Mike Luckovich

By RW-(the original)

October 24, 2005 09:23 PM | Link to this

First we get a column with someone describing their body parts and now Mike draws this. (Note to ml: I hope this nose translates better in print)

My only question is why does Mike think Greenspan has a ‘possum for a pet?

By S. Awman

October 25, 2005 01:32 AM | Link to this

The ajc is primarily an entertainment for intercity progressives. The bear dances for the people who throw coins. It’s not right or wrong it is just survival in a declining market.

One definition of intelligence is “the ability to succeed in a changing environment”. Progressives have been losing for at least 13 years. But, they have entertainment value like bears in cages.

By Dusty

October 25, 2005 09:50 AM | Link to this

Well, I thought Mike Luckovich had sunk pretty low with the Harriet Miers’ cartoon. But, by golly, he has managed to get lower than dirt. OH, let’s ridicule the old folks. Look at that big nose, those sagging jowls, the cane and big glasses. Isn’t that a howl!! That’s old Greenspan who did great work for the country under George Bush!! HaHa Let’s get ‘em!!

I knew this was the age of bad manners and Luckovich is a prime example. Manners and respect have gone right out the window with standards and ethics in journalism. Political cartoonists think they are exempt from all such “restrictions”. Maybe Luckovich’s grandparents will tell him what a jerk he is.

By Ricky

October 25, 2005 10:00 AM | Link to this

Is that suppossed to be Andrea Mitchell with the soup? Mike, while I agree that Ralph Reed is a hypocrite and deserves to be called on it, lets see some cartoons on Jesse Jackson or Louis Farrakhan or Hillary or Charlie Rangel exploiting their hyprocrisy. How about when Charlie Rangel compared our President to racist leaders back in the sixties. I would love to see some balance from you Mike. You might actually be able to earn some respect from moderates who are tired of seeing the same type cartoons based of the left’s or right’s talking points.

By SarahConnah

October 25, 2005 10:16 AM | Link to this

‘scze me…but isn’t that what Alan and Andrea look like. I mean…sheesh… Message from Lucy and Desi: “Lighten up Ricky.”

By Hal

October 25, 2005 10:44 AM | Link to this

Amazing likenesses, Mike. You’ve done it again! Good work, man.

By Conrad

October 25, 2005 11:07 AM | Link to this

I think that the AJC should revamp itself. I want them to only print news that is positive, that shows President Bush and the rest of the administration in a positive light.

All news should show the positive side, and beat liberalism until it becomes a docile animal unable to fight.

By E.G. Salomon

October 25, 2005 12:18 PM | Link to this

*I want them to only print news that is positive, that shows President Bush and the rest of the administration in a positive light.

All news should show the positive side, and beat liberalism until it becomes a docile animal unable to fight.*

So you basically want a media that won’t post stuff like what happenned in New Orleans, because that’d be “negative news”; that you want a 24/7 newscover of Bush reading for children, regardless of a war going on or a possible avian fluy epidemy because that’d be “positive news”.

Well, that can be granted… If you live in Fairy World.

In this world, there’s always good things and bad thing going on, and (capable) people should be able to embrace/deal with it accordingly. If your psyche’s too fragile that it can’t handle bad news, then you’re just being a waste of space.

Which brings the following question: If conservatism’s the “righteous” and dominant side, then why in the world does it feel threatened by a few liberals? If you’re in the right in all senses, why you think a relatively few left wingers will bring the country’s demise? Is it because your strong facade is actually hiding a weak soul or something?

And frankly, one thing I learned over the years is that anyone deeply involved in politics, regardless he/she is a republican or a democrat, is a plain hypocrit.

Why, if it were a Democrat President on the White House, I bet the conservatives would be here praising Mike for “mocking such an inept president”, while the liberals would be accusing them for being “neo con whiners”.

A vicious circle I tell you…

By Mike

October 25, 2005 12:24 PM | Link to this

Congratulations! You have captured the essence of Alan Greenspan, economics, and retirement in one picture and a short dialogue. Thanks for a good laugh to start the day.

By Susan

October 25, 2005 12:41 PM | Link to this

What’s up with the people who want the “positive light” shed on the shrub? That light was blown out a long time ago. I, for one, am glad that we have Mike to bring us a true picture of what is right and wrong with our country. Love the cartoons and I read them every day! Thanks, Mike!!

