governing (while offering no real jokes or insights while doing so) or a half-assed presidential run by Winslow makes it feel like Prickly City is a chore you have to do that you put off until the last minute, then scribble something down and hand it in just before the bell. Show a little pride, why dontcha?
Knowing this, dear readers, please offer up what you think Stantis will spend next week talking about. Will Winslow's campaign continue, or will Stantis drop it because he doesn't know where to go with it? Will Carmen spend another week complaining that this isn't Reagan's Republican party? Or will he dare venture into a topic he hasn't tackled yet, like Romney's flip-flops, Giuliani's habit of hiring felons, or Fred Thompson's phony red truck? The comments section awaits.
June 23, 2007
A Wii? Shouldn't That Have Been Yet Another Edwards Haircut Joke? Republicans Can't Get Enough Of Those
I wanna elect this guy for president.
Boy, it's been a roller coaster ride for Winslow's presidential campaign so far. In the past few weeks he's gone from being a part of the Democratic debates where called Hillary a witch and Obama shallow, to being a complete unknown only a few days ago when Prickly City moved up their primary to July 2007, and now he's magically the frontrunner, having raked in $60 million.
How does that happen, exactly? I don't mean the money thing - that's just Stantis making a point about the problems with political fundraising, and he's got one. No, I'm talking about Winslow's rise to prominence, his fall into obscurity, and now suddenly outraising all of the frontrunners in the course days.
It happens when the person writing the strip doesn't know what he's doing.
As a fellow writer, I have a sense of what Stantis goes through during the creative process. Ideas and jokes come at you all the time. The key to being a decent writer is knowing when to use the right joke. Sure, it might have been funny to Stantis to have a reporter ask Winslow who he is at a press conference - but it's not a joke you can tell AFTER showing Winslow at a nationally televised debate.
Wacky, sily humor is fine - if you know what you're doing. Stantis doesn't, and it's painful watching him learn on the job since he never actually learns anything other than to suck more than he did the day before.
You know what would have been cute and maybe even funny? If Carmen had quietly declared her own candidacy as a Republican, and SHE was the one who had magically raised $60 mil in a matter of days because she's from Prickly City. But nope - the "hysterical" idea that Winslow and his "Free Paris and Bomb Canada" platform is now winning because he's from a city(?) that's having the first primary is supposed to make us laugh and laugh and laugh.
Ain't gonna happen. Unless you're Pellucid - then you might think this is the funniest thing since Rush's "Obama the Magic Negro" song or Glenn Beck sexually harrassing a female guest.
June 22, 2007
Edwards's Haircut: Hack Job or Legitimate Commentary?
Did it really take Stantis two months+ to knock out a John Edwards's Hair strip? This was a "news" story that seemed custom-made for the Stantornator to lock his jaws around and froth and bite and growl about the minute (plus two weeks) it hit the wires.
Maybe it took him a couple months to perfect Edwards's arm. No, wait. That can't be right. He drew Edwards's arm back in August of '04:
In fact, let's take a brief digression from today's "hack job" and look at the evolution of the Art of Scott Stantis. Here's a side-by-side comparison of the same scenario drawn nearly three years apart:
Personally, I prefer the older, thinner Winslow, with his wary gaze off-panel, his tail like a backside erection, his nose like...well...an erect nipple, ne pas de mouth. And actually I prefer the older, thinner Edwards arm too. Nice detail with the dress shirt's button/cufflink.
But anyway, we're trying to solve the mystery of why it took so long for Stantis to address The Haircut...
[Insert brackets to indicate hours of quiet reflection followed by original research which is sure to produce the legitimate commentary that follows]
I suspect he was simply following the advice of the 2007 Farmer's Almanac, which lists the best day for being a predictable hack: 22.
Posted by CJo at 09:07 AM | Comments (2)June 21, 2007
Dip Your Fingers In Water To Prevent Meatballs From Sticking To Your Hands
Wikipedia? We're in a fight with some Fox-News-Channel-Daily-Show-ripoff-watching-punk over an article at wikipedia? I don't even believe in wikipedia. I'm the motherfucking person of the year, you son of a bitch, so don't be coming into my goddamn kitchen and calling me "not credible for proof of commonly accepted criticism." When were you person of the year, assclown?
Every December I make the 7-mile walk to the Farm and Fleet to pick up a copy of the Farmer's Almanac for the upcoming year. I'm set for 12 more months. That's all the information that anyone needs. And if I seem unduly upset, that's mostly because I missed out on the best days to quit smoking this month (1,4-6,9,10,13), and the best days to bake myself a pie to cope with that fact (23,24) don't come around soon enough.
