A Few Words in Defense of Grover Norquist and Dick Armey

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by TWI_news: A Few Words in Defense of Grover Norquist and Dick Armey http://bit.ly/dkBW69...

Yep, I'm a leftie (in fact, a wild-eyed loony leftie by today's Overton-shifted standards), and I have no use for those three folks. But I remember they did stand up against the 4th Amendment abuses initiated by the last Administration (and sadly, continued by the current bunch). Corporatist tools and jerks that they are, they were right on those Constitutional issues.

I'll assume Weigel isn't lying about this. That's not a safe assumption, but in any case the cartoonist had millions of others from which to choose. It's odd how all the “partiers” were all AWOL during the eight glorious Bush years.

If the cartoonist wants to criticize Dick Armey and Grover Norquist he can find some starting points at the links. But, criticizing them over that probably wouldn't be a good career move.

The Cartoonist would like to respond.
David–
I appreciate the your point and am sorry that you think the cartoon is a bit off. Perhaps I erred by including the Patriot Act in my little cartoon trash heap, but in general you're missing the forest for a smallish tree. The cartoon is making a much larger point about the lack of shame on the part of DC insiders for the many years of cheer leading the Bush/ Republican agenda. From the catastrophic deregulation of the financial markets, record deficit spending, to the trampling of the constitution ( not just the Patriot Act– but torture, black prison sites– the undeclared war itself ). Mr Norquist and Mr Armey were boosters for the worst kind of imperial president.

The memory hole is fast and deep for sure. It's only because of the American public's short memory that Armey and Norquist can so quickly repackage themselves as Tea Party outsiders. That's the point of the cartoon… and I stand by it.
–Matt ( not Mark ) Wuerker

But not TOOO hard against them. Would not have been tasteful.

I think this may illustrate a difference in the nature of the editorial cartoonist's job, and that of the straight-news reporter. I agree with you that Mr. Weigel is pointing out the small out-of-place tree in the otherwise properly-illustrated forest (IMO). Cartoonists can (usually) get away with this sort of thing.*

If Weigel or one of his text-providing colleagues did it, critics would seize on that minor error and hammer away at it in order to call the validity of the whole article into question. It's an old rhetorical trick, and political blog commenters just love to use it, in addition to their other tools (building a straw man, shifting the goal posts, and if really desperate, criticizing grammar/spelling). But it's a technique that can be pretty effective, so Mr. Weigel and his scribbling/typing colleagues don't have as much slack in this regard.

*I forget who among your colleagues said it many years ago – it might have been Mike Peters, or him quoting someone else – that (paraphrasing) editorial cartoonists are aspiring mob hit (wo)men who couldn't get jobs in that line of work for one reason or another

Hmm, one of my comments has gone AWOL.
How, oh how, will the internets carry on without my input???!!

Hmm, one of my comments has gone AWOL.
How, oh how, will the internets carry on without my input???!!

Thanks Aaron!