xkcd

by **Qaanol** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:06 am UTC

http://xkcd.com/1044/

Title: Charlie actually delivered the Medicare line almost verbatim in the 1971 movie's Fizzy Lifting Drink scene, but it was ultimately cut from the final release.

Oh no who spilled politics in my xkcds?

by **RWW** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:07 am UTC

I don't get it.

by **Clayh** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:08 am UTC

It's not funny. This is the first xkcd comic I've been genuinely disappointed in. Usually xkcd sucks makes me mad, but I'm predicting I'll agree with it on this one.

by **Wes Janson** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:08 am UTC

This one is definitely odd. I'm missing something here....so Randall doesn't like Romney: who does?

by **Steve the Pocket** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:09 am UTC

Looks like someone else needs to lay off the fizzy lifting drinks. HEYO!

by **Someguy945** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:10 am UTC

The comic is a parody of this: http://i.huffpost.com/gen/520957/MITT-R ... -BURNS.jpg
Mirror link: http://i.imgur.com/pElcG.jpg

Qaanol wrote:Oh no who spilled politics in my xkcds?

It's not really making a political statement, it's parodying a piece done by another individual which happens to involve a political figure. Or is someone going to claim that this comic in some way supports or attacks Romney?

by **Mattisthe1** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:13 am UTC

It may also be a reference to this article: (sorry to post a URL with no post count, but created an account just to contribute this link http://motherjones.com/media/2012/02/rick-santorum-heavy-metal-megadeth-quiz)

by **lovelystrangeness** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:17 am UTC

I still don't get it. Why pick Charlie Bucket? Is it in any way related to the discussion of Anne Romney as Mitt's "golden ticket"? (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/04/06/150071819/s-c-gov-haley-ann-romney-is-mitts-golden-ticket) [PS. I'm in the same situation as Mattisthe1]

by **jestingrabbit** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:21 am UTC

Someguy945 wrote:It's not really making a political statement

I think it is a political statement, in that it is a critique of what passes for political discourse and comment. I mean, that people are talking about this instead of policy is kinda telling.

by **asdfzxc** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:22 am UTC

lovelystrangeness wrote:I still don't get it. Why pick Charlie Bucket? Is it in any way related to the discussion of Anne Romney as Mitt's "golden ticket"? (http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics ... den-ticket) [PS. I'm in the same situation as Mattisthe1]

Charlie was just kind of randomly picked for maximum contrast. I don't think he's a reference to anything.

by **adanedhel728** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:25 am UTC

Ok, all politics aside, I think it's awesome that Randall was able to make a stick figure picture look so much like Mitt Romney without even drawing a face. And it's not just the hair, it's the shape. Even if the name hadn't been there, I think we all would have recognized it.

by **ijuin** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:31 am UTC

This might also be a reference to the notion of Rommney living "in a world of pure imagination".

by **gormster** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:36 am UTC

Um, this seems... super positive on Romney. Is Randall a Republican?

by **Atticus** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:38 am UTC

Thanks Someguy, that makes a lot more sense.

by **PACrivellaro** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:41 am UTC

Hardest I've lol'd at an XKCD in a long time.

It's not really political. It's satirical of politics themselves, not picking a side therein. Not at all.

Kudos to Randall for making a very off-kilter comic this time. Surprisingly fantastic.

by **Djehutynakht** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:42 am UTC

Romney's actually not that bad. As a Massachusettian I've heard from everyone I know who grew up with him that he always acted just as their friend's father. Politics.. meh. I don't know. The healthcare thing hasn't caused turmoil here though, so...

Oh, dammit Randall. You reminded me of a rant I was going on during my ride to a bioenginnering symposium today.

Willy Wonka is an ass. Think about it. He throws a tantrum over a few workers being unfaithful, closes his factory in a fit, and lays off hundreds if not thouands of local workers and plunges the city into a chocolateless depression. Then, while many of his workers spiral into poverty, he spends off his vast fortunes on building elaborate and unneccessary decorations and contraptions inside of his factory. And then, when this mad industrialist decides to open up his playhouse to five children, the world goes insane with love for him, despite the town still being in depression and all of the workers still unemployed, their jobs given to cheap foreign (possibly) child labor.

