New York Post story nominated for "most ignored of 2008 award."

New York Post reporter Ginger Otis has been nominated for the prestigious Most Ignored Story of 2008 award, for her recent story, "Obama Robbed in New York." The story details how, in NYC, which happens to be Hillary Clinton's "home town," whoever counted the votes seemed not to notice that Mr. Obama had any.

From the article:

February 16, 2008 -- Barack Obama's primary-night results were strikingly under recorded in several congressional districts around the city - in some cases leaving him with zero votes when, in fact, he had pulled in hundreds, the Board of Elections said today
Unofficial primary results gave Obama no votes in nearly 80 districts, including Harlem's 94th and other historically black areas - but many of those initial tallies proved to be wildly off the mark, the Board of Elections confirmed.
Truth is, in some districts getting a recount, the senator from Illinois is even close to defeating Hillary Clinton...

In a predominantly black Brooklyn district for which Clinton was given credit for a 118-0 victory on Primary Night, the Board of Elections' latest figures indicate that she may not even come out the winner - Obama currently has 116 votes to her 118.

Since stories about possible electoral fraud are routinely ignored by the rest of the Media -- forgotten as if they'd never existed in the first place -- observers believe Ms. Otis's story has a fair shot at winning the award. "However," noted Brad Friedman, four-time past winner of the award, "it's early yet. We haven't even gotten to the general election, anything can happen." Indeed, Ms. Otis looks to be facing several other strong contenders. The story of 50,000 Los Angeles votes not counting has already been largely forgotten, and given the historic Democratic primaries and the omnipresence of school shootings, Britney Spears, and cleaver-murders, nobody seems to be paying much attention to stories about anything the current Administration or Congress are doing. But for now, Ms. Otis's story is an early favorite.

When asked for comment, Ms. Otis added: "What story?"

Today's the day

Read more at the Cartoonists of Color Draw-In web page. I've posted several links to articles, and a couple mp3's of interviews I and the other guys have done regarding the action.

The Clintons smoked identity politics, inhaled big-time

The more I see of the Clinton campaign, the more I understand the burning hatred the right wing has always felt toward them, even if I don't (yet) share it. How can you not hate people who laugh and smile while they distort their opponents words and records? How can you not hate people who brazenly drag their opponents' race into the campaign repeatedly, and then feign indignation when their opponent calls them on it? How can you not despise the Clintons when they speak derisively of Barack engaging in identity politics, while at the same time reminding everyone at every turn that Hillary has ovaries?

The Clintons' latest not-quite-subtle attempt to marginalize Obama based on race:

Said Bill Clinton today in Columbia, SC: "Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88. Jackson ran a good campaign. And Obama ran a good campaign here."

This was in response to a question about Obama saying it "took two people to beat him." Jackson had not been mentioned.

Boy, I can't understand why anyone would think the Clintons are running a race-baiting campaign to paint Obama as "the black candidate."

Obama did win the vast majority of black South Carolinians' votes. But how does Bill Clinton explain Iowa? Did Jesse Jackson win Iowa and the history books forgot to record that?

Rambo, McCain: It's only a coincidence

Sylvester Stallone today endorsed John McCain, Vietnam POW, for President. I'm sure it absolutely, positively has nothing to do with a certain film that's opening tomorrow. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.

Stallone said of McCain, a Vietnam war veteran who spent more than five years as a prisoner of war, that "there's something about matching the character with the script."

"And right now, the script that's being written and reality is pretty brutal and pretty hard-edged like a rough action film, and you need somebody who's been in that to deal with" it.

...I think.

Letter to Editor: Candorville's mockery of bigots offends me!

A reader was kind enough to send me a copy of his letter to the editor about today's Candorville:

Copy of Letter to the Editor-Austin American Statesman

Dear Editor:

As a white, Independent voter, I am appaled at the tastelessness of the “comic strip”, Candorville, that appeared in the Saturday Jan. 19, 2008 Austin Statesman.

This has a non-white male character talking to a non-white female character and I will quote the dialogue in it’s entirety for those who missed it.

He says, “I figured out what Obama needs to do if he wins the nomination. If he wins, you just know thousands of bigots are going bullet shopping. So he’s gotta pick a vice president that bigots’ll hate worse- Someone the bigots wouldn’t want to risk becoming president. Obviously, his running mate should be an illegal immigrant,”

To me this is patently offensive and the Statesman should not have run it. As I wrote earlier, “I’m a white, Independent voter and this appears to me to be race baiting of the worst kind.

