Fighting Words

by Henry on July 15, 2005

“Chris Muir”:http://www.redstate.org/story/2005/6/17/121922/392, meet “Aristotle”:http://www.fightingwordscomics.com/Toons/csnav050620.jpg. Aristotle, meet Chris Muir.

(via “PNH”:http://nielsenhayden.com/makinglight/ )

{ 13 comments }

1

Katherine 07.15.05 at 9:14 pm

Thank you.

2

ArC 07.15.05 at 11:02 pm

Muir truly is the dumb version of Bruce “Mallard Fillmore” Tinsley.

3

agm 07.16.05 at 3:55 am

Sorry to kill the humor, but could someone please explain the Chris Muir comic?

4

Barry 07.16.05 at 6:45 am

Chris is scum.

All else is elaboration upon that theme.

5

Barry 07.16.05 at 7:04 am

agm, perhaps I should elaborate. Chris has been excusing US torture in his cartoons. He harped upon the good food allegedly fed to the prisoners, and the sexual methods allegedly used.

6

Seth Finkelstein 07.16.05 at 7:26 am

agm, this is the “punchline” in the specific strip:

Character 1: “Wait, the U.S. Senator who represents Illinios voters?”

Character 2: “Per Se” [implying – In name only, he *really* “represents” souless terrorist killers who hate America.]

This is Muir’s idea of subtlety (granted, Tinsley would have spelled it out. In a large font.).

7

almostinfamous 07.16.05 at 8:49 am

This is Muir’s idea of subtlety

actuallly seth, based on the last few years of clinton and the past 4 or 5 of bush’s and personal experiences as well, it seems to me that this is the entire neocon/theocon idea of subtlety. that doesnt excuse what muir describes in his cartoons, but his other work is pretty indicative of how much kool-aid he is drinking(and peddling)
and is as such very very distressing to see.

8

Rob 07.16.05 at 10:23 am

You know you would think these uber living room warriors would have remembered from all those WWII movies where Nazis feed allied prisoners huge banquets trying to break them and then moving on to torture if the food wasn’t enough.

9

Jeremy Osner 07.16.05 at 1:00 pm

Character 2: “Per Se” [implying – In name only, he really “represents” souless terrorist killers who hate America.]

This is a kind of strange, colloquial usage of “per se” that I have heard before but I’m still not sure exactly what the speaker thinks the phrase means — it does not mean anything that would serve to make that implication.

10

anatoly 07.16.05 at 3:28 pm

erm, it’s not like the second comic is any more subtle than Muir’s.

These are two very stupid comic strips.

11

abb1 07.16.05 at 4:57 pm

Yup, you shouldn’t need Aristotle to figure this one out.

A better comic could’ve pointed out how they treat their constituency as a bunch of morons, their condescension to the plebs. It’s a bit like the Roman empire in Lives of the Twelve Caesars.

12

Adam Kotsko 07.16.05 at 6:34 pm

I at least got the Aristotle one. There’s subtlety, then there’s nonsense.

Instead of per se, he probably should have said something like “supposedly” or “ostensibly.”

13

Villaveces 07.18.05 at 9:59 am

Both dumb comic strips. But please avoid using Aristotle that way, Aristotle would not have argued that way, and his argument was not invalidated by bringing up food. There was no argument. Plus trying to combine modern human rights arguments with classical philosophy is extremely ahistorical and frankly offensive. PLEASE stop the stupidity on both sides.

Comments on this entry are closed.