Or so I say.

by **BlitzGirl** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 4:46 am UTC

Someguy945 wrote:The comic is a parody of this: http://i.huffpost.com/gen/520957/MITT-R ... -BURNS.jpg
Mirror link: http://i.imgur.com/pElcG.jpg

Thanks for the link - this comic was making absolutely no sense. Now that I know it's a parody of a parody, I realize that it's not supposed to.

by **Filius Nullius** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:03 am UTC

I think most of us might agree that Mitt Romney being in charge of the United States is very similar to a kid in a candy factory... I doubt he'd be like charlie though, probably more like Augustus Gloop.

img = http://www.paloaltoonline.com/photos/charlieandthechocolatefactory.jpg

by **Velict** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:08 am UTC

gormster wrote:Um, this seems... super positive on Romney. Is Randall a Republican?

ijuin wrote:This might also be a reference to the notion of Rommney living "in a world of pure imagination".

ojfc

by **WolfieMario** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:08 am UTC

Someguy945 wrote:The comic is a parody of this: http://i.huffpost.com/gen/520957/MITT-R ... -BURNS.jpg
Mirror link: http://i.imgur.com/pElcG.jpg

Unfortunately, that version was actually funny

(at least depending on your views)

I don't think it makes much sense to parody another parody/satire/lampoon. Unless it's a horribly unfunny parody/satire/lampoon, you'll be hard-pressed to produce a parody of it that's actually funny, without also seeming very unoriginal (akin to the "<number> people disliked this video because <reason>" comments). Or in this case, it didn't come out funny in my opinion at all - without context, it just made me go "what?" when not a single quote could be legitimately attributed to the wrong side. Although I admit I tried amusing myself by swapping the voices when reading some :lol:

...Hmm, I wonder, if somebody parodies this, will it become funny again? Or will it actually become a mind-numbingly boring abomination? I suppose that's all in the execution

EDIT: Now I'm tempted to do one between Burns and Charlie, but I don't have the time... I guess I'll leave it to other xkcd-sw people :wink:

by **ryan7113** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:32 am UTC

ijuin wrote:This might also be a reference to the notion of Rommney living "in a world of pure imagination".

Pure gold. I'd rather vote for Charlie Bucket, at least he's trustworthy.

by **Eshru** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:37 am UTC

There is a chance, albeit slight, that Mitt will say the 14th item (burns list) when/if Obama is re-elected. Seems like the best reason to get out and vote yet.

by **zoffenberger** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 5:47 am UTC

I think he's satirizing the process of straw-manning political candidates, which is really all the elections in our country are anymore. He's putting down real statements of substance (depending on your definition, not asinine like the ones in the MAD cartoon) by Romney juxtaposed with nonsense to show how ridiculous and counter-productive things like that are when there are real issues to be discussed. Not that the original parody isn't fun or funny; Mr Burns is my favorite character on the show and it's definitely a good way to suggest that Romney is out of touch. But it just continues this process whereby people look at a man and see everything but the policies and the issues, and that's what's really screwing this country right now.

inb4 everyone tells me I'm a Romney or Obama lover, I'm neither, I just want us to not fall into the same trap we do every election cycle.

by **RikRaccoon** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:01 am UTC

I don't think it's a parody of any particular parody, but slightly more absurd version of a popular trope.

Santorum vs Grand Ayatollah was one of was favorite comparisons in this style... http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/02/29/grand_ayatollah_or_grand_old_party

by **18chai** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:03 am UTC

I'm pretty sure the point is that even though it's clear what Charlie Bucket has and has not said, I still don't fully believe that the others are from the Romney of today. (Though I don't find it hard to believe he HAS SAID those things in the past. *cough* flip-flop *cough*)

by **Kelgair** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:06 am UTC

If indeed this was a parody of the MAD magazine "Ebul rich man compared to fake ebul rich man!" comic. It's perfect, especially since Romney has exactly the same relation to the mythical Mr. Burns as he does to the mythical Charlie Bucket. Meaning if you could possibly mistake what either of the mythical people are saying with what a real person is saying it says more about you than anything.

There's a couple flat out BS quotes in the MAD list that are funny if people still believe them. And that I find more interesting. I would have figured the obvious BS would be past the internet by now. God knows there's enough factual soundbites and write ups to make sure the truth is told regarding those quotes. Yet the false quotes still results in a BS cartoon made by MAD magazine.

by **gothick** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:07 am UTC

I just got stuck on working out "what's 'SOUD ROTING'?" on number 2, then figured the whole thing was based too deeply in the politics of another country to be funny for me.

by **thomaspalmer** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:43 am UTC

It's a parody, but it's still using a current political figure who may be his party's nominee. It's sub-par for XKCD in my opinion. But hey, I'm not the artist, Randall can do whatever he wants.

by **Ghona** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:49 am UTC

I don't get it.

by **dwagonrider** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 6:59 am UTC

gothick wrote:I just got stuck on working out "what's 'SOUD ROTING'?" on number 2, then figured the whole thing was based too deeply in the politics of another country to be funny for me.

that took me a moment to parse too - if you look closely it's "solid footing" but it's kind of squished together

by **Kelgair** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:02 am UTC

RikRaccoon wrote:I don't think it's a parody of any particular parody, but slightly more absurd version of a popular trope.