I apologize to all my non-white friends for this bad taste on the part of the cartoonist, and the Statesman as well.

Rev. James A. Andrews D.D.

AKA Zpadre

Always nice to hear from a white person who takes it upon himself to be offended on behalf of minorities. I hear from such angels occasionally. Oddly enough, the minorities in question never seem to tell me themselves that those particular strips offend them. Thank God for the Reverend Andrews's of the world, otherwise I'd never know that I've done wrong.

My response:

I often hear from readers who tell me they're white, and that they're offended on behalf of minorities about something I said. When, in fact, I hear almost nothing but praise for those same comics by the supposedly-aggrieved minority readers themselves. I don't understand this phenomenon. I'm not sure I understand why you're apologizing on my behalf. Why would you, a white person, apologize to "all your non-white friends" for something another non-white person said? Why don't you ask THEM if they're offended? If THEY would like an apology, by all means, direct them my way so I can correct whatever misinterpretation they're laboring under. If you can find a single non-white friend of yours who hasn't already thought about the danger Obama faces, I'd be surprised.

I'm also unclear on why you feel it's race-baiting.

From the Encyclopedia Britannica online:

"Race baiting is the act of using racially derisive language, actions or other forms of communication, to anger, intimidate or incite a person or groups of people, or to make those persons behave in ways that are inimical to their personal or group interests."

Who exactly do you think today's cartoon was "DERISIVE" of? It wasn't derisive of black people. It wasn't derisive of illegal immigrants. If anyone, it was derisive of "bigots." Now, if you're saying today's Candorville was trying to anger or intimidate bigots, or trying to get them to behave in a way that's inimical to their personal or group interest (namely, trying to get them to stop being bigots), then you've got a point. I fail to see what's offensive about someone deriding bigots.

Also part of the definition of "race-baiting":

"This can also be accomplished by implying that there is an underlying race based motive in the actions of others towards the group baited, where none in fact exists."

Are you honestly - with a straight face - going to tell me there aren't bigots in this country who'd sooner see a black man dead than in the White House? Are you going to tell me there was no reason for Barack Obama to ask for and receive an uncommonly large contingent of secret service agents as protection? Are you going to tell me - an African American cartoonist who receives occasional death threats simply for publishing a cartoon with black characters in newspapers - that a black man running for PRESIDENT has nothing to fear?

If only Bush had watched What's Happenin'

If this sort of thing had happened in 2000, it might not have cost me nearly $40 the other day to fill up the tank on my tiny Ford Focus, two towers might still be standing in New York, and the name "Greenland" might remain an oxymoron a little bit longer:

Town Hall Defends Foxxx News from Candorville

An amused reader sent me an e-mail about a conservative blogger who took issue with a recent Candorville strip (and, though he didn't mention it, he probably wasn't too happy with the previous day either). From Town Hall:

The liberals hate Fox News with a passion because it is fast proving that Americans prefer not to be lied to [*ironic-licious link added -D. Bell*]. Fox brings both sides of political issues and probably have more liberal commentators on staff than do most other news services. Thus, they do not bring us only the liberal side. The liberals just can't stand that and try to trivialize them as often as they can. More evidence that politics should be kept out of comics is "Candorville's" Dec. 7 comic strip, which attempts to trivialize Fox News because it has many "foxes" on its staff who wear short skirts and show much cleavage, and they think that's the reason why Fox is "whipping up on" all the other Cable stations and networks. As if all of them don't have many foxes with short skirts and cleavage. Does this artist (and other liberals) really think we are so ignorant as to not be aware of this? Notice they also refer to it with three xes, as if the whole network is "triple-x." Subtle. Too bad. When he stays away from politics, I actually enjoy this strip. (Candorville, 12/7/07)

All I have to say to that is...



Oh, and this...



Oh yeah, there's also this...



(I probably should've warned you I was posting clips from Foxxx, they could probably get you fired if you watched them at work. Seriously.)

Yes, I'm sure just like Lemont, all those people who somehow think we found WMD in Iraq watch Fox News for the accuracy of their reporting. I don't know how I and "the liberals" could have been so wrong.

In fact, that's enough blogging, I have some accuracy to go watch...