By John

October 25, 2005 12:45 PM | Link to this

Excellent as usual Mike. By the way - I knew it was a cat on the chair. It looks like a cat. An old cat but a cat.

Don’t listen when the children say it looks like a ‘poosum. It’s just another lame attempt at trying to be clever. They always scream “that liberal is being mean to me and calling me names” as they belittle liberals with childish comments of their own.

By Chris

October 25, 2005 12:53 PM | Link to this

The funny thing about reading all these posts is that Greenspan is in an apolitical job. He has served Presidents from both parties and served them well. He is one of the people Clinton can thank for having great economies while in office. Hey E.G. no real conservatives are worried about a few liberls as you claim. As a conservative, I know that we win when the issues are actually debated without either side throwing out propoganda(notice I said both sides). There is a reason there has only been one Dem president in the last 25 yrs and why they are in the minority in both houses of Congress. So, no I am not worried at all.

By Dana

October 25, 2005 12:56 PM | Link to this

Mean old liberals, always picking on us conservatives. We’re the only ones that get to call people names. They should know that by now. Boo-hoo! They’re so mean. I’m gonna take my ball and go home. So there!

By Dusty

October 25, 2005 12:59 PM | Link to this

No, Salomon, conservatives do not feel “threatened” by a few whining liberals. What I object to is a constant barrage of ridicule by Luckovich against distinguished people in our government. Yesterday, Miers who is White House Counsel, was made to look like a scarecrow passing out French fries. Today, Greenspan is made to look like an old crone at Halloween. Big laugh!! Strangely enough, there are NO liberal figures passed off as fools by Luckowich. And AJC claims to be a “balanced ” newspaper. Maybe the New York Times could help them decide what is ethical and what is blatant bias.

You don’t seem to know the difference either, E.G.

By Harry

October 25, 2005 01:00 PM | Link to this

Charlie Rangel earned the right to say anything he wants about YOUR draft-dodging frat boy. Unlike most of the current republicans in government, Congressman Rangel served his country honorably and was awarded the Purple Heart and Bronze Star. The current bunch of republican chickenhawks don’t mind sending poor and middle class kids off to die in their OIL war; but they still have other priorities for their own kids and grandkids.

Alan Greenspan, the republican, is a political hack. Good riddance! He regularly used his position against the previous administration, raising interest rates every three months to sabotage the expanding Clinton economy. Greenspan has ignored basic economic principles trying to prop-up the failing bush economy. Turning billions of dollars of surplus into debt is not a problem now. He is not concerned when the country has deficit spending AND massive tax cuts or even the effects of record oil and gas prices. Like Brownie, he’s been doing a heck of a job!

By Joe

October 25, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this

All these conservative/republican cry babies are making me sick. Grow up and realize your president and his administration are incompetent!

By Chris

October 25, 2005 01:23 PM | Link to this

So lets get this straight. Charlie Rangel, who has made some of the most outrageous and unfounded claims, can say anything he wants. So by your judegement, it would have been okay for John McCain or Bob Dole to say anything they wanted to about Bill Clinton, an admitted draft dodger. Would you have been okay with you Harry? And your rant against Greenspan is totally unfounded. Many Dems have praised Greenspan for his job in handling the economy in both good and bad times. Not everyone is a political hack, Harry

By Ricky

October 25, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

Harry, I would be willing to bet there are more Republicans serving in govt right now that served in our military than Dems

By IL-logical

October 25, 2005 01:45 PM | Link to this

Let me see ,”Fair and Balanced”: if someone your side doesn’t agree with says..The sun rises in the East…someone then must argue in the opposite..to make it “Fair and Balanced” Me, I ‘m from the Sgt. Joe Friday school: “Just the facts mame”

By kimberly

October 25, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this

Ricky, can I get a piece of that bet? HAHAHA! Please try to prove that before the afternoon is over. Please? Hahaha!

By Scott

October 25, 2005 01:54 PM | Link to this

Sheesh, when will this childish “Liberal vs. Conservative” bickering end? Grow up, all of you!! (Especially you right-wing whiners!)

By Conrad

October 25, 2005 01:56 PM | Link to this

President Bush is an excellent president. And history will go to show that he was a fearless leader that lead us into the 21st century. All of the badmouthing from the liberals will not be recorded, and only Bush’s impervious record will be left to stand.