Santorum vs Grand Ayatollah was one of was favorite comparisons in this style... http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/02/29/grand_ayatollah_or_grand_old_party

I have to say the fact you think a catholic president with EVERYTHING that has been put in law and social "what's right" law in a secular country is comparable to a straight up Islamic religious despot and country is even minutely comparable in this day and age is jaw dropping. The QQ about what Santorum would have done in this country is laughable. The QQ about what the Ayatollah has done in his confirmed history is not laughable though.

by **westrim** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:02 am UTC

Randall, we don't all read the same things you do. Some of us aren't Americans, some aren't scientists, some aren't mathematicians, some aren't romantics, some aren't coders, etc. Yet somehow, most of your comics are still easily accessible even to people outside a given field, which is a good part of the reason for this webcomics popularity.

This one isn't accessible. That's probably because it's based on a joke that, while you've seen it and that's great, most of us haven't and most of those don't even have the context to figure it out. And there's no way for us to find out except this forum, which the vast majority of your readership (and you) do not read. It's not googleable, it's not obviously part of anything except the vast field of political satire.

Please, when you're making a comic that not nearly everyone is expected to understand straight away, make sure there's something to latch onto so they can find out.

Sincerely, World.

by **Icalasari** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:04 am UTC

Djehutynakht wrote:Willy Wonka is an ass. Think about it. He throws a tantrum over a few workers being unfaithful, closes his factory in a fit, and lays off hundreds if not thouands of local workers and plunges the city into a chocolateless depression. Then, while many of his workers spiral into poverty, he spends off his vast fortunes on building elaborate and unneccessary decorations and contraptions inside of his factory. And then, when this mad industrialist decides to open up his playhouse to five children, the world goes insane with love for him, despite the town still being in depression and all of the workers still unemployed, their jobs given to cheap foreign (possibly) child labor.

Or so I say.

That's... A pretty good point

Not to mention his process in selecting who will take his place is absolutely AWFUL. I mean, come on, he has no idea how well Charlie will perform!

...Unless he's requiring that he becomes Charlie's legal guardian and there is something on the golden tickets that makes it so that using them to go to the factory allows Wonka to claim legal guardianship, with all sorts of loopholes being abused to make it legal, thus allowing him to indoctrinate Charlie

...Ok, now I'm seeing Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory as one VERY dark film...

by **cephalopod9** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:16 am UTC

gormster wrote:Um, this seems... super positive on Romney. Is Randall a Republican?

You must not be a republican* if you think "Abortion should be safe and legal" goes in the "positive" category these days.

*according to the standards by which the party presents itself most loudly to the public.

by **da Doctah** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:40 am UTC

thomaspalmer wrote:It's a parody, but it's still using a current political figure who may be his party's nominee. It's sub-par for XKCD in my opinion.

Agreed. If politics belongs in XKCD, I'm a vermicious knid.

by **AvatarIII** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:04 am UTC

This comic confused me at first, the first quote is something good, then it kind of went the other direction.

gothick wrote:I just got stuck on working out "what's 'SOUD ROTING'?" on number 2, then figured the whole thing was based too deeply in the politics of another country to be funny for me.

It's supposed to be "Solid Footing".
But yeah I mostly don't get it because US politics as seen from a British perspective is completely confusing.

by **jozwa** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:15 am UTC

zoffenberger wrote:I think he's satirizing the process of straw-manning political candidates, which is really all the elections in our country are anymore. He's putting down real statements of substance (depending on your definition, not asinine like the ones in the MAD cartoon) by Romney juxtaposed with nonsense to show how ridiculous and counter-productive things like that are when there are real issues to be discussed. Not that the original parody isn't fun or funny; Mr Burns is my favorite character on the show and it's definitely a good way to suggest that Romney is out of touch.

