Mike Luckovich

By Billy

October 26, 2005 08:35 PM | Link to this

There was a time when when I was younger I didn’t like Mike, but the older I get (47), the more I like Mike. I would have guessed it would be just the opposite. Go figure…

By gn

October 26, 2005 09:39 PM | Link to this

Mike’s up there along with perhaps Tom Toles as the best cartoonist in the country today.

By Tex

October 26, 2005 11:49 PM | Link to this

Mike, your cartoons are great! Is it not interesting that, almost without exception, your neo-con/repub detractors are filled with hatred, anger, bitterness, jealousy, non-compassion, and so much more self-hatred? Guess you don’t wear a baseball cap, drive a SU/PU truck, wear gangsta togs, and sip your courage in a sports bar!!

By Arur

October 27, 2005 02:14 AM | Link to this

Super Artur Luckovich Russia? Tomsk

By Matt Thompson

October 27, 2005 06:12 AM | Link to this

I would like to remind all those who would chastize those whom question and criticize the one’s who are supposed to lead, political dissent is the founding principle of our country. The right to demand answers from our government, and to not live in fear of it, is what truely separates us from those we call our enemies.

By mb

October 27, 2005 07:06 AM | Link to this

I would like to remind all those who would chastize those whom question and criticize the one’s who are supposed to lead, political dissent is the founding principle of our country. The right to demand answers from our government, and to not live in fear of it, is what truely separates us from those we call our enemies.

Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, but not if you’re a sheep, baaaaaaaaaaaaaaa…

By Mike NotL

October 27, 2005 07:44 AM | Link to this

Looks like Mike L had to hold the CIA PlameGate cartoon in his pocket for at least one more day… any bets on when it will hit????

This one is humorous though. (Kid behinnd the counter looks like me in H.S.)

By Les

October 27, 2005 08:22 AM | Link to this

To the 36 people (so far) who voted they didn’t like Mike - lighten up. This is a funny cartoon. It’s not making fun of any politician or political party. It is light hearted and represents quite a few Americans. Answer this question honestly: Do you vote “no” just because you don’t like Mike in general? Or, did you vote “no” because you don’t like the cartoon? (Remember not to perjure yourself.)

By gttim

October 27, 2005 08:27 AM | Link to this

But you know Republicans, they are angry and filled with hate for anybody who does not think their way. They can never like Mike. Just like with facts, they never want to let humor get in the way of their theories.

By Bob Belle Isle

October 27, 2005 10:08 AM | Link to this

Amazing…Luckovich ask “WHY” with his “cartoon” 10.26.05. If he hasn’t figured it out by now, he never will no matter how many times it’s explain- ed to him. He’s probably one of those who think no WMD were found in Iraq. Bob Belle Isle, Cartersville

By Cthomas

October 27, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

Bob, I’m amazed by your comment. You do realize that no WMD were found in Iraq, don’t you? The debate recently has been between those who think we should have known that it was uncertain whether Saddam had WMD and those who think we were right to assume he did. I am in the former camp and think we were woefully mislead by Colin Powell, Bush, and the others. I can respect people in the latter group. But no one believes we found WMD in Iraq.

This is why, for example, the New York Times stories hinting that we were “just about to” discover WMD in the first days after victory in 2003 are so controversial. We never found them. You know this, right—and are just being provocative?

By Daniel

October 27, 2005 10:43 AM | Link to this

Mike, you’re one of the best in the business. Keep it up!

By elton

October 27, 2005 10:49 AM | Link to this

Cthomas -

Actually your statement that “no WMD were found” is wrong. Some were found. Not a lot, but some.

But liberals areent really known for relying on facts are they? Better to rely on the information they recieve from bumper stickers.

By steven

October 27, 2005 10:56 AM | Link to this

Les We don’t like Mike in general. He is a hateful person. He is a liar and ahe is a hypocrite.

What’s to like?

By Bobb

October 27, 2005 11:54 AM | Link to this

Am I correct in assuming that you are making fun of porkers who knowingly eat themselves into obesity, would just as soon eat the nutrition label as read it, but will still sue the fast food provider the first chance they get for making them the fatties they are? If so, you still stink, but this cartoon gets a passing grade.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 12:06 PM | Link to this

Bob, I think you are right. The fact that people will sue restraunts because they got fat is a joke. Just another example of how our society has gotten out of control and why we need to revamp the ligitation process in this country

By Tom Frey

October 27, 2005 12:11 PM | Link to this

I am disgusted at the “WHY?” cartoon! How is it that you feel you have the right to exploit the names of valant and honorable men who gave there lives for your freedom! I wonder what their answer would have been if they had the oppertunity to be asked if they would like their names used? As a former Marine who has served in a combat area, I think you would have had the best contribution to the AJC you could produce….a blank page.

By Willy

October 27, 2005 12:42 PM | Link to this

Mike - Good work on the “Why” cartoon. I don’t think you are exploiting their names at all. Even if people don’t agree with your politics, surely they can get past their “disgust” and see that you are simply trying to ask why those honorable people lost their lives. Even in a popular war (this isn’t one) it is still a valid question.

By sheila cohen

October 27, 2005 01:01 PM | Link to this

Mike Luckovich is brilliant and inciteful. He is reason enought to subscribe to the AJC. On the days that his cartoon does not appear, I take my time in opening the paper to the editorial section. Keep telling it as it is!

By NA

October 27, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this

Mike,

Funny and inciteful - as usual. I think we may need to clarify the definition of WMD. What quantity of destruction should be labeled “mass”? Also, destruction of what? People? Infrastructure? Can someone post a good working definition?

By NA

October 27, 2005 01:14 PM | Link to this

BTW - inciteful is just a pun on the word “insightful”. Please don’t get too anal, ya’ll.

