What’s Wrong With Them All?

I’m becoming a regular reader of Rush Limbaugh. Couple of things I liked today. Firstly the image at the top of his discussion of last night’s Republican debate:


What I liked about it is that as he’s standing there he’s got a lit cigar in his hand. Help! All the candidates are gonna die!

About 10 years ago, when I used to read leftwing blogs and commentaries, there was one commentator whose icon at the top of the page showed him rather ostentatiously smoking a cigarette, in a time when the antismokers were already in ascendancy. I was glad there was someone around who was bucking the trend. I like people who buck trends.

But then one day the cigarette vanished. I never normally write to these guys, but this time I emailed him to ask why the cigarette had gone. There was no reply. And after that I never read his commentaries again. In fact I can’t even remember what his name was. As far as I was concerned he may as well have died.

Anyway there’s a question that Rush Limbaugh asked in another article:

The question is not what’s wrong with Trump, not what’s wrong with Cruz, not what’s wrong with any of them.  The question is: What’s wrong with the people currently leading the country?

Well, I’m not an American, and I have no idea what is wrong with the people currently leading America. But the strange thing, here in the UK, is that I have exactly the same question about the people leading my own country. What’s wrong with them? What the hell is the matter with them?

And my guess is that they’ve become globalists. They’ve signed up for a New World Order in which sovereign states like Britain and France and Germany simply cease to exist, and become regions inside some sort of global government, in which the EU will be the European area government or something. So they’ve stopped looking after their own countries’ business any more, for the simple reason that pretty soon none of these countries is going to exist any more, so what’s the point? But it’s worse than that, because in addition to getting ready for the transition to global government, they’re actively demolishing their own countries, shattering their inner cohesion. Mass immigration is one way they’re doing it. Favouring Islam and undermining Christianity is another way. Smoking bans are another. Global warming is another too. It’s why we’re under cultural attack from all quarters. Because they don’t want there to be any coherent or cohesive resistance to their plans.

This is a conspiracy theory, of course, and I don’t like conspiracy theories. But currently, aside from sheer incompetence, it’s the best explanation I’ve got. There are some things that don’t fit, though: If that’s what they’re doing, I don’t know why they haven’t yet abolished the British monarchy. Nor do I know why they haven’t gone after tea with the same fury that they have tobacco. So maybe there’s no conspiracy after all.

In other news, I read this today in the BMJ:

We need to regulate the contents and construction of cigarettes to discourage initiation and facilitate cessation.

I guess it’s the next logical step after display bans and plain packaging: You add rat poison to cigarettes. That would “facilitate cessation.”

I’ve spent the whole day using Manga Studio 5 to create more cartoons. I’m slowly learning. Here’s one result:


From left to write, Amanda Sandford, Sheila Duffy, Deborah Arnott, and Sir Ian Gilmore, all equipped with long, pointed noses with outsize nostrils. I’m sorry if Sheila Duffy looks passably human: this will be rectified in future iterations.

It’s another line of attack. I’ve noticed that the cartoonist Josh started doing pictures in aid of the climate sceptic cause. When he started out he was very uncertain, but he’s grown greatly in confidence since then. I suppose I’d like to do something a bit along the lines of Gerald Scarfe, or this Ralph Steadman cartoon I came across yesterday:


I remember looking at some of Steadman and Scarfe’s cartoons, and wondering how anyone could possibly survive the kind of attacks they launched.

Carlos Santana, While My Guitar Gently Weeps:


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to What’s Wrong With Them All?

  1. Nice noses Frank! LOL! :> Yes, cartoons can be powerful. People share and remember the good ones and the political points they make stay in people’s minds.

    He’s a bit simplistic/populist a fair amount of the time, but part of that has to do with the format/ratings of radio talk shows. The fact that he’s got such a large and devoted following speaks volumes as to just how fed up most people are with things over here.

    Heh, I wonder if I could make a successful run for president if I legally changed my name to “None Of The Above” ?

    I’ll bet that I could win as a third party candidate against Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump!