As they claim at wikipedia, "[m]any visitors come to this site to acquire knowledge, others to share knowledge." Can the wikipedia tell me "Bloodstains can be among the toughest stains to remove from clothing and fabrics. Soak the stained clothing or cloth in cold saltwater, then launder in warm, soapy water"? I don't think so. Something important and vital to my daily activities, and it's not included in wikipedia; how could they portray themselves as a source of knowledge? As far as I'm concerned, wikipedia is a waste of internet tubes that could be devoted to lolcats.
Posted by Sacki at 09:00 AM | Comments (4)June 20, 2007
Legitimate Commentary
There are some out there who think that Shrubville is not a valid resource to help understand the mixed up muddled up shook up world that is Scott Stantis's Prickly City. There are some who think that the three very distinct auteurs of this site -- CJo (me; Monday, Wednesday, Friday), The Furnace (Tuesday, Saturday, Sunday), Sacki (Thursday) -- are one in the same to be referenced as "The Shrubville Guy." There are some who cite four out of approximately 1,000 posts on Shrubville -- we've been publishing a daily* critique of PC since 9/25/04 -- to note that "this is not legitimate commentary. This is not thoughtful analysis. This is a smear-job, pure and simple."
And, listen, maybe our critics have a point. Maybe we on occasion fall too easily into attack mode. But it's been a tough slog covering this strip. We've been up and down the Stantis oeuvre three times over. We probably know more about his characters, his technique, his storylines, his political points than he does at this point. It's tough packaging a fresh delicious sandwich every day when the bread is moldy and stale.
But slog on, I say. And slog on we will.
Which brings us to today's strip. If you will recall all the way back to yesterday, the Prickly City presidential primary has been moved up to July. Today's strip features Winslow in front of his increasingly-ubiquitous Winslow '08 podium. Excellent, one thinks. This is a good opportunity for Stantis to combine current events (the push in some states to move up their primaries) with an ongoing Prickly City storyline (Winslow is running for president in 2008). However, Stantis doesn't bring the execution to a satisfying synthesis.
As daily readers of this strip might remember, the press is fully aware of Winslow's presidential campaign. On the following occasions, Winslow, standing in front of his podium, has been grilled by the press:
April 20, 2007: Re: how much money he's raised compared to Clinton and Obama.
May 17, 2007: At the Democratic Debate, addressed by name (Mr. Winslow), told by the moderator to stop throwing water on Hillary Clinton. (Winslow wondered why she wasn't melting. She's a witch. Get it?)
May 18, 2007: At the Democratic Debate, addressed by name, told by the moderator his time was up after he spent his allotted time soliciting an autograph from Barack Obama.
May 19, 2007: At the Democratic Debate, chased and beaten by Chris Matthews (!) because he said he doesn't hate President Bush.
May 28, 2007: Re: whether or not "Free Paris Hilton" was his only platform.
May 29, 2007: Re: whether or not "Free Paris Hilton" was his only platform.
May 30, 2007: Re: whether or not he has a platform on which he's running. Why yes, yes he does. And his platform is "Free Paris Hilton," thanks for asking.
Stantis has gone to great and repeated lengths to establish that Winslow is running for president. The press seems to be fully aware of his run and his one and only platform. So when Stantis has Winslow in front of the podium today and a member of the press corps ask who he is, it took me out of the moment. It ruined the continuity. I no longer believed the fantasy world Stantis had created. I could only see Stantis's hand moving the parts around to service the joke, as it were.
If I were to offer some unsolicited constructive criticism to Scott Stantis, I might suggest he try to remember situations in which he's previously placed his characters. Either that, or he should stop trying to build momentum with continuing storylines that weave in and out of continuity.
OK, dawg? You know it, baby.
*We started covering the weekend strips on a daily basis in July of '05.
June 19, 2007
One and Done
The streak is over.
After a somewhat amusing strip that actually made sense and offered political insight yesterday, Prickly City is back to sucking again. Wish I could say I was surprised.
Today's strip is all over the place. Winslow announces to Carmen that Prickly City has moved up its presidential primary to July 2007. Ya get it? Other states like California are moving theirs up, so of course it would be funny if PC moved theirs up to next month. Ha?
