This time around, it's a nearly double-sized issue(in a slightly different format) that collects, in one handy volume, everyVladrushka story to date, both the ones published by Eros (the 24-page epic "Gulag Gangbang", and "Red Star") and the ones you've seen at AWC("Spoiled Rich Brats" and "Friction").
This Sickness: "Martha" Preview At Scans Daily I'm very sorry to report that adultwebcomics.com seems to be down for the indefinite future. The great Joey Manley informs me that the site was hacked, and they're not certain when it will be resumed. So in the meantime, I've found an alternative way to show some of the newest work. (if you're over 18, and in this case a Livejournal member.)
At Scans Daily, I've posted a generous sampling of the artwork from "Martha," a personal story set in those long-ago golden days of 1997, that will most likely be published inThis Sickness #5, planned for the spring of 2009--assuming the world is still in existence. This one is just as much smut as the usual, but meant to be more...nice. You know,as an experiment.
None of these are lettered. That will be in the final, papery version. But it is explicit, and not safe for work. So, y'know, be prudent.
21 years a senator from Arizona, and 5 more a Representative for same before that. And where is McCain using his very finite campaign resources to send out robocalls--which, in other states so far, have mostly served to alienate swing voters--now?
Victoria Jackson, Stephen Baldwin, Pat Boone, John Ratzenberger(Cliff from Cheers, the first guy I think of when I think "charisma"), and another guy whom I've never heard of, all agree: they needed money and Norm Coleman offered it to them!
And here in Washington, the slimy would-be Republican governor has been trying to distance himself from the party by having the ballot read "G.O.P." Which, as readers of this blog, and most people, know, is in fact a nickname for the Republican party. But he's probably hoping to try to pick off any that are uninformed but unhappy with the current Democratic governor.
Barbie's sure treating her that way. And has made it pretty plain that her part of the campaign is solely promotion for herself, looking toward 2012. This campaign, McCain's, is one of the most twisted and dark I have ever seen. And it's a relief that Obama's is pretty boring by comparison, but in the good way: the "Isn't Outraging Me Every Day" way. The "Doesn't Scare Me To Death" way.
Once a sycophantic lickspittle, always one. But given that he would have happily become McCain's VP candidate had the RNC let him, and that he's done everything in his power to betray his former party, I hope he'll be happy with what he'll get, which is utter isolation, or worse.
The flipside to John McCain’s metanarrative of personal valor has always been palpable self-righteousness. In this campaign, his sense of integrity has been doubly offended. First, an adviser said, “He just really thinks the media is completely in the tank for Obama and doesn’t feel like he’s getting a fair shake at all.” And second, another said, “I don’t think John likes people who try to do jobs they’re not qualified for” — referring, in this case, to Barack Obama.
Courtesy of Rachel Maddow. My favorite is the abuse of 9-11 service by McCain's brother, angry about being stuck in traffic.
And a bit about all those who chose to give the "Backwards B" story credence, Fox News chief among them. Note too that while even Michelle Malkin was, to her credit I give begrudgingly, highly skeptical of this story, Hugh Hewitt jumped right into that meat grinder both balls first. Will he miss them?
To all those who still try to blame Bill Clinton for 9/11(yes, they exist) because, somehow, of the 1993 WTC bombing, I would suggest this to you: the perpetrators and planners of that attack went to prison, while almost all those involved in 9/11 are dead by their own hand or still free.
I suppose it's best that it end not with a bang, but a little pathetic bleat. I have to give credit where it's due, though I refuse to link to her: this was such a flimsy story that Michelle Malkin, for god's sake, didn't buy it, not even when it was first reported, not even if it might have somehow helped the McCain campaign. Which shows us one heartening thing: there is, in fact, a moral point beyond which even she will not go.
Attributing violence to Obama supporters, and black ones at that, when one merely committed pointless violence to oneself. How can you sum up better what the McCain campaign has descended to? Somewhere below the gutters, I think, and drooling on themselves.
So about the other interesting news, today I was photographed by Thomas Hurst for the Seattle Times, for a piece allegedly to run in November. It's just part of an overall "docu-photo" series, but it was a new and enjoyable experience.
What, you were expecting something more eloquent? Not when I'm in a good mood.
