A clean, well-lit place to vent
Please feel free to contribute to this frequently-updated forum, which posts selected commentary on our favorite comic strip. If you’d like your critique to be posted, please note that civility, if not approbation, counts. Click here to submit a comment.
Today's 10-years-ago Flashback strip, which I missed seeing the first time around and was glad to be able to view today, is proof positive not only that the U.S. enjoys freedom of speech but also uses it properly, to afflict the comfortable. I see many YouTube videos depicting trivial “first amendment tests” where adolescent or retarded-development videographers go out in public and try to provoke a reaction by taking pictures of things no one (other than adolescent/retarded-development videographers and some misguided cops) cares about. What a relief to view genuine and effective protest against real government ineptitude.
Today's Doonesbury, with Joanie explaining why she abandoned her child, harkens back to my first year out of college when I would have been non-judgmental of her decision. Thirty-plus years later I now realize that we have 'evolved' (or is that devolved?) into an emasculated culture where: A man abandons his child and it is the man's fault. A woman abandons her child and it is the man's fault. Hopefully, women will some day be held accountable to criticisms of abandonment the way men have always been. Glossing over it the way today's cartoon does doesn't acknowledge the huge damage done to kids who suffer through such 'I was finding myself' abandonment. It is a permanent scar.
What are you setting Zonker and Zipper up for? I am worried about these two. Zipper for being so dense, and Zonker for possibly landing in jail.
And just to think; that 17-year-old is now a grandmother.
Do I see Zonker starting to Break Bad?
Today's video about Van Gogh's "Starry Starry Night" led me to an article that says turbulence is the great unsolved mystery of classical physics. Good stuff! Thanks!
"Alpha House" is good. Really, really good. Bit if I could choose, I'd stick with the daily Doonesbury, which was a habit for decades.
Oh boy, here it comes, one of my favorite Duke lines: "Brain to eyeballs: will not compute." Hurray for unexpected reunions!
Back in the '70s, I knew a few NCAA players whose trainers passed out the performance-enhancing drugs like they used to pass out salt tabs. Their later lives were noticeably poorer for it. Also, a possibly forgotten (today) aspect of the issue: the popularity of PEDs was at least partially in response to the dominance of the Soviet Union's, and especially East Germany's, international athletes during those times. But the speed? That was definitely an American experience that rippled across the country from the 1950s on through to Breaking Bad. GBT has had a grasp of American zeitgeist for decades and I (we) love his work because of it.
I love the publication details in Monday's 1978 "amphetamine scandal" breaking news story about Duke: The realistic masthead, "Washington Post SPORTS Monday"; the authentic page layout and page refs; and especially the credit under the headline, "By Richard Redfern." I definitely missed that the first time around.
As a psychologist, I loved Sunday's strip that speaks to the genetic/biological predispositions of political behavior. There's no consistent ideological distinction between liberal and conservative, but there are very consistent personality differences between the people we label that way. Sensitivity to threat seems to be the biggest single factor. The role of the amygdala is not simple, but certainly involved -- e.g. John McCain doesn't seem to have one. The evidence for genetic factors is strong. There's a good book -- Predisposed: Liberals, Conservatives, and the Biology of Political Differences, by John Hibbing, et. al. -- that explains the research and speculates on the evolution of the types. I'm glad to see this stuff make Doonesbury. It's important for understanding our political mess.