  2. waltc says:

    In the novel The Manchurian Candidate, the GIs being brainwashed by the chicoms are given cigarettes made of yak dung and, much to the amusement of their captors, can’t tell the difference (on account of being brainwashed). I wonder if the BMJ plans to brainwash us first or just presume we’re so dumb or addicted we’ll smoke their dung

    About those cartoons: art imitates life. Here’s a photo of Henry Waxman, until recently a California congressman and leading anti-smoking zealot. In fact, he once proposed a bill that would ban smoking in every building in America that was occupied by more than ten people a week. (!)!Not makimg that up. Anyway, here’s his actual nose. Your new friend Rush used to call him Henry Nostrilitis


  3. Lepercolonist says:

    Rush Limbaugh always defends smokers. Considering he is the number one radio show in the U.S. tells me that there are millions of people who agree with Rush.


    I’m enjoying your cartoons, Frank.

    • mikef317 says:

      Speaking as a retired American who spent his working career in advertising related industries, I’d give as much credence to TV / radio audience measurements as I do to Tobacco Control numbers.

      The link below is old (2009). It’s from the Washington Post which I consider a halfway reliable news source. Estimates of Limbaugh’s audience are all over the map.


      Today there are roughly 250 million Americans aged 18 and over. If I used the largest estimate of Limbaugh’s 2009 audience (30 million), at most 12% of the U. S. population listens to his show. Most people don’t.

      However may listeners, even if it’s the “number one rated show,” those who agree with Limbaugh’s views on smoking (or any other subject) are totally unknown.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        Mike Rush was the FIRST source to expose the passive smoking fraud live in the faces of all the world. He makes headlines everywhere when he makes statements. His popularity isn’t just from listeners. Its built on his opinions and facts that make mainstream headlines.

        So 30 million can in fact be 60 million.

        • mikef317 says:

          Rush was “the FIRST to expose the passive smoking fraud live in the faces of all the world.” The entire world? Wow! News to me. Would any history buffs like to comment?

          As a citizen of New York City, I read the New York Times and other local print media. NYC is also the home of almost all national broadcast media. Despite this, for many years, I haven’t seen more than a few headlines about Rush Limbaugh’s opinions.

          “30 million can in fact be 60 million”? Maybe Rush and his 60 million followers should all write to NY City Hall and inform them that our “pioneering” smoking ban and highest cigarette taxes in the nation should be rescinded. If Rush makes a “statement,” surely “mainstream headlines” must follow, and action will be taken.

    • Frank Davis says:

      RUSH: I’m telling you, there ought to be some measure of appreciation for people who buy tobacco products, despite the forces arrayed against them, It’s getting harder and harder to use tobacco products, unless you want to call marijuana tobacco, and you can do that anywhere, for the most part. But the fact of the matter is they have to endure a lot, the public hates them, they’re despised, they can’t smoke in places of comfort anymore, can’t even smoke outside in a park! And yet their actions and their taxes and their purchases are funding children’s health care programs. I’m just saying there ought to be a little appreciation shown for them, instead of having them hated and reviled. I would like a medal for smoking cigars, is what I’m saying.

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        In 1993-4 when the passive smoking fraid epa study first hit the headlines rush was the first to run in and condemn it. He has since damned it at least a hundred times since then in slurs or outright stating it. Rush has always been the smokers friend……….or does that offend you to mike.

      • mikef317 says:

        I’d agree will all the statements Limbaugh made in the long quote. That and thirteen bucks will get me a pack of cigarettes in New York City – and I can’t smoke in bars, restaurants, or many other places.

        My comment pertained to Lepercolonist’s “number one radio show in the U. S.,” and “millions of people who agree with Rush.” This sounds like Americans are mad as hell about the mistreatment of smokers. I wish that were true, but it’s not.

        U. S. TV / radio audience measurements aren’t very good, but let’s take the 30 million figure as Rush’s listeners. At a guess I suspect that many are smokers.

        America is a huge country. At best Rush might reach 10% (or I’ll even go for 15%) of the adult population. That leaves 85 to 90% that DON’T listen to Limbaugh. I can’t prove it, but I’d say that these are the people who vote for smoking bans and higher taxes.

        I see Limbaugh as preaching to the converted. It’s nice to listen to someone who agrees with you, but I don’t see where Rush has gotten smoking bans repealed or taxes lowered.