A few things don't make much sense. First, I already heard or read (I don't remember) a gag saying that California had moved its primary up to last February, so this isn't exactly fresh comedy. But we've gone over that whole "2 week delay" problem comics have in the past. Then there's Stantis's insistence that much like the Simpsons and Springfield he doesn't say what state Prickly City is in, so Winslow has the awkward line that his CITY has moved up their primary. Um, what? Maybe if he had simply said "our state" instead of "Prickly City," but nope - I guess that would make too much sense.
Then there's Carmen's bizarre final line: that Reason won't be on the ballot. Huh? What does that even mean? How is that funny? Did he mean to use the word Logic? Or Common Sense? Why Reason? I suppose if I thought about it for a while and tried to jam that word in there to somehow make sense I could, but this is a freakin' comic strip - I shouldn't have to think.
That's why yesterday's strip worked. Winslow the liberal pointed out that the Republican presidential field is once again filled with ten rich white guys, using an ice cream cone to make the point. A nice visual gag paired with decent political commentary. More of that please.
Not more of this crap about a city having a primary where Reason is on the ballot.
Side note: doing a quick Google it looks like Prickly City is in Arizona, since they have a primary and New Mexico has a caucus. Not that it really matters, but why not just say it's in Arizona so today's strip makes sense?
Side note #2: is it considered a smear if I point these things out? I guess so. Maybe I should make an effort to actually smear Prickly City one of these days - Pellucid won't know what hit him (or her).
June 18, 2007
An Open Letter to Pellucid
Dear Pellucid:
If you could please stop smearing your own feces all over the walls for a minute and listen up:
I, CJo, as authorized Monday representative of Smearville, think that today's 'Prickly City,' while not containing much original insight, actually manages to be on-target and slightly amusing, if not a little too vertical. I may not have chuckled out loud necessarily, but at least I didn't toss aside the paper in disgust. Sometimes we actually find Stantis's comic strip 'slightly amusing.' I'm sure that news may disappoint you, as you'd prefer us to engage in your odd and disturbing smear fetish. But alas, dear Pellucid, the only smear today -- besides your own feces on the wall -- is the big smear of catsup across your puss, as you gorge on corndog after corndog, your greasy meaty paws slick on your computer keyboard, your paranoid little brain making lists of media bias to correct on Wikipedia.
Anyhoo...I have a deal to propose, Pellucid: If you make an edit on the word "rathskeller" at Wikipedia, we will stop the smearing and slogging of you.
God bless.
Posted by CJo at 01:40 PM | Comments (6)June 17, 2007
Personally, I Can't Wait For Pellucidville
Sorry for the lack of a post yesterday. But after reading it, can you really blame me for taking the day off?
Carmen calls Cindy Sheehan a cut and runner. And Carmen gets added to the list of people I'd punch in the face if I ever met her in person. Yup, nothing like "mother of a dead soldier" humor to kick off the weekend right. But hey, Winslow says Carmen's being mean, which is Stantis's way of being the dick that says things like, "Well, I shouldn't say I told you so, but...I told you so!" Note to Stantis: everybody hates that guy.
Today's not any better.
Winslow beats Carmen in the "how far can you fly" game on the swingset, but seeing how battered and bruised he is, did he REALLY win? I'm sure there's some kind of witty insight about the futility of war in there, but clearly Stantis wasn't going for that. No, his kids were probably playing on the swings and we get a full panel Sunday strip showing it to us.
What's much more interesting to me is the Wikipedia comment CJo pointed out in the Friday comments:
"The addition of a smear site to this article is proof enough to me that the individuals primarily responsible for editing this page are not interested in facts but rather in presenting the comic in the most negative light possible. If you want to add factual errors that the strip has made, a new, cited section for that should be added rather than adding a link to a smear site to the article and trying to present it as neutral commentary. --Pellucid 18:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)"
I guess in the minds of conservatives, "criticism = smear." And facts have a liberal bias. And "relevant" really means "only things that praise or agree with what a conservative says." I really hope that Pellucid sets up her own site that points out all of the factual errors we make here at Shrubville. To quote our President, "Bring. It. On. Bitch."*
*I added the "bitch" part.
June 15, 2007
Bringing Up The Rear
To recap our week thus far:
Monday: Elephant.
Tuesday: Elephant.
Wednesday: Elephant.
Thursday: Elephant.
Friday: No Elephant.
I guess the lack of an elephant in today's strip is supposed to be the 800-pound gorilla in the room. Which would've made for a clever strip, to have an 800-pound gorilla show up. As has been noted for the past 2 and 3/4 years, however, clever doesn't live in Prickly City. No forwarding address.