This just in: Huckabee is Jesus

According to Mike Huckabee, his recent surge in the polls is due to divine intervention. But now we know Huckabee himself is divine, because the bookcase dressed to look like a cross floats right behind his head. I guess they thought stringing christmas lights around his forehead as if they were a crown of thorns would've been a little over the top.

Friday Movie: The Jerk

Sometimes revelations that the President's been lying about WMD again and "can't recall" hearing about the CIA's torture-tape coverup make you want to write out a long, detailed, link-filled post. Other times, it can make you want to tune out and watch Steve Martin:

Somebody get Larry Craig off the Computer

Several weeks ago, Candorville commented on the amusing phenomenon of gay-hating Republican politicians who turn out to be gay themselves. In response to this hairy issue, some hardcore conservatives shot off no less than two dozen e-mails assuring me I had it all wrong. Looks like they're right: not all gay-haters are secretly scouring airport men's rooms looking for a good time.Some of them are sitting at home in the dark, frantically researching their gayness on Conservapedia.

(As of this writing, every single one of the most-viewed pages has something to do with homosexuality, from an alleged increased risk of disease to gayness in Scottland).

Now this is why I think they should teach about homosexual behavior in Health class, so the Larry Craig's of the country wouldn't have to rely on shady, agenda-driven websites when they're worried about catching hepatitis.

Thanksgiving Message for 2007

I'm too busy nursing an upset stomach from too much turkey, mashed potatoes, sweet potato, greens, fruit tort, and ham - and too busy preparing to spend money I don't have on whatever this week's commercials convinced me I need to buy tomorrow - to post a Thanksgiving message. So, I thought I'd let one of America's most crotchety novelists, William S. Burroughs, say it for me:



Happy Thanksgiving!

Clinton follows Bush's lead on the Media

This is exactly what we need -- four more years of this crap:

Reporters who have covered the hyper-vigilant campaign say that no detail or editorial spin is too minor to draw a rebuke. Even seasoned political journalists describe reporting on Hillary as a torturous experience. Though few dare offer specifics for the record--"They're too smart," one furtively confides. "They'll figure out who I am"--privately, they recount excruciating battles to secure basic facts. Innocent queries are met with deep suspicion. Only surgically precise questioning yields relevant answers. Hillary's aides don't hesitate to use access as a blunt instrument, as when they killed off a negative GQ story on the campaign by threatening to stop cooperating with a separate Bill Clinton story the magazine had in the works. Reporters' jabs and errors are long remembered, and no hour is too odd for an angry phone call. Clinton aides are especially swift to bypass reporters and complain to top editors. "They're frightening!" says one reporter who has covered Clinton. "They don't see [reporting] as a healthy part of the process. They view this as a ruthless kill-or-be-killed game."

Despite all the grumbling, however, the press has showered Hillary with strikingly positive coverage. "It's one of the few times I've seen journalists respect someone for beating the hell out of them," says a veteran Democratic media operative. The media has paved a smooth road for signature campaign moments like Hillary's campaign launch and her health care plan rollout and has dutifully advanced campaign-promoted themes like Hillary's "experience" and expertise in military affairs. This is all the more striking in light of the press's past treatment of Clinton--particularly during her husband's White House years--including endless stories about her personal ethics, frostiness, and alleged Lady Macbeth persona.

It's enough to make you suspect that breeding fear and paranoia within the press corps is itself part of the Clinton campaign's strategy. And, if that sounds familiar, it may be because the Clinton machine, say reporters and pro-Hillary Democrats, is emulating nothing less than the model of the Bush White House, which has treated the press with thinly veiled contempt and minimal cooperation. "The Bush administration changed the rules," as one scribe puts it--and the Clintonites like the way they look. (To be sure, no one accuses the Clinton team of outright lying to the press, as the Bushies have done, or of crossing other ethical lines. And reporters say other press shops--notably those of Rudy Giuliani and John Edwards--are also highly combative.)

So far, the strategy has worked brilliantly. In the current climate, where the mainstream media is under attack from both conservatives and liberals, Clinton may have picked the right moment to get tough with the press. But, as the murmur of discontent among the fourth estate grows--and Hillary's coverage has taken a sharper tone since a widely panned debate performance late last month--even some Hillary supporters fear that the strategy may produce a dangerous backlash.

Assuming Clinton wins the presidency, I'd just like to thank the Clinton team in advance for providing "Candorville" with at least four years of material.