By Young

October 27, 2005 01:20 PM | Link to this

Good cartoon, Mike. But you need to return to the controversial cartoons tomorrow to get the overwhelming 300+ responses that you got for your cartoon yesterday. What a brawl that was in fray!

By Larry Taylor

October 27, 2005 01:29 PM | Link to this

It’s one thing to disagree with the war and Bush. It’s another to use the names of our fallen heroes to make a political statement, especially considering that many, if not most, of the names represented in Mike’s cartoon fully supported the mission and the president. To dishonor their memory and use their names in such a dishonest way is disgusting, and all of you cheering Mike on should be ashamed.

By Patrick Dawson

October 27, 2005 01:40 PM | Link to this

Why? The 2000 died solely so that George W. Bush could campaign as a “war president” and scare voters into not changing leadership during that “war.” Sad to say, those brave men and women died as part of Bush’s overall campaign plan.

By Bobb

October 27, 2005 01:48 PM | Link to this

Oh, I’m sorry, I thought we were supposed to comment on today’s cartoon about tubbiess who eat the packaging in addition to their food. There might be a waste management solution in that somewhere…… Anyway, so like, yesterdays cartoon did stink. Bad. Today’s can’t possibly make up for it.

By Don

October 27, 2005 01:49 PM | Link to this

Bullseye.

Mike managed to sum up in one illustration, everything I feel about this war and have felt since the beginning.

By Pal

October 27, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this

Tex, Speak for yourself. Just because I’m an intelligent open-minded man doesn’t mean that I’m a pu$$y. Being a reasonable non-follower and being a man’s-man aren’t mutually exclusive.

By Jeannine Redden

October 27, 2005 03:05 PM | Link to this

An article in today’s paper tells about the government of Iran calling for the complete inialation of Israel, and I believe this is the agenda of the Islamic extremists in Iran, Iraq as well as all the Arab nations , perhaps when wondering WHY? one should consider this as the reason. We have to start somewhere to try and stem the tide!

By bob

October 27, 2005 03:24 PM | Link to this

Mike has very good drawing skills, however his content is generally sophomoric and predictable. Ultimately, he is in the same lot as Boortz, O’Reilly and the like; always courageously proclaiming his views without actually contributing anything substantial to society. Good thing the reader doesn’t have to actually pay money to read his cartoons.

By Jon

October 27, 2005 04:45 PM | Link to this

Where is Garfield when you need Him? (Burp!)

By Doc

October 27, 2005 05:50 PM | Link to this

I think Mike L. is highly talented, but his bias gets a bit tiring. A couple of years ago he claimed to be an “independent.” I did a content analysis of his cartoons as part of a scholarly research project. He ridiculed Bush often, but not Kerry, and Kerry soudl be a cartoonists delight. Mike, you are a liberal, admit it, quit thinking or saying you are an independent. Remember, the first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem.

By Ben Miller

October 27, 2005 05:51 PM | Link to this

Mike is the most bias cartoonist in America today. I can not recall him ever chastising Democrats, or homosexual activists. He is always anti-Republican and anti-Christian. Some have deserved his scrutiny. But he was way off base when he blasted Robert Dole, a true war hero and went to bat for Bill Clinton, a true draft dodger. Dodging military service seems to be the big thing he keeps hitting Cheney, Bush, Gingrich and other Republicans about. Yet during the ‘96 election he never felt compelled to contrast the military service of those two candidates.
Why can’t the Journal hire a cartoonist who is ready to look at both parties with equal scrutiny instead of looking at everything through blue colored glasses. His actual drawings are poor and many of the messages go over the line. If he wants to know why these soldiers died why doesn’t he take a vote on those that are doing the dying now in Iraq. My son is servicing his second tour there now. He and his buddies are all pro-Bush.

By Doc

October 27, 2005 05:56 PM | Link to this

Hey, you leftist goobers, Shelia, et al. not “brilliant and inciteful,” it is “brilliant and insightful.” You may have made up a new word, however.

By the_gop_hates_me

October 27, 2005 07:32 PM | Link to this

I love how all these right-winged blow hards are attacking Mike yet all they’re doing is sitting in their double-wides, drinking Pabst, thumping their chests while they let others do the fighting. Go enlist you bunch of cowards!!!!

By TrueConservative

October 28, 2005 05:46 PM | Link to this

heres some good advice for everyone on the board here 43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

this goes for our policies in Iraq as well as on this board- We are all americans and we want the same things although we might disagree on how to get there. Theres alot of devisive politics intended to keep us warring with one another so that we dont notice the devilish corporate political Ticks on both sides who grow fat on our blood

some of you think in a democracy if you stomp the other guy you can have it all your way. you are wrong. if we dont all win, nobody wins- thats the truth of a democracy- what would happen if millions of us caught up in these issues talked this out and came up with some sort of consensus- we could march on washington and take our country back from our Corperate overlords- but it has to stop here and it has to start now- I may disagree with you but I respectfully disagree- this is the first step

By Citizen Spades

November 1, 2005 10:30 PM | Link to this

This comment is based on viewing the cartoon and then chuckling to myself, I didnt read anyone else’s comments because I’m sure they are uneducated and twisted.

This cartoon is funny because its true.

Fat people eat too much.

If you are counting calories WHY ARE YOU EATING AT MCDONALDS? If the answer is “Because it is the most affordable meal for my income range” I congratulate you on having anything to eat at all while millions of people are starving worldwide.

Thats why this cartoon is funny.

By Citizen Spades

November 1, 2005 10:36 PM | Link to this

P.S.

If you voted no, is it becuase you’re fat?

If you voted no, and it is not because you are fat, GET A #%$@& SENSE OF HUMOR.