___ ____ ____ ____
Also this week there was a bit of discussion concerning the Wikipedia entry for Prickly City, and constant confusing revisions thereto. There appear to be at least a couple of parties interested over the past 6 months or so, for whatever reason, in seeing that Shrubville is not listed as an external link. We believe that we are highly relevant, not to mention believing that someone's humor is wearing thin, so perhaps it would be instructive to find out what's behind them devoting their time to keeping Prickly City's wikipedia page "clean."
December 8, 2006: A10brown, valedictorian - Bringem Young University, department of Political Science, makes the initial deletion, with no reason given.
I could only speculate that we must've said something about Mitt Romney, or perhaps he dug up a pair of McDonald's collector plates with words from the prophet Mac Tonight that told him to do it.
January 3, 2007: The incomparable Gorilla Jones adds Shrubville once again to its rightful place. Reason stated: "restore relevant link." There's nothing wrong with Gorilla Jones that an additional 10 victories next year by the Chicago Bulls couldn't fix.
May 4, 2007: CyberSkull, aka Trevor Downs from Los Altos, California. Once again, no reason is given, but as this user is proud to count among his uploaded wikipedia images comics such as this and this, perhaps he was just pissed off that we kept chiding Stantis for continually bringing up thongs. How dare we!
June 13, 2007: A sane & sensible person again adds Shrubville, "a blog that critiques Prickly City." Can't argue with that.
June 14, 2007 (Flag Day): Wikipedia user Pellucid argues with that. Reason: "Totally irrelevant." Totally. Unless you use the established definition of the word relevant, located in say, a dictionary: "having a bearing on or connection with the subject at issue." I would say that however tenuous one might think the connection between Shrubville and Prickly City is, a tenuous connection is still a connection, yes? I fail to see how this fellow's poor reading comprehension should impact the inclusion of Shrubville on the wikipedia page for Prickly City. I suggest he gets a'crackin on working on this one:
Historical and skeptical views
Overview of the Life of Jesus - A summary of New Testament accounts.
From Jesus to Christ — A Frontline documentary on Jesus and early Christianity.
The Jewish Roman World of Jesus
The Jesus Puzzle—Earl Doherty's website.
Work for Jesus or go to hell, I say.
Posted by Sacki at 01:00 PM | Comments (2)June 14, 2007
Message To Stinky Tuscadero: Sit On It
There once was a man aping Nast,
Who substituted craftsmanship for bombast.
His "thoughts" mumbo-jumbo,
Less Harper's (& more like Dumbo),
A regular 21st-century Balaam's ass.
June 13, 2007
Delish
Even though Stantis repeats for the third time the "What do you stand for" set-up, he at least finishes with a somewhat-funny gag: Winslow serving himself a heaping helping of elephant rump.
Not bad. I'll get behind that gag, so to speak.
As mentioned in the comments yesterday, Stantis has himself a "blog." Kind of. It's mostly just posts of his political cartoons but he'll occasionally make comments on his own work. Nothing too enlightening. But it got me thinking about what other people are currently saying about Stantis. Which lead to a Google search. Which lead to Wikipedia. Which lead me to see that Stantis (and/or cohorts) have successfully lobbied to get the link to Shrubville removed from the Prickly City Wikipedia page. Losers. If anyone can or wants to help reinstate, please feel free.
Posted by CJo at 07:23 AM | Comments (7)June 12, 2007
Scott Stantis: Super Bush Republican
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!
In case you're reading this, Mr. Stantis, that's me laughing AT you, not with.
Looks like we're getting a full week of Carmen yelling at Republicans for not standing for something, which always cracks me up. Why? Because Republicans like Stantis DO stand for something, they always have, but now that those positions are incredibly unpopular they amazingly disown that platform and now claim that their party has somehow failed them. Yeah, right.
Why is it you weren't asking this question in 2004, Stantis? What's radically changed in your Republican party since then? Let's see - you botched the war in Iraq, yet you still fully support it. How is that a change in your position? You whined about the immigration issue last year, but you never even said where you personally stand on the issue. Heck, just last week you couldn't make up your mind about outsourcing, while your Republican party has made it loud and clear that they strongly support it - and since you fell back on the typical corporate talking points like "living wages are bad," it sure sounded like you were just another Republican.
Admit it Stantis - you're a Bush Republican, through and through. Bitching about some little thing he did once or twice doesn't make you a vocal critic of the Bush Administration - we all bitch about our political leaders at one point or another (just ask Dems how happy they are with Harry Reid right now - not so much).
