A couple of things about Oliphant's cartoon:

1) Yes, it was cringe-inducing. And I'm a liberal.

2) I was surprised that he showed Bush as a "captive" of the Cuban anti-Castro lobby.

This is another example of a disturbing trend in the media: portraying Bush as captive of forces beyond his control.

Are they suggesting that he is weak and clueless?

That is just as disturbing as the caricature of the Cubans.

3) Oliphant is an equal opportunity basher. That, after all, is the textbook definition of a political cartoonist. Having practiced that unique form of journalism I can testify that the same rules apply:

a) Comfort the afflicted and

b) afflict the comfortable.

If you follow Oliphant (and I have since the early 70's) you know he's whacked EVERYONE at one point or another. That's his job. And he's done it better and longer than anyone of his generation.

If that sounds like I'm a fan, why yes, I am. But I know he doesn't pull any punches. Liberals, conservatives, Dems, Reps, everyone gets whacked by the master.

Tell you what. I'm going to draw a little cartoon. Will you publish it on your web site, and defend me? It'll be very funny. I'll draw a bunch of short, balding men with huge glasses clutching briefcases full of money, surrounding a hapless, helpless-looking Bush. They'll be threatening to foreclose on the White House, mess up his bank accounts and sue him if he doesn't get tougher on Arafat.

Won't that be clever?

I've been reading Oliphant on and off for over 20 years. I even used to know a lady in Chicago who was friends with him. He is far from an equal-opportunity basher in my eyes. But that's not important.

What is important is that in this latest cartoon, Oliphant's afflicting the afflicted and comforting the comforted. Worse, he's gone beyond being just another predictable paint-by-numbers left-wing cartoonist. Now he's in the realm of hate, and someone needs to be pointing it out.

Of course, it's nothing new. The left has been vicious toward Cuban refugees, and apologetic toward the torture-happy butcher-regime of Castro, for over 40 years. It's just disgusting, and I won't stop pointing that out. It needs to be said, again and again, and I'll keep on saying it even if I'm the only one.

If he had stereotyped blacks or Jews this way, his career in America would be over. Now frankly, I would not agree with that either; just because a man publishes something racist and hateful, that doesn't justify destroying his career. But I won't stay silent in the face of this sort of crap. He should be ashamed.

Moreoever, I'm embarassed that any American would make excuses for his hate.

It seems that we Cuban-Americans can do no good. During the Eli·n Gonz·lez

crisis, we were faulted for not following the rule

of law. Now, in making our opinions known about U.S.

relations to Cuba, mostly through legal and peaceful means, we

are bashed as Mafia hit-men. The right to lobby our

elected representatives is not only constitutionally guaranteed,

but a duty for the preservation of representative

government. But according to Oliphant some groups

have more of that right than others. Tell that to the

Israel lobby in Congress! Cuban-Americans are doing

no more, nor less, than other groups in the American

constituency--making their interests known and

exerting their legal rights. If Oliphant does not

like that, maybe he should try drawing caricatures

of the U.S. legal and political system. Let's see how far

that gets him.

Well, OK. Again, let me state what I said before: the cartoon was cringe-inducing. But in an odd sort of way, that's the point.

But here is why you should keep reading:

This morning's Wall Street Journal carries an article by political cartoonist Jeff Danziger. The article is a remembrance of sorts for David Low, the famous World War II British political cartoonist, inventor of Colonel Blimp and Mussolini's pneumatic chin among others.

What caught my eye was a passage recounting how Low kept going despite the howls of protest from his targets:

"[Low] was maintained, against his enemies, by his publisher, Lord Beaverbrook, who agreed with none of Low's opinions but knew that people enjoyed the cartoons for their skill and wit. Besides, they sold papers. Agreeing with the cartoonist had little to do with it.

"And that, I suppose, is what rankles today. The enjoyment of wit, especially angry wit, is an acquired taste. Not many Americans have it... An angry person in our midst, spitting vitriol...drawing something angry, is thought odd, maladjusted...."