  4. harleyrider1978 says:

    Take mllineal voters they thought owebama was the greatest thing until they found out he was using them as a cash cow to fund zercare. How would you feel if you found out you had to pay 650 bucks a month for a policy that stated you had to pay out of pocket 10,000 a year first before your insurance kicked in……….most millineals don’t even make 10,000 a year. My son at 23 is one of them only making 12,000 a year. He tried to get signed up on the BS law nite before last and after he got told what I just stated above he told em fuck you that’s nothing but a rip off.

    All the rest figured it out too.

  5. Frank Davis says:

    Wonder if this will work

    Lots of new possibilities here!

  6. slugbop007 says:

    Speaking of Children:
    Big Pharma’s latest guinea pigs are tiny tots.

  7. harleyrider1978 says:

    What can I say except I wish it was the whole Johnson family and RWJF also in chains

    Drug firm CEO who was vilified for boosting prices arrested on securities fraud, reports say

    Pharmaceutical entrepreneur Martin Shkreli, vilified for buying up drug companies and dramatically boosting the prices of some medications, has been arrested by…


  8. slugbop007 says:

    The Columbia Cartel pales in comparison to Big Pharma. They are the Ûber Pushers.

  9. slugbop007 says:

    One more time for the children. In all seriousness:
    Children’s Exposure to Diesel Exhaust on School Buses in the USA

  10. harleyrider1978 says:

  11. harleyrider1978 says:


  12. harleyrider1978 says:

    Stanley died in a fire and his body was burned pretty badly.

    The morgue needed someone to identify the body, so they sent for his two bestfriends, Cooter and Gomer.

    The three men had always done everything together.

    Cooter arrived first, and when the mortician pulled back the sheet,

    Cooter said, ‘Yup, his face is burned up pretty bad. You better roll him over.’

    The mortician rolled him over and Cooter said, ‘Nope, ain’t Stanley .’

    The mortician thought this was rather strange.

    So he brought Gomer in to confirm the identity of the body.

    Gomer looked at the body and said, ‘Yup, he’s pretty well burnt up.

    Roll him over.’

    The mortician rolled him over and Gomer said, ‘No, it ain’t Stanley ‘

    The mortician asked, ‘How can you tell?’

    Gomer said, ‘Well, Stanley had two assholes.’

    ‘What? He had two assholes?’ asked the mortician.

    ‘Yup, we never seen ’em, but everybody used to say:

    ‘There’s Stanley with them two assholes.’

  13. harleyrider1978 says:

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Trumps polls are even higher than Reagans and bushs going into the home stretch……….

      This is going to be a LANDSLIDE VICTORY

  14. nisakiman says:

    Don’t count your chickens, Harley. Politics is a funny old game, and not all is as it seems.

  15. slugbop007 says:

    You should send those drawings to Deb, Chapman and company.

  16. jaxthefirst says:

    “I don’t know why they haven’t yet abolished the British monarchy.”

    Quite simply, because, at the moment the vast majority of the British public happen to like the Queen very much and think she’s doing a good job, and to sweep her away at the stroke of a pen would, I believe, genuinely cause people to riot in the streets. Honestly, I really think that it’s the one thing which would bring huge numbers out in open protest. And I think that the Globalists know that, and it’s the last thing they want – not because they give a damn about what the people like or dislike (look at the smoking ban for an example of that), but because it would highlight much too starkly just how little they are bothered by “the plebs” for them to protest, openly and loudly, on the streets in large numbers and yet for the powers-that-be to press on regardless. Cunning and concealment are their greatest weapons, after all.

    No, I think they’ll wait until the much-less-popular Charles is set to take over, and then they’ll make their move, knowing that far fewer people will then object to the drastic change to our constitution which abolition of the monarchy would entail. And you know something? I think Her Maj knows this, too, which is why, despite her age, she has steadfastly refused to abdicate and hand over the reins to Charlie. Because I think she knows full well that once she’s gone, the game’s gonna be up for our Royal Family. I know it sounds harsh, but I think that the best protection that the Royal Family could have would be for Charlie to refuse the Crown (or accept it, and then abdicate very quickly for “health” reasons or something like that), and for the very popular William to take over. But I doubt that’ll happen, sadly.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.