Whole bunch of photos were taken, with pages from chapters 10-12 of Vitriolall spread about, partly because most of those are on stiff illustration board and can stand up by themselves. Most with my face. Some with an impromptu self-portrait he had me draw(some of me drawing it) in front of my face. Some with a gas mask I have on the wall as a macabre decoration on my face. I hope that's not the one they use, though some of you may prefer that.
How to tell a true Christian? Apparently one that goads and insults his god. One that thinks God doesn't know what he's doing and needs to be reminded. They see McCain losing and what do they think? Do they think maybe, just maybe, God doesn't want them to win because of all the further harm they might cause? Do they see their faults and reflect, and learn, and maybe, I dunno, repent their hatred?
No, they tell God off. They try to taunt him into action, like a spectator egging on someone in a bar brawl, saying, "You pussy! You gonna take that from him, man?" Like Reverend Arnold Conrad here. Watch. And do you hear a single person in the room, who really should, given their beliefs, take their souls and the fate thereof more seriously, tell him off? No, they stand by, and affirm.
Who are you to goad and instructyour god, o man?
They love God, supposedly. I didn't realize it was tough love.
What I was taught, growing up? That this is the very definition of blasphemy. That this is what "taking the name of the Lord in vain" specifically means.
What does this tell me? That they don't think of their god as very "big" at all. And that they only trust in his wisdom when it fits their hatreds and revenge fantasies.
Here are the exact words he said below. Notice the stupid bastard thinks "Hindu" is the name of a god.
"There are millions of people around this world praying to their god, whether it's Hindu, Buddha, Allah, that [McCain's] opponent wins, for a variety of reasons. And Lord, I pray that you would guard your own reputation because they're going to think that their god is bigger than you if that happens. So I pray that you would step forward and honor your own name in all that happens between now and election day."
And in Hell, he will hear an endless loop of this. What will be done to the rest of his senses, I couldn't say.
The fundamentalists are strong believers in the End Times, and a key part of that is the rise of false prophets. My question to them on that is twofold:
(a) What exactly is a false prophet but one that claims to speak for God while knowingly trying to use that to manipulate people toward an otherwise indefensible goal?
(b) I realize they believe false prophets will arise, but do they think that it's also incumbent upon them to play along and follow said false prophets?
I'm just sayin'. You hear as little from the moderate Christians as the moderate Muslims, and so it's the most hateful who taint the image for all. But, just like this audience is consenting by silence, aren't all you non-insane Christians conceding your religion, and people's perception of it, to the violent, racist madmen?
Do you then have a right to complain that anyone "misunderstands" or "stereotypes" you, if you abrogate such responsibility? Why do you defer to lying, hateful psychopaths for whom you should have nothing but contempt? Why do you say nothing?
Are you that cowardly? Do the fanatics scare you that much? Because let me tellya, they scare me, but at least I've always said something about it.
Just a brief announcement that today, it appears I officially became the regular illustrator for the column of humorist David Volk in Journey magazine. At the moment, the first one is to run in November(I think). So now would be a good time to become an AAA member, I guess, just for my cartoon.
I can't, because I don't own a car.
Other interesting news, but that can wait till later...
How many politicians have had to resign over this kind of frivolous misuse of taxpayer money? (John Sununu is one name that leaps to mind) And given all she says about low taxation, what does it say about her concern for the taxpayer that she's so willing to waste their money?
This week's slime tactic: call Obama a "socialist."
Bush 41 tried this, specifically calling Bill Clinton a "communist spy," in the waning days of his own campaign--though prior to their last debate, so Clinton got to call him on it. When they play the Marx card, you know they're defeated.
I'm a typical middle-class American. I run a small family bank in Ohio. I'm no Master of the Universe, no hedge-fund manipulator. I have a couple of dozen employees. I work hard. I obey the laws. I have a family. But if Barack Trotsky Obama wins, I can kiss it all goodbye. I've done well for myself, but $280,000 a year doesn't go as far as it used to, even here in Akron.
So, as I said, I make $280,000 annually after business expenses. I'm married and filing jointly. Under Obama, my itemized deductions would actually increase slightly — I'd get $49,420 in itemized deductions, while under McCain I'd get $48,975. But my personal exemptions would increase slightly under McCain — he'd give me $6,911, whereas I'd only get $6,132 from Obama.