Danziger goes on to describe Low's targets in the 30's:

"Low whacked the fascists and communists years before the true hideousness of their plans emerged, but he was as much mocking Hitler's short German pomposity, Mussolini's empty Italian boastfulness and Stalin's thick Russian brutality. He captured Neville Chamberlain's arch English stupidity in a few brush strokes. Readers loved it. In all respects he was politically incorrect, but prescient, so that when the fighting actually started the British had a pretty clear idea who the enemy was."

The point isn't whether you agree or disagree; the point isn't to be "correct", politically or otherwise; the point is to let the artist call it the way he sees it.

"Political cartoons try to grab the unstable moods as they emerge from day to day. It is a perishable art -- that is, until many years later, when historians search for how people responded to seminal events."

Danziger bemoans the fact that Low, today, might not even be recognized:

"...the real art these days is getting most publishers to agree that they should run anything but the most superficial commentary expressed in what is tellingly called a 'gag'...Political art itself, especially the not nice kind, is declining....But there are times...when mere India ink, draftsmanship and wit, humor and disgust, are far more convincing than all the words in the world."

Dean,

Let me preface my remarks first. I have lost faith in the American media since the mid 90's. This Oliphant cartoon is really low. I can only think of one reason for it appearing in May 2002.

It's campaign season. If my hypothesis is true you can look forward to seeing further slams against George W. It's quite obvious the left are sore at losing the Presidential election in 2002. That's why they want to choose Bush's federal court nominees for him. It is also the reason they slammed his cabinet choices.

Remember how the left criticized Bush for not appointing any "black" cabinet members in 2003? Appointing a socialist to a cabinet position is the sine qua non for being black. The left wants only racial diversity, not diversity of opinion.

This illustrates the true character of the left in America. Since the left really believes they won the Presidential contest in 2002 they must go after Bush in any sleazy way possible. Please note this is also the same tactic used by the left against Republicans since losing control for BOTH houses of congress in 1994. I suspect this will backfire in 2002 since Americans will tire of this horsehockey. I hope the media will not figure this out until after November 5.

American politics has gone in the toilet the past ten years. I just hope we can get our voters out in force on November 5 to reverse this trend. The only thing that will stop this unfair bitterness is losing. The Democrats will continue using these nasty tactics as long as it succeeds.

Respectfully,

Kevin Brehmer

Gosh fellas, maybe you're missing the subtext here, is that possible?

At the risk of thrashing an expired equine creature let me make the following observation:

The punchline of the cartoon doesn't come from the fact that the Cubans are portrayed as gangsters; if that's all it was, it wouldn't be funny.

Just like, Dean, your proposal for a cartoon showing a bunch of fat Jewish guys harassing Bush about his support for Arafat...it's not FUNNY, because it misses the point, not because it's insulting to Jewish people.

Hell, you could show them with sidelocks and skullcaps carrying sacks of bagels; it still wouldn't be funny because it misses the point!

Would people be outraged at the stereotypical portrayal of Jews? Probably.

But would they think it was funny and to the point? Nope. Because ... it just wouldn't be a skillful cartoon that GOT TO THE ESSENTIAL POINT OF THE MATTER.

The Cuban cartoon meets that test; the punchline comes from the (admittedly vitriolic) opinion that Bush will do anything to win Florida for himself and the greater Bush family (including Jeb).

In other words, Bush is the punchline. Not the Cubans.

The fact is, the Cuban community voted overwhemingly for Bush and against Clinton-Gore-Reno.

The fact is (why am I explaining this?!) Bush NEEDS Florida to win re-election. The 'toon Cubans know this and are using it to their advantage; timing is everything -- they know Carter's trip to Cuba focuses everyone's attention on the current President.

Then why weren't they shown as suave, sophisticated romantic Latin lovers instead of pidgin-English speaking gangsters?

Here's how I see it:

The last time we saw the Cuban community in the media was during the Elian Gonzalez fiasco. I think many people will remember his uncles' family as being somewhat belligerent/bellicose and rude, whatever.

Accurate? Who knows. I just know that's how they appeared to many people I know. That's their opinion. They might be wrong.

You might disagree with that perception, but that's YOUR opinion. YOu might be wrong.