If you want to see where the Republican party stands, just take a look at their votes in Congress. Even though Bush is at 28% in the polls, they STILL vote for whatever he wants. Heck, they just filibusterd a no confidence vote on Alberto Gonzales, and I'd think most Republicans would agree that he's a joke of an Attorney General (sidenote: remember how much Republicans hated filibusters and they're "unconstitutional?" Hypocrites.). Although we don't know where you stand on that debacle, Stantis, since you've avoided it like the plague. What, afraid to take a STAND ON AN ISSUE?
We know where the Republicans stand. They support illegal wiretapping (as long as it's only those nasty terrorists, of course - but hey, go ahead and spy on all of us just in case). They support the occupation of Iraq (fight those terrorists over there - but why are we spying on them here if they're all over there?). Tax cuts are good, raising taxes is bad (even though most of them still haven't figured out that you have to be rich to get a tax cut). Universal healthcare is evil (unless it's one of your friends or family members that is broke because of health issues). It's okay to imprison people who are accused terrorists (nevermind that they might be innocent - they've got brown skin and talk funny, so they must be eeevil). And of course my favorite Republican platform: Osama who?
The only difference now is that the majority of Americans have figured out that the Republican leadership is a failure and a joke. They don't like Bush, they know the Republicans fully support Bush, so they don't like the Republicans either. And Scott Stantis, you're the ultimate Bush Republican - even though you deny it. And that makes me laugh.
Followed by a big manly tear running down my cheek, knowing you somehow still have a comic strip BECAUSE you're a Bush Republican.
June 11, 2007
Big Lame Hunter
You tell 'em, Scott. You go, girl. Body blow, body blow, body blow, uppercut. You're the champ. You 'da man. Your jib? I like the cut of it. You got game...big game. Jolly good show, chap. Etc.
Now...[yawn]...let me also add...[yawn]...that you...[yawn]...
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
June 10, 2007
Noxious Gases
"Mr. Stantis, my diagnosis is that you're an unfunny hack."
WHAT DOES THIS EVEN MEAN?!?!?
I've just about had it with Scott Stantis and Prickly City. It's as if he's trying to produce the absolute worst comic strip in the land. Someone needs to tell him to stop trying - the title is all his.
Does Stantis even know what carbon offsets are? Basically it's when you can't (or won't) cut back on your own carbon consumption so you pay to balance it out somehow - plant a tree, donate money to a green cause, etc.
Winslow's bright idea is to steal Lucy's psychiatry stand and charge people for...carbon indulgence? So they're going to pay Winslow, the smelly stupid stinky hippy green liberal, to actually use up more carbons? And he'll happily do it, because he's a greedy ne'er do well who could care less about saving the environment?
All together now: HUH?
Let's put aside the idiocy of having the liberal in the strip want to destroy the environment. Why would anyone pay Winslow - who doesn't own a car, or a house, or anything as far as I can tell - to burn fossil fuels? Why not just do it themselves? Or does Stantis have a secret desire to burn even more oil than he already does? It's yet ANOTHER case of Stantis coming up with what he thinks is a clever idea, scratching it out on a napkin at lunch, then slapping it together by the Friday deadline without actually reasoning out what the heck it's supposed to mean.
So to recap: Winslow is a greedy corporate bastard only out for profit, so much so that he'll happily produce excessive greenhouse gases if people will pay him. Carmen is the concerned citizen who points out that he's wrong. Maybe Stantis should have shown her planting Charlie Brown's Christmas tree while she criticizes Winslow.
At least Stantis didn't include Al Gore. Unfortunately it might be a sign of things to come. What are the odds he spends the week drawing a fat Gore talking about the environment while lecturing us (rightfully so) about how the media has failed us and the Republicans have ruined our country? His book did come out a few weeks ago. Place your bets now.
June 09, 2007
It's Over - I Think
So Scott Stantis finally spends an entire week - Monday through Saturday - on a single topic, and he devotes it to...outsourcing. While the war in Iraq rages, immigration has split his own party in two, and we're seeing the depths of the U.S. Attorney scandal and how it relates to election fraud finally start to come out, Stantis spends his time on an issue that hasn't been a hot button topic for a while. But at least he's being political and offering up a legitimate position on the issue, right? Right?
Of course not. His brilliant take falls back on the typical Republican talking points, which is that we shouldn't mandate a living wage in this country (an issue that was in front of the Congress several months ago but hasn't been discussed recently while they argue about the war and immigration).