That leaves my taxable income at $213, 766 under Obama, $213,433 under McCain. Now we have to factor in the bracket cutoff, which for 2009 is $208,850. Anything below that figure for married couples filing jointly is taxed at the fourth tier, 28 percent. Any income above it, until you get up to near $400,000, is taxed at the fifth tier. And this is where the raving income-redistribution scheme of Barack Robespierre Obama kicks in.
As you can see, my taxable income is about $5,000 higher than the cutoff. McCain is going to tax that $5,000 at the current rate, which is 33 percent. But Obama's crazed plan calls for raising that rate to — get ready for it — 35 percent.
And here's what this means. Under McCain, my total tax bill would be $48,254. Under Obama, it would be $48,511.
That's a difference of $257. I'll say it again: Two hundred and fifty-seven dollars.
That's not two hundred and fifty-seven dollars I, or America, can afford.
Things are tough right now. Average working Americans like me are really struggling. They're angry. And when they see the effects of Obama's spread-the-wealth lunacy on an average angry struggling American like me, they'll be even more angry, average, and struggling.
Let me lay it out for you. Right now, I take home about $19,000 a month after the government skims off its share. And I don't have to tell you that $19,000 a month isn't what it used to be.
Take my Jaguar. Do you have any idea how much it costs just to have that thing tuned up? It's like a BMW repair bill on steroids. We're talking $500 just to open the hood.
The hard times are taking a toll on my family life, too. My wife has had to completely cut out having her colors done, and her personal shopper is threatening to walk if we keep cutting back on her hours. We're tightening our belts, but you can only tighten so far before there's no more room to pull.
Then there's food prices. All across America, families are angry and struggling as they try just to get by. We're in the same boat. It's getting harder and harder just to put food on the table. We're only eating filet mignon twice a week, and under Obama's crazed far-left regime, we may have to completely give up Maine lobster and Macanudo cigars.
Oh wait--red? Now who's the ones who've been using that color like they invented it?
Buchanan runs out of every other possible reason to defend the GOP and to criticize the (from a GOP point of view) irreproachable Powell's endorsement of Obama, just as the McCain camp has run out of every other possible bit of mud to sling. Flat on their backs, it's starting to suffocate them. The attacks have now taken on the quality of a cry for help.
Because, also like the McCain campaign, when pushed into a corner, Buchanan falls back on good old-fashioned race-baiting. He's so often a courtly presence on cable news, it's good to be reminded of the real Buchanan, whose mouth helped cost the GOP the election in 1992 as well.
Particularly amusing is Buchanan's imputation of ingratitude to Powell, that somehow his army career, his promotions, and his job in the Bush administration were the result of Republican kindness, were not earned. That they were gifts, perhaps, in that he probably should be grateful the GOP let him near any power at all? Why's that, Pat? Because he's...black? The thinking this reveals is instructional.
Even more so to Pat, but he should know this, would be the fact that, if anything, the Republicans should be grateful to Powell for providing them victory in the original Gulf War(though they did such a bad job otherwise this didn't help them to another term), and for providing them so much cover, in the case of the Iraq War almost at the cost of his reputation. Ingratitude?
Through Pat, they went there. Let's see McCain also allow the smearing of his good friend Powell. Let's watch as the party goes terminally insane.
A lesson from Syd Barrett on the foolishness of letting elephants frighten you. (Also, if you've heard it, one of the best kid's songs ever) I realize the metaphor is as unintended as it gets. But just the same, striking, isn't it?
An Effervescing Elephant with tiny eyes and great big trunk once whispered to the tiny ear the ear of one inferior that by next June he'd die, oh yeah! because the tiger would roam. The little one said: "Oh my goodness I must stay at home! and every time I hear a growl I'll know the tiger's on the prowl and I'll be really safe, you know the elephant he told me so." Everyone was nervy, oh yeah!and the message was spread to zebra, mongoose, and the dirty hippopotamus who wallowed in the mud and chewed his spicy hippo-plankton food and tended to ignore the word preferring to survey a herd of stupid water bison, oh yeah! And all the jungle took fright, and ran around for all the day and the night but all in vain, because, you see, the tiger came and said: "Who me?! You know, I wouldn't hurt not one of you. I'd much prefer something to chew and you're all too scant." oh yeah! He ate the Elephant.