Enjoy your cartoons by Mike. They do nothing but make us laugh at you as you struggle trying to capture your last breath.

P.S. Only positive news should be put out. The negativity does nothing for this country.

By quanxavier

October 25, 2005 02:00 PM | Link to this

I take great exception to all conservatives calling Mike’s cartoons an unbalanced. He has on many ocassions taken to task the likes of Bill & Hilary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, MLK III and Bill Campbell. The reason you see more conservative figures in his cartoon is ??? They are in power they are the ones that are in news cycle. W’s picks are there for scrunity and or criticism. Miers & Roberts are fair game. Cheney, Libby, Rove, Frist, & Iraq are dominating stories on FOX, MSNBC, CNN, and other media outlets. So please explain to me how Mike is picking on your guys?

By E.G. Salomon

October 25, 2005 02:18 PM | Link to this

Chris - Fair enough.

Dusty - You know, you had my attention until:

You don’t seem to know the difference either, E.G.

If I didn’t know any better, I believe you just labeled me as a liberal for the sake of belittling me.

Anyway…

While I admit that for instance the latest Miers cartoon is just plain bullying by the cartoonist, at the same time I have to say that people has grown rather thin skins (I blame the Political Correctness BS).

Over the past years, far more distinguished people (even the Pope himself) had been mocked by cartoonists of all kinds and people could laugh about it without any kind of guilt/repercussion because they were able to think for themselves and draw their own conclusions.

Anyhoo, seen several conservative cartoonists in other newspapers/magazines and frankly, some of them are just as bad as Luckovich in terms on picking on the opposition.

In fact, there are even some that go to ridiculous extremes

The AJC may lack balance, but there is indeed balance in the big picture; it’s just a matter broadening the sources.

And frankly, I once said that it’s practically impossible to be an impartical political cartoonist: Either you’re a right winger or a left winger, like it or not. That’s why I wouldn’t like to follow that path; I might end up losing my own opinion in the process.

By E.G. Salomon

October 25, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

P.S. Only positive news should be put out. The negativity does nothing for this country.

No, you’re thinking of pessimism; pessimism does nothing for the country.

Pointing what’s wrong in the country however helps pinpoint problems in order to figure a way to solve them.

Ex: “Georgia is last place in education” What it means? That something has to be done in order to solve this, not a way to bum you out as some think.

Honestly, how would you feel if someone sold you a beautiful $2 Mill house, but neglected to tell you that it’s full of termites and has a faulty plumbing just because he “didn’t want to bother you with negativity”?

By Harry

October 25, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

FYI, Chris and Ricky Bill Clinton is not actually a draft-dodger, he had a high number in the lottery and was never called. However, the list of republicans chickenhawks who activily avoided the draft or combat, but are NOW warmongers is well documented: George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Dennis Hastert, Tom DeLay, Trent Lott, Jeb Bush, Saxby Chambliss, Don Nickles, Joe Scarborough, Newt Gingrich, Richard Armey, and on and on! Don’t forget Lush Scumbaugh, Pat Robertson, Neal Boortz, Jerry Falwell, Sean Hannity, Bill Kristol, Bill O’Reilly, George Will, Michael Savage and the whole FOX News network from the CEO on down!

By Bud

October 25, 2005 02:53 PM | Link to this

Harry, From your post, it is quite obvious that you are completely uneducated. Alan Greenspan serves no political agenda. The only thing that wrecked the ecomony was the overinflated stock prices of the .COM era. Remember that? Go read a book on the basics of the money supply and then tell me what you think of Greenspan.

By Mark

October 25, 2005 03:19 PM | Link to this

I agree with the blogger that expressed disgust at the constant liberal vs conservative bickering. This country has gotten so hooked into a far left and far right war of ideology that right and wrong doesn’t matter anymore. We need to get back to doing what is right in this country as opposed to the win at all cost, end justifies the means mentality, that has started this country down a slippery slope to nowhere. It really bothers me that what is right in this country is defined as what is profitable. We could cite example after example of commerce before country…commerce before people…etc. Until doing the right thing comes back into vogue we will continue our pell mell rush toward our own demise. Unfortunately, messes like the Tom Delay indictments illustrate just how co-opted and pimped government has become to big money interests, corporate money, interest groups and their lobbyist johns.