I'm always fascinated by Republicans like Stantis who can't think for themselves, and then when they actually do stop to try and figure out where they stand on an issue it's like a small child trying to comprehend math for the first time. "I think the free market should dictate how much money people make." Well what about the fact that unions have fought for a century to make sure that in this country people have a safe working environment, a 40 hour work week, etc. while other countries still treat workers like slave labor? So instead of refusing to do business with those countries that abuse their workforce many of our corporations instead outsource our jobs to them because it means more profit for them and their shareholders while leaving our citizens out of work? "Well, that's capitalism for you." So no matter what, profit rules all? "Yup." And what happens when our citizens make so little that they can't afford the goods that we no longer make and have to import and we're strictly a service economy? "Hey, let's talk about illegal immigration - that's the REAL problem - those illegals are taking our service jobs." And so it goes.
There is no debating with Republicans. They don't argue from the head, they argue from the heart. When Stephen Colbert jokes about that it really is funny cuz it's true. Stantis must love having Prickly City and his editorial comic, because it gives him a forum where he can spew a few talking points, ignore the real issues, and then act high and mighty because he feels like he's "won" the argument with anyone who disagrees with him. The only time anyone gets to voice an opposing viewpoint is in the letters people send him, and when he actually does a podcast (down to less than once a month now), he offers up even lamer Republican talking points and belittles anyone making a real point because they're a stupid stinky smelly liberal who "doesn't get it."
Today is no different for Stantis. Nevermind how stupid it is that Carmen and Winslow are somehow "back" in Prickly City, which didn't make any sense in the first place. Carmen is a Republican that is here on a "Guest Worker Visa," which I guess means she'll only be here for a short period of time. Of course Democrat Winslow snuck in over the border like an illegal alien, even though he's an American citizen. Then Stantis offers up the conservative Thomas Friedman's lame "the world is flat economically" argument, and Winslow makes an even lamer comment about Indian and Chinese food since those are the equivalent of 3000 auto worker jobs being sent to Mexico or 5000 telemarketing jobs going to India.
I guess I wouldn't have such a problem with Stantis if he actually attempted to create a real dialogue about a real problem our country faces. I understand it's difficult to talk about an issue like this and still try to be funny, but that's what he's paid to do. Rehashing the Hello Kitty Carmen and cracking wise that Winslow snuck into the country while offering up lame one-line Republican talking points ("a living wage is bad - be happy you have a job at all," "it's a free market - deal with it," etc.) isn't insightful political commentary, it's lazy. But it's easy for Stantis to comment on everybody else's jobs while he's got one because of his political beliefs and not his actual work performance. Let's see where Stantis stands on these issues when he's unemployed because people finally wise up and realize the damage he's doing to the comic strip pages not just by being unfunny and lazy, but because he's dragging down other funnier, more insightful strips with him because they're on the other side of the political fence and if he gets fired, they get fired too. That's not the free market at work - that's politics, pure and simple.
But a Bush Republican like Stantis wouldn't have it any other way.
June 08, 2007
Car Men, the Drivers of Caminhoneta
I've found a way to make Prickly City readable!
First, you translate the dialogue into Portuguese. Then, you translate the Portuguese back into English.
Carmen: Perhaps the way to stop all this outsourcing is to start exempted of laws of the wage.
Winslow: What on making an alive wage, drivers of caminhoneta?
Carmen: How can you make an alive wage if you will not have a work, Winslow?
Winslow: I do not know but I bet if we called the sustentation that of tech would have a reply.
Carmen: I bet that.
******
See, now that makes perfect sense. Or at least more sense than it's currently written. And it's funny too. Or at least more funny than it's currently written.
You're welcome, Scott.
Posted by CJo at 08:42 AM | Comments (4)June 07, 2007
Clever As A Gizzard
Is every argument that Prickly City tries to make a strawman argument? Why yes, quite so, indeed, no doubt, you've hit the nail on the head, ain't that the truth, indubitably, verily, verily.
So what do I mean by strawman argument? Misrepresentation, illogic, taking quotes out of context? Sure, that happens sometimes, but that's not the strawman I know. That's not the strawman at all. No way, no how, impossible, unheard of, out of the question, inconceivable.
The strawman here, the one that has been running through the Prickly City thread since its inception, has been humming "If I Only Had A Brain." And not only that, all of this while today's strip, in which Carmen wishes for fingers, fingers which she will no doubt place in her mouth, presents the underlying theme of "Suck? Yes, We Do Suck."
Posted by Sacki at 10:27 AM | Comments (2)June 06, 2007
Hello (Again) Kitty
Looks like Scott outsourced today's strip to his archive.
