Archive for October, 2022

The Election Denier Philosophy

The Election Denier Philosophy

As we head into the final stretch of this election season, it can feel overwhelming. We’ve been deluged with deviously crafted ads, catchy slogans, and endless appeals for our vote (and our money). We’ve been bludgeoned with reports, speeches, commentary, and analysis. Things can feel like they’re really messed up.

So now I think it is a good time to pause for a moment, take some deep breaths, and clear your mind… so you can realize that, yes, in fact, things are messed up.

Well, not all things. But some. For instance, the fact that there are so many candidates who are straight up election deniers, including the Republican candidates for state attorney general and secretary of state. You’d think that accepting the truth or at least not promulgating lies would be a qualifier for running for those offices. Apparently not. That is objectively messed up (under any circumstance).


Running for School Board

Running for School Board

Almost six years ago, I drew a cartoon about Betsy DeVos being nominated as the Secretary of Education for the Trump administration. This cartoon is very different from that cartoon, but as far as my comments go, I pretty much have the same thing to say — like DeVos, many of the folks running for school boards this fall are cranks:

A crank (for lack of a better term, let me know if there is one) is a person caught up in her own thoughts, plans, and ideology — dogmatically indifferent to the consequences. It’s been my experience that nearly every organization has one — work group, school board, sports team, professional society, whatever.

And for the most part, it’s good to have a crank.

They provide a vital service: They keep everybody else honest.

Nobody wants to set the crank off, so we tend to plan more carefully.

For example, say you’re the chair of a church committee to raise funds for a mission trip. There is consensus for a pancake breakfast, but there is a crank on the finance team who believes with all her heart that using food for fundraising is a grave sin. If indeed you want to move forward, you will make sure to organize a solid and defensible plan.

But the last thing you want is for the crank to be in charge.

Cranks by their nature are “my way or the highway” types, and likely with a chip on the shoulder from having been handled and circumvented so much in the past.

So, please, do your homework and vote accordingly.


The “Who’s the Attorney General?” Show!

The "Who's the Attorney General?" Show!

I have for some time been trying to figure out a way to illustrate the unique circumstances of this year’s race for attorney general in Michigan between the current office holder, Democrat Dana Nessel, and Republican candidate, Matt DePerno.

A quick summary from Bridge Michigan:

“DePerno is one of nine people who were investigated by Nessel’s office for an alleged Michigan vote tabulator tampering scheme. Nessel’s office began its investigation in February, before DePerno was her opponent. Because of the conflict of interest of investigating him, Nessel sought the appointment of a special prosecutor to decide if charges are warranted.”

You don’t see that kind of thing every election year. But who could have predicted that the Republican Party would nominate somebody actively breaking well-established laws to be the top enforcer of laws for our state? Oh, yeah, right… Unprecedented has sort of become the new precedented, huh?

Anyway, I believe this week’s cartoon stands on its own. But for those of you old enough to remember the annual advertising blitz by Network TV to promote new fall lineups, it may resonate a little more. Also, am I the only one who gets a Dr. Strangelove vibe from Matt DePerno?


You Can Imagine Why I Might Not Trust You

You Can Imagine Why I Might Not Trust You

Abortion is, of course, a sensitive issue. And even though I may at times relish provoking thoughts and (let’s be honest) pushing buttons, I decidedly do not when it comes to this topic. People have developed deeply held views that are very personal.

But just because something is sensitive doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be discussed. As always, you readers can decide for yourselves, but this is my take: Opponents of Proposal 3 have labeled it as radical and extreme. That’s subjective (and somewhat disingenuous when significant elements of the pro-life movement have used those very words as rallying cries).

What I will say is that deciding the legal status of abortion in Michigan via ballot proposal is not great. In a similar way in which Roe v. Wade was not great, we should be deciding these things through the legislative process. But the reality is, we haven’t done that. And the chances of us ever doing that are slim to none.

I mean, if we as a country couldn’t get the Equal Rights Amendment passed into law, what are the chances that any legislature (state or federal) is going to be able to handle the abortion issue?

So wherever you stand on Proposal 3, don’t be surprised if the “other side” doesn’t seem to understand you. They probably don’t.

Comments (1)