Thanks. I honestly didn't get the comic, even when someone posted the Burns one, but this makes sense.

by **Pfhorrest** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:53 am UTC

I had even seen the Burns parody already (and found it mildly amusing), and fell completely flat on this one until someone reported the Burns parody. I was thinking "I barely follow politics and even I can tell the obvious difference"... which evidently was the point, but if even people who've seen what you're parodying don't recognize it as a parody until it's pointed out, you're doing something wrong.

Then again, I don't really follow the mud-slinging olympics very closely, so maybe this Burns parody thing is big news in the front of everybody else's minds?

by **navin_kumar** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 8:55 am UTC

I came here to see how many people wouldn't get it and how many wouldn't find it funny. The first haven't seen the cartoon and the second are democrats whose sense of humor is impaired by a hatred of Romney.

by **kizolk** » Wed Apr 18, 2012 9:23 am UTC

I go with zoffenberger's interpretation here; I believe the key to that comic is the "is there even a difference?" line.

That said...

This comic is *lame*. Sure, it's a satire of media, but let's not kid ourselves. To those who think this isn't a political statement: may I remind you of this blog entry http://blog.xkcd.com/2008/01/28/obama/ ? Some of the Romney quotes on this one could have been said by Obama or any other politician (e.g. the one on the budget). But the first one for instance is completely different, as abortion is the kind of issues that make you react very strongly and emotionally, it's not "just politics". At first, I thought Munroe was trying to say "give him a break, he's not as horrible a person as you thought he was!", but in fact, taking a quick look at Romney's Wiki article:

In 2005, Romney revealed a change of view regarding abortion, moving from an "unequivocal" pro-choice position expressed during his 2002 campaign to a pro-life one where he opposed Roe v. Wade.

[...]

[Romney] later said, "Changing my position was in line with an ongoing struggle that anyone has that is opposed to abortion personally, vehemently opposed to it, and yet says, 'Well, I'll let other people make that decision.' And you say to yourself, but if you believe that you're taking innocent life, it's hard to justify letting other people make that decision."

Either Munroe did his research wrong, and genuinely thinks Romney is pro-abortion (which I highly doubt since I assume his real, current views on this issue have been discussed at length in the American media), or 1) not only is he saying "guys, Romney's anti-abortion! We, as young reasonable progressive people who voted for Obama in '08, should totally despise this guy", he is also 2) calling our attention on Romney's flip-flopping. Oh geez, that's really not partisan at all.

So, no he's not saying explicitly "VOTE OBAMA", but as if it wasn't obvious... ^^; And actually, the fact that he doesn't say it is even worse IMO, it's disguised as a "haha won't you lol, dear reader? INCIDENTALLY, WE'LL SOON HAVE TO CHOOSE OUR PRESIDENT" and as a faux-neutral take on media and politics. Again, there *is* a political statement. Politics have nothing to do in xkcd (I mean, IMO. Of course, the author does what he wants to do), and as has been pointed out, the fact that a lot of people who read it don't even know who Romney is makes it, hey, even worse. Not that it makes it funnier to know who he is. Also, I bet most Americans don't know about the HuffPo thing, and, contrary to, say, the math jokes, you can't actually find out about it only by reading this comic since there's no clue whatsoever that it is a parody of something very specific. The reference is completely lost unless you read it yourself, have a friend tell you about it, or visit this forum. It's a big deal, because the comic doesn't look like a journalistic work; what I mean by that is, I read it with Munroe's voice at first ("I just had this silly idea, and I mixed it with some more serious political views, check it out:"), not as a parody; I can say I didn't get the point until I read the original.

But more importantly, Munroe should seriously stop trying to "educate" his readership on politics, how to treat women, free software, etc. ...at least on politics. Think of those of your readers who don't agree with you: they're reading their xkcd 3 times a week, having fun and all, and then you put up this kind of comic, basically telling them they're asses. Wow, great work, Mr Munroe, you really do care about your fans!

Lastly, the idea of the comic is good IMO. The "is there even a difference?" line is funny and a good satire, and I like how he shows that biased "journalists" can be found on both sides. More generally, it shows how silly the media have become. But he didn't have to use authentic Romney quotes, or even use RL characters, and not-so-subtly remind people to vote for the other guy.

P.S: I'm not American, but if I were, I sure as heck wouldn't vote for Romney, and I like xkcd most of the time. Ah, also, when I start writing there's no stopping me, and unfortunately, I sometimes end up going a bit too far when debating/proposing arguments. I probably won't agree with any of this shit in a couple hours. Heck, in reality, I don't even really care about this comic (still didn't find it a hell of a lot funny) and the political statements that may or may not be included in it haha.

Who is online