Obviously Oliphant chose one picture over the other. And that's HIS opinion. He might be wrong.

Really guys, I don't see anything in the cartoon that relates to Castro at all.

But that's just my opinion, I might be wrong.

But while we're on the subject, what did you think of the movie Scarface? Were you offended by Al Pacino's characterization of Tony Montana? OK, Pacino didn't write the script or greenlight the project; but you know what I mean.

I would guess that the movie confirmed your worst opinions of left-leaning Hollywood movie-studio executives?

And...I promise not to post anymore stuff on this topic! The horse is dead already!!

I believe what Ara is missing is the primary point of my whole article: that Cubans in America have been portrayed the way Oliphant portrayed them--brutal thugs holding the American political system hostage--for decades now. Yes, I said decades. There's nothing new, clever, or original about this.

I'm glad Ara wouldn't be outraged by obnoxious Jewish caricatures, but I stand by my observation that Oliphant's career would be badly injured had he drawn the cartoon I described--stereotyped Jewish bankers and lawyers threatening Bush if he wasn't tougher on Arafat.

The Left has always been nasty toward Cuban refugees. The subtext is always the same: they fled a Worker's Paradise because they are thugs who didn't want to be part of the new, more enlightened system Castro and Guevara brought to the island. Furthermore, people who hate communism (and therefore despise Castro) are part of the "paranoid mindset" that's done so much "damage" to the American political process. It's boilerplate that's been in constant circulation for generations.

Both Democrats and Republicans vie for the Cuban vote; the Republicans usually get it because they have historically been more tough on Communism, although there are of course exceptions. Hell, it was Kennedy who created the embargo, and no Democratic President since has made any serious moves to undo it (although Carter was/is known to view it with antipathy). Many who view Castro's critics as vile have long portrayed both parties as being hijacked by/in the thrall of/mindlessly pandering to Cuban voters, and constantly insinuate that this is the only reason for the embargo's continuation.

Never mind that Castro's the biggest mass-murderer in the Western hemisphere. Never mind that countless refugees fled torture and political imprisonment at his hands. Never mind that many of them have friends and family who have been killed or imprisoned by Castro for having politically incorrect views. It's all about those gangsters holding the political process hostage.

As for the bit about Bush being lashed this way and that by various forces: if he weren't being portrayed as overly influenced by this constituency or that, he'd be portrayed as a right-wing ideologue and "cowboy" who won't listen to anyone else--which, come to think of it, is how most of his critics were portraying him during his first year in office.

No, it seemed pretty clear to me that this was just another cheap shot at Cuban refugees and, just as important, their friends and supporters. And a good way to tie Bush to them, since it's almost universally assumed on the Left that influence by Cuban refugees is a bad thing. They always follow the paint-by-numbers pattern Oliphant used here: brutal thugs threatening the American political system. It's as big a stereotype as saying Jews control the banks and the legal system.

Let me end by saying this: I'm quite ambivalent about the embargo myself. I'm not ambivalent about the plight of Cubans or the way they are so nastily treated by people who spend much of their time mouthing platitudes about human rights. The cartoon wasn't clever. It was a repeat of the same stereotypes the left always (I repeat, always) uses about Cuban refugees and their political supporters.

Aww, poor babies. Did any one ever tell you that LIBERALS SUCK !

Prepare yourselves, buy a big jar of vasoline, because, this Fall will mark the return of a new improved REPBULICAN CONGRESS!

Every town must have a place where phony hippies meet, psychadelic dungeons popping up on every street.

Union Square pacifists abound. And of course, our generation X players at the War Protestors League on Lafayette Street. Don't worry, we have an eye on it.

It would be nice if you made sure the cartoon referred to was actually available to view...
The link goes to another Oliphant cartoon.

you guys suck because on the main thing it says that there would be political cartoons in the website and there wasn't at all. You know some people really do read these things for homework assignments. So maybe you should do something about that. Well thanks for your time, bye!!
hi

Hi! Nice site! Please visit our site also http://www.someviagra.info/ . (Viagra) see you soon

Truely tremendous blog!