By Ricky

October 25, 2005 03:19 PM | Link to this

Harry, Bill said that if he had been called he would have gone to Canada, enough said. Just for the record, David Asman, who works for Fox, his son is a Marine and has served two tours in Iraq. So there you go.

By concerned citizen

October 25, 2005 03:54 PM | Link to this

If there ever was a government post that needed to remain free of political bickering, this is it. One could argue that this job is more important than any Supreme Court Justice nomination as those issues judged by the court have more to do with personal beliefs than keeping the country running. I think both sides can agree that a good economy is good for everyone. So putting the smartest economist you can find in the Fed Chair is a no brainer. This guy sounds qualified, even if he was nominated by Bush (who is notorious for returning favors in the form of political appointments). I think most Americans are happy if they can feel good about the security of their job and their prospects for saving money or affording their standard of living. All those political hotbutton issues that get the majority of the attention in this country aren’t nearly as important to daily life as they are made out to be. But the economy is. Let’s get this one right, uuummm, I mean correct.

By The72John

October 25, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this

Perhaps Mike should start each day with a definition of “satire”, so that Dusty and RW and their friends won’t be confused.

See, Greenspan really IS old and he really DOES have a pretty respectable schnoz. Anyone who takes this cartoon as anything but a good-humored homage to Greenspan’s retirement is not only congenitally stupid, but utterly lacking in humor and proportion.

Good god, you people. Get a grip on life.

By Mark

October 25, 2005 05:05 PM | Link to this

Sometime it seems as if “hotbutton” issues provide a smokescreen for broader, more compelling issues that are facing more and more Americans. Bread and butter issues only seem to be an issue to those who have just lost theirs. How many days of the week do we go without hearing of another massive layoff, another company outsourcing good paying jobs to cheaper labor markets. And nobody seems to care until it is their job that disappears. What about the hard working college educated 50 somethings that if they ever work again it will be for much, much less. Try telling the guy that has worked the same job in a factory for 30 years that his job is gone and now in the later stages of his life he must “retrain.” Right now, today, I know of a very large company that is set to announce the closing of 20 manufacturing facilities. This same company closed 16 last year. Companies buy out other companies with nothing more in mind than to close down the acquired facilities and sell the real estate. And yes. I know about the “global” economy the alledged “free market” (I did take economics in college)that has become a sort of bastardized version. These are issues that go straight to the heart of the American populace. We are told that the economy is humming right along only to realize that aspects of it are manipulated and a facade. How is it that an entire economy depends upon housing starts. At what point does the house of cards fall. An economy should not depend on the populace spending every cent they make and more buying stuff. How does this kind of economy survive when more and more people have less and less disposable income? I know I have gotten off topic here, but these are the type of things that are going to really impact the American way of life. How is it that we, a country that once aspired to raise the bar for others now has taken the path of least resistance and has set out to lower our standard of living to that of the 3rd world?

By Dusty

October 25, 2005 05:20 PM | Link to this

This is my last blog for today.(No applause, please!) To read these posts is the most discouraging activity around. Yes, I am a southern Christian conservative who likes to read a newspaper with unslanted, truthful information. I expect opinions on the editorial pages, but two main editors, Tucker and Bookman call the president a liar, and blame everything and anything that goes wrong on him, no matter the circumstance. Although the president was in the military but never went overseas, he is accused of not serving his country. Phony reports are concocted. Then there is Luckovich who has never drawn the president in one cartoon that wasn’t rediculous. Liberal bloggers can’t even mention the president without adding some childish ugly name to go with it. Free speech indeed. No class. No trust. No ability to understand all the difficult decisions the president has to make almost every day. With faulty information from our intelligence service and the British, the president and Congress decided on war with Iraq. Now we have the Cindy Sheehans, the repeat Jane Fondas, the Nancy Pelosis, the Ted Kennedys and many more who think they know more than the president or anybody else. No one has said the president is perfect. But he is strong and sensible. So, all you folks who know how to run the world better than Bush and Blair but probably can’t even run your own affairs, keep up your “conscientious” complaints. You may succeed in ruining our country yet.

By Sam

October 26, 2005 07:39 AM | Link to this

Hey Dusty, will you make this your last post ever?

By Dusty

October 26, 2005 09:40 AM | Link to this

Sam, did I hurt your tender feelings? I hope so.

By Sam

October 26, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this

Were you trying to, Dusty?