-April 29, 2007
June 05, 2007
Comedy Is Hard Work. Scott Stantis Must Hate Hard Work.
Because Stantis thought that "Is there a Mama New Guinea" was too clever...
If you have to explain a joke, it's not funny. Someone needs to drill this concept into Scott Stantis's brain, assuming he has one.
Today's strip is a two-fer in the non-sensical department. Apparently outsourcing at Prickly City translates to "I don't have to draw Winslow for the week!" Is Stantis THAT g*ddamn lazy that he'll use an excuse as lame as that outsourcing reporting to India story to justify not drawing a character he should be able to draw in his sleep? Yup.
The other head-scratcher is a play on words. Stantis must have read somewhere that some of our jobs have been sent to Micronesia, so he shoehorns in a joke asking if there's a "Macronesia." Do you get it? Micro/Macro?
No, of course you don't. Because THAT'S NOT A JOKE. Not in this context anyway. If you're a computer geek talking about how small the computer chips are that they make offshore in Micronesia and if in Macronesia they make bigger ones, then yeah maybe there are a few tech nerds out there that would guffaw. But what would the existence of a Macronesia have to do with Winslow and the mysterious "they" Carmen mentions in relation to today's strip? It's just more laziness on the part of Scott Stantis.
I would love for Scott to sit down and try to explain today's strip. What is Winslow's job that it's being outsourced? If that job has been outsourced, why has Winslow disappeared yet we can still hear him? Is Carmen also at work while she and Winslow walk and talk? Because that's apparently all Winslow does for work too. How does a website outsourcing the watching of local city council hearings apply to what's happening in Prickly City? Is asking if there's a Macronesia supposed to be funny simply because the other country is Micronesia? How does that relate to what's happening in this storyline?
Stantis, if you can't handle your workload, quit. Live off of your single panel political commentaries that appear on the OpEd pages where you're not reliant on two characters walking in the desert every day. If you're not going to take the time to come up with actual storylines that makes sense and jokes that make people laugh, then there's someone out there who is more than happy to put in the long hours to make it work. Heck, a few of them even read this website. I'm sure they'd love the platform you have every day.
If the guys who are so passionate about bitching about how terrible your strip is that they created a website dedicated to criticizing Prickly City are about to give up on it, how do you think the average comic strip reader feels? I'm guessing most of them gave up months ago. So do us all a favor: quit. Before it becomes even more obvious that the only reason you have a strip is because you're a Bush Republican.
June 04, 2007
Poof
Aaww, crap, indeed, Winslow. Aaww, crap. If there's one thing Stantis does worse than political humor and comment, (fear of) technology humor and comment, and (hatred of) the culture of celebrity, it's comments on the newspaper business. Our favorite scribbling journalist gets even more confused than normal when trying to defend the industry that butters his daily bread.
He actually has an interesting story to work with this week. A website no one really cares about called PasadenaNow.com is outsourcing local city council meeting coverage to Indian reporters...in India. I can see the old newspaper guard getting upset over this, and for good reason.
Now granted it's only Monday and we have, god forbid, four more strips in this series, but how does Stantis apply the concept of outsourcing local news coverage to reporters in India to his own strip?
By having Winslow disappear.
I can't even begin to understand the connection.
Maybe the gag is that the drawing in Prickly City has been outsourced to India. But, of course, had that been the case, instead of disappearing I imagine Winslow would look professionally drawn for once.
But, hey, I'll give Stantis credit for this much. He has created suspense. We breathlessly await tomorrow's strip so we can see how badly Stantis will botch it all up.
Posted by CJo at 07:20 AM | Comments (1)June 03, 2007
Where's Carmen's Flatscreen TV?
Boy, if Joe Rogan thinks Ned "Carlos Mencia" Holness is a joke thief, wait'll he gets a load of Stantis.
It's interesting to watch a Bush Republican like Stantis criticize something that he and his party helped develop over the last six years. It's as if he's just now realizing that the Mainstream Media is all about trying to scare people into submission, and gosh darnit Stantis isn't going to take it anymore! Yeah right.
What's cute is that everything Stantis lists that we're supposed to be afraid of has become a threat because of Bush's policies. Thanks to Bush our air is more polluted than ever because he's rolled back the environmental restrictions for his corporate buddies. That food you're eating might be deadly because Bush thinks his corporate buddies can regulate themselves to make safe food. Same with our pets' food. And so on and so forth.
It's extra-special cute that Stantis includes both Democrats AND Republicans as things to fear, as if the media is completely unbiased and against both parties. Ha. Watched CNN lately? Might was well call it Fox News Lite.