Penguins are always stealing jobs from Latinos

If you live in Houston, you may have noticed that the Chronicle, in an effort to provide entertainment geared toward Houston's large penguin population, has replaced the comic strip La Cucaracha with a strip about a group of penguins living in the Arctic Circle -- a subject that's obviously far more relevant to Houston readers than a strip about Latinos and immigration. The Chronicle has one of the largest comics sections in the nation. Surely they could've found something else to cut (maybe something whose creator died during the Black Plague).

If you're a Houstonite (or if you're not but you still read the paper) and a La Cucaracha fan, let the Chronicle know what you think about that by emailing comics@chron.com or calling 713-362-3222.
•
•
•

Harry Reid: the paper tiger roars

Harry Reid remembered his backbone today when he warned that Ted Olsen, the man who made the argument that convinced the Supreme Court to stop Florida from recounting its votes and hand the presidency to George W. bush, won't be confirmed as Attorney General (if Bush nominates him). Fearing that "Ted Olsen" is merely English for "Alberto Gonzalez," Reid rightly insists Olsen isn't the right man to clean up Gonzalez's mess. Apparently "highly partisan" is no longer an asset on one's résumé when they come before the Senate for confirmation. We'll see if Reid sticks to that.

I can think of nine Republicans who would make great candidates for Alberto Gonzalez's old job.

•
•
•

Losing as an art form

From Rolling Stone.

In head-to-head polling against the likes of Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney, Clinton and Obama have managed to post only modest leads. Edwards, by contrast, not only bests every Republican candidate in the race, he trounces them -- by an average of twelve points.

Naturally, that means the Democrats won't nominate Edwards.

•
•
•

If we have universal healthcare, the terrorists win

I recently received an angry e-mail from a reader who was sure I'm a supporter of universal health coverage. He was right, but what struck me was his suggestion that this makes me a terrorist-hugging jihadist. I suspected the genius didn't come up with this brilliant notion on his own, and sure enough, a quick Google search turned up the likely culprit. It was no surprise...

If the Media were Liberal...

If the Media were truly Liberal, this (minus the sarcastic bookends) is the kind of thing we'd see during the day after Oprah, instead of after Midnight on a Saturday:

"Stephanie Miller Show" goes slumming with Candorville's Darrin Bell

For some unknown reason, Elayne Boosler, guest hosting the Stephanie Miller Show on Jones Radio Network (& aired on many Air America affiliates), decided to spend a few minutes interviewing yours truly this morning. I didn't post about this beforehand or tell friends or family because it would scare the hell out of me knowing that people were actually listening to me live. "They" say most Americans fear public speaking more than they fear death, and for a cartoonist who's used to spending his days alone, half-naked in a tiny studio with only his characters to keep him company, death would be #3. #2 would be having to wear pants.

Still, I sit for interviews whenever I'm asked because, hell, this is a dream come true for me -- creating cartoons that strangers (who don't owe me anything) spend a few precious, irretrievable seconds out of their days to read -- and when someone asks me to talk about that on the radio or TV or a panel discussion, it's a reminder that it's actually happening, that that little kid who "wasted time" drawing Optimus Prime and Snoopy in his textbooks actually became what he wanted to be.

Here's the interview. Behind this buffer of time, it isn't so scary. From today's Stephanie Miller Show:

Why Bush should be Impeached

I still have no idea why Barack Obama believes the current administration's violations of our Constitutional rights do not constitute "grave breaches." I'm sure his desire to not be impeached himself, should he win, has nothing to do with it. Watch this recent Bill Moyers special (in 5 parts) for a less self-interested assessment:

Obama's odd reason for opposing impeachment

Barack Obama on the incompetence and secrecy of the Bush administration, and on why impeaching them is unacceptable:

"There's a way to bring an end to those practices, you know: vote the bums out," the presidential candidate said, without naming Bush or Cheney. "That's how our system is designed."
-USA Today

Well, no. Our system was actually designed so that we can remove criminal officials through impeachment.

He goes on:

"I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breeches, and intentional breeches of the president's authority," he said.

Illegally spying on millions of Americans in violation of the Fourth Amendment, holding American citizens without providing access to counsel for years, torturing captives, evidence of felonious vote caging (aimed at denying Blacks their right to vote), etc., don't constitute "grave breeches"? Exactly what would constitute a "grave breech" in Obama's mind? And what does he mean "intentional breeches"? Does he think Bush spied on Americans by accident?