"What I would say is that the news media should do a penetrating expose and take a look. I wish they would. I wish the American media would take a great look at the views of the people in Congress and find out if they are pro-America or anti-America," she said.
First Act of Violence Against A Reporter at Palin Rally
In this case, a reporter was kicked in the back of the leg in NC. A small thing, but significant. Are the Republicans proud of this and the shouted threats? Is this really the image they want of their party? Do they think this makes them look like badasses?
As the McCain people love to claim equivalent things go on at Obama rallies, I challenge them to find one instance of any kind of intentional violence at one to date.
...Sharks don't have a "stop eating" mechanism in their biological blueprint. Under normal conditions sharks can't catch food fast enough to do themselves damage from over-eating. Nature has limited their ability to catch food. A shark in a feeding frenzy, however, given enough food, will eat until it quite literally bursts open like an overstuffed sausage. Its guts just explode out into the water. In some cases crazed, gut-busted sharks eat their own entrails, unable to distinguish between their innards and their kill. A shark is just a dumb beast driven by a killer instinct. If nature's limits break down, so does the shark. The only thing keeping sharks from eating themselves to death are the physical limits nature places on all apex predators. Because nature has perfected the art of limitation, a shark eating itself to death is extremely rare, and usually occurs only when humans get involved and temporarily throw food supplies out of balance. Nature is nothing if not a series of carefully orchestrated restrictions. True Natural Law economics is not laissez faire it is structured guidance, like the rules in a football game. It's a bad idea to give 22 men pads, helmets and a football and say laissez faire, unless you want every one to get killed...
Today huge groups of human beings are largely free of nature's constraints. We, as a race, can, and will, apparently, out grow our eco-system-something Aristotle did not consider in his extensive writings on natural law. Given the political freedom 21st century human beings could and would extract every fish in the ocean in a few years time. But for nature's limits sharks would, too. Soon genetic engineering breakthroughs will clear away whatever constraints nature has left over humanity. Conservative economic theory, which depends entirely on constraints provided by nature, is fantasy. Outgrowing nature's restraints means nature can no longer stop us from destroying ourselves if we get off track. With nothing to contain us we have to assume nature's former corrective role in all our endeavors and provide necessary limits ourselves...
Conservatives look at the deregulation disaster that is the last eight years of Republican rule and have come to the conclusion that they were corrupted by eight years of power. Power doesn't corrupt. Washington is a petri dish for all one's latent dysfunction. Power revealed who Republicans truly are. They came to Washington and did exactly what they wanted to do and they destroyed themselves. Self knowledge is a bitch. For all the evil Washington has done to Republicans, they sure don't want to leave. They most definitely want to stay despite the horrible things power does to one's conservative credentials. To convince Americans they have learned their lesson and should be given the reigns of all-corrupting power one more time, conservatives have brought forward Sarah Palin, someone they advertise as too simpleminded to be affected by Washington's irresistible evil, like some kind of Alaskan version of Frodo Baggins. Basically, Republicans are promising Americans they'll be dumb as hell if we give them another chance in 2008.
Now that we realize that, in fact, McCain's campaign is solely being used as the host on which the future candidacy of Palin feeds till it matures and leaves McCain's drained husk behind, we shouldn't be shocked that all her public statements directly contradict McCain's platform.
For instance, McCain wants to freeze all spending not related to the military and veterans(good luck on that; Gingrich tried to close down the government too, and that didn't go over well).
"The economy is slow and revenue is not coming in like it does during good times,” Vaughn said. “How can you really explain how this plan will work?” “Really?” asked Palin. She went on to explain that revenue shouldn’t be coming into the government at this time. Rather, she said, that money is better spent by the businesses and individuals themselves. “We shouldn’t worry about government not having enough money. Government’s got plenty of money,” she said. “It’s a matter of how government prioritizes the expenditures of those public dollars.”
Barbie, you fucking idiot: Where does the government get it from, besides taxation, and borrowing that will later have to be paid off with tax money? Does she want to conquer other countries and take their gold or something?
I've really gotten tired of these borrow-and-squander conservatives.