It would have been nice if Stantis had been a little more insightful with his "criticisms" today. Maybe in the future he can tackle how the conservative media doesn't just use fear to control us, they use certain kinds of fear to distract us from the types of fear that are damaging to the White House.
For example, the TB story. There's all kinds of fear there: fear of a terrorist attack with infectious diseases, fear of an unsecured border, fear of flying, etc. But that makes Bush look bad for not dealing with the problem. So magically *poof!* - we caught three guys trying to blow up JFK! You know that fear you have of terrorist attacks? Well you don't have to be quite as afraid today! Just forget about that guy who could cough and kill millions who somehow got past Homeland Security - look over here at the other thing you're supposed to be afraid of that only Bush can protect you from!
And so it goes.
To top things off, Stantis can't leave well enough alone. He actually tries to include a capper, which is Winslow wondering how he'll Tivo "Fear Factor." A show that hasn't been relevant for years, but since it has the word "fear" in the title Stantis thought it was clever and funny. It's not. If there's something we should all fear it's that Stantis has a spot on the funny pages at least until 2009. Now that's scary.
June 02, 2007
Do You Wed This Agent Of Intolerance?
Oh goody - Stantis continues to fawn over Jerry Falwell. But of course since he's the Worst Comic Strip Writer In The World he botches it.
Carmen and Winslow sit in the desert (they must be tuckered from all the running and snake-swinging they did yesterday in celebration of Falwell's life). Carmen notes that Falwell "wedded politics and religion." Carmen then delivers her own witty retort because apparently Winslow is too stupid to think of it, saying she hears that religion has filed for a divorce. Then Winslow says something unimportant just so we know he's still a character in the strip.
This is what happens when you're too afraid to let your own creation - but one with a different viewpoint than your own - get the zinger. Wouldn't it have made a whole lot more sense for Winslow to joke that religion wants a divorce? Of course. But Stantis has to make his precious little angel Carmen the alpha dog, so Winslow can go spit.
On top of that, do you think Stantis realizes that he just insulted everything Falwell tried to accomplish in his life? If religion wants a divorce, then doesn't that mean the union with politics has failed miserably? That his attempts to influence our government have led to the presidency of George W. Bush? What's great is that since Stantis was so adamant about having Carmen deliver the punchline that he can't even blame the liberal Winslow for insulting Falwell's accomplishments. It's all on the Neo-Con Tot to blast a dead man two weeks after he was put into the ground for failing to make his "marriage" work and ruining politics with his religious influences. Way to pay tribute, Stantis.
But hey, what can you expect from a guy that whines that animated comics have an unfair advantage and then proceeds to copy and paste the exact same panel four times in a row. Laziness, thy name is Stantis.
June 01, 2007
Here are a Few of My Favorite Quotes
Jerry Falwell's lifeless corpse plummets down the chute to Hell.
"In two weeks - a non-zany tribute to Jerry Falwell! You heard it here first . . ."
-- Comment on Shrubville by Annie on May 15, 2007 04:32 PM
"The whole consideration of this — of this horrible little person is offensive to very, very many of us who have some regard for truth and for morality, and who think that ethics do not require that lies be told to children by evil old men, that we're — we're not told that people who believe like Falwell will be snatched up into heaven, where I'm glad to see he skipped the rapture, was found on the floor of his office, while the rest of us go to hell.
How dare they talk to children like this? How dare they raise money from credulous people on their huckster-like 'Elmer Gantry' radio stations, and fly around in private jets, as he did, giggling and sniggering all the time at what he was getting away with?"
--Christopher Hitchens re: Jerry Falwell on CNN, May 15, 2007.
"The idea that religion and politics don't mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country."
-- Jerry Falwell, Sermon, July 4, 1976
"I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won't have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!"
-- Jerry Falwell, 'America Can Be Saved!' (1979) Sword of the Lord Publishers, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, p. 52-53
"And, I know that I'll hear from them for this. But, throwing God out successfully with the help of the federal court system, throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools. The abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked. And when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad. I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way — all of them who have tried to secularize America — I point the finger in their face and say "you helped this happen."
-- Jerry Falwell, Remarks to Pat Robertson after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, on The 700 Club, September 13, 2001.
"AIDS is not just God's punishment for homosexuals; it is God's punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals."
-- Jerry Falwell, Source Unknown
"Into every life a little inanity must fall."
-- Carmen re: Jerry Falwell's Tinky Winky fascination, Prickly City, June 1, 2007
picture courtesy of JB
