Flaming Liberals

Elder uses many "they say" arguments to present the Liberal view, but he does so in a way that makes Liberals seem idiotic and slightly insane. Instead of calling them insane himself, he lets the liberals speak for themselves. He starts out with telling the opinions of proffessional liberals, and gradually works his way down to include everyone. "They say" president Bush is evil, which progresses into the liberal belief that conservatives are Nazis. Elder makes it clear that this closed mindset has gone too far when he gives the example of his barber, who blames president Bush for 9/11, and says that Washington D.C. is involved in some conspiracy to murder Americans. At this point, Elder does not even have to insult the Liberals, because they have already said enough.

What's Mime is Your's

There are two main points I love about this strip that remind me of today's society. In the comic laws are made against having "invisible walls", which pokes fun at our system in the United States which allows people to outlaw almost ANYTHING, such as the words "one nation under GOD" and "J-E-S-U-S" at Christmas time. This comic outlines the idiocy in the kind of society that allows people to sue McDonald's for spilling hot coffee on themselves and making them fat.
The other part about this comic that also reflects part of our society is the win-lose situation. Someone is always at the butt of the joke, and in this case, that party happens to be mimes. Even if you pass a law in an attempt to fix your problem, it becomes a problem for someone else. You really haven't solved any problem, you've just pushed it along for the next person to deal with. Eventually the pressure of the problem becomes too much to handle, which results in full-blown chaos. It was like the 1800s when the government kept pushing around the heated issue of slavery instead of solving it, which resulted in Civil War. I'm sure that if there was a sequel to this particular strip, the mimes would be finding a way to get revenge.

"Stop drunks from even starting their cars."

My columnist for this week was Joe Hurley, and he discussed the important issue of drunk driving. Hurley talks about the tragedy that occurred when Michael Gagnon chose to drink and drive. Due to his carelessness, four children and their mother are dead. Hurley goes on to explain that this tragedy didn't have to happen and could have easily been prevented if the right measures were taken. Hurley proposes that the government should mandate cars that check the driver's breath, cornea or perspiration, so their car will not start if the driver is intoxicated. Hurley believes that we should use our technology to prevent further deaths that will tear families apart.
I agree with Hurley; too many families have been bashed and battered because some idiot was able to drive drunk. My own family was a victim of such tragedy when my uncle was killed by a drunk driver many years ago. I think that stronger measures should definitely be taken to prevent such tragedies, and the breathalyzer installed in the car is a wonderful idea.
In this column, Hurley appeals to families, as he focuses on the deadly repercussions caused by drunk drivers. I think that Hurley also could have used this column effectively by appealing to the auto companies and government. Instead, he insults them, saying, "Or maybe the loss of a person here and a family there is acceptable to our lawmakers and auto companies." In order to make this column more effective for the government and auto companies, Hurley should have listed some statistics on deaths caused by drunk driving. He also could have mentioned how much money in taxes is wasted on drunk drivers in prison. Drunk driving costs society not only emotionally, but also economically. If it could be prevented, millions of tax dollars would be saved. By using this argument, Hurley could capture the heart of and the wallet.