Saturday 16 January 2021

Please Hold Transcript: 5/2019

Hi, Everybody!

Did everybody who wanted a High Society: Regency Edition get one yesterday?

I kid. I 've read the comments.

Ivan! you said:
I'm really disappointed with the shipping options. I live in the Middle East and so cannot order at all?
You should contact The Waverly Press here. They're able to arrange shipping anywhere, but you got to reach out.

Same goes to anybody else that needs international shipping.

As of right now, there are still SEVEN (7) copies of the Candidate Bundle left. The Collector and Prime Minister bundles are both sold out.

Other goodies are in stock, so check out what's available

(kidding, check you e-mail Shecky...)

Anyway, time for the first AMOC Special Friend of the Day of 2021, and it's our old Special Friend Jesse Lee Herndon:
Suitable for framing

Please Hold for Dave Sim 5/4/2019
[phone rings, beeps]

Matt: Hello, Dave!

Dave: Hello, Matt! How are you doing?

Matt: Pretty good. I literally just turned on the camera, like, I’m gonna get it all ready so all I have to do is the button, and the phone rang, and I’m like, “this is good timing!”

Dave: (laughs) Sometimes you get that clockwork mechanism working for ya.

Matt: So, how ya doin’?

Dave: Ahh, good, good. The… updating people on the wrist, I really did a number on it with that “Green Dante/ Green Virgil” cover. But, that’s just how that works. You find out how bad things are getting but pushing the boundaries and going, “okay, I really want to draw a lot more, but I don’t think that’s in the cards for Grandpa.”

Matt: (laughs) I’m sorry to hear that, but ya know, it’s not horrible horrible bad, like you can’t even just sit with it and not move the wrist at all and it still hurts, is it?

Dave: Oh, no no. Yeah, it’s ahh… there’s no complaints on my end. I wanted to start off wishing Jeff Seiler a happy belated birthday, it was his birthday on April 30th. And I remembered his birthday, but I didn’t call him just cause April 30th was a particularly crazy day with stuff I had to get done. I was gonna sing Happy Birthday to him here, and I can’t really do that because Margaret bought one of those happy birthday packages on the last Kickstarter. So, it doesn’t seem fair to give Jeff Seiler something for free that Margaret Liss is paying good money for.

Matt: Well, I have a solution, but he’s not gonna like it. (laughs)

Dave: (laughs) What’s that?

Matt: When we’re done with the call, I’ll have my kids sing Happy Birthday,cause they love singing Happy Birthday and I’ll put that on the end of the video.

Dave: (laughs) Okay, are they around?

Matt: Uhh, I can get ‘em.

Dave: Okay, well, we’re gonna do about an hour, which is what we usually do. So just, that’ll be perfect. Happy Birthday to Jeff Seiler from the…

Matt’s Kids: Happy Birthday to you, Happy Birthday to you, Happy Birthday dear Jeff. Happy Birthday to you. Happy birthday!

Dave: …to Jeff Seiler from da goils.

Matt: (laughs) He will love it.

Dave: Okay, ahh… do you wanna talk about the David Johnson “Genesis” question first? Or do you wanna deal with the narrator question first?

Matt: Let’s do narrator first, cause I’m sure that’s gonna be a shorter answer.

Dave: Oh, no, that’s (laughs) that’s exactly the opposite. That’s one of those… “who is the narrator” is probably the largest question, I think, everywhere in the universe. Obviously, my answer to that is twofold. I think there are two narrators. There’s God and there’s not-God, or YHWH, and that’s what scripture is as far as I’m concerned, is… you know how if you’re having a discussion with Paula and she starts losing, she’ll try and change the subject?

Matt: Yes.

Dave: Yes. That’s, I’m pretty sure, is a universal structure between God and his creation YHWH, so scripture was God’s answer to that, to say, “Okay, we’re going to read all of this into the record.” It’s, uhh… the equivalent in our society would be in a court case, the agreed statement of fact. There’s a bunch of stuff at issue and under contention, but the prosecuting attorney and the defense attorney have to get together and put together as much as possible an agreed statement of fact. And that’s what I think scripture is, is, “okay, we both get a say in this, here’s the enactment that just happened, whatever enactment it was, whether it was Moshe and Aaron, or whether it was Jesus, or whether it was King David, whoever it was, this is the agreed statement of fact”. And the thing is, because we’re God’s creation, there’s a certain sensibility that looks at that. Which is really just, I mean, it’s beautifully crafted and beautifully written, because it’s God. I mean, he created language, so obviously he’s gonna do a really good job of doing an agreed statement of fact. Nor only for Himself, but I think, for YHWH. “Would you agree this is how you would have phrased that? This is how you would have said, ‘this is what just happened’.” And it’s like, “yeah, as a matter of fact, that’s exactly I would say that.” So, I think… bringing it to our immediate context, which is English, I think that’s… a perfect example of that is Shakespeare. I think, Shakespeare, if he was wasn’t in the first generation who could actually read the Bible, could read “this is what scripture is and this has been around for, at that time, 4000 years? 3500 years? And here’s how it works, here’s what I’m talking about.” And obviously, being William Shakespeare, went, “I wanna do that.” (laughs) It’s like, God is not surprised by this, but it’s like, “No, you can’t do that”. Because, ya know, if you’re looking at… and I’m pretty sure, Shakespeare was looking at the King David narrative, Solomon narrative, the Jewish Kingdom… Judaism, or Israel and Judah and was going, “I want to do that.” And it’s like, “No you can’t, because those were done at the time and it’s an agreed statement of fact.”, but there’s no reasoning with William Shakespeare, which is why I think, if you look at all of his plays, there’s such a preponderance of English Kings. (laughs) Its like, William Shakespeare, going, “Ya know, this King David stuff, this is pretty hot stuff, but you could flesh this out and make it even more interesting and flowery” and it’s like, “ya know, that’s not really God’s purpose with it, but he knows where you’re going with it, so you go with that.” And it’s… he got, I don’t know if you’d call it close, it’s like the first play is “Henry VI” and that was 1591, and Henry VI ruled from 1422 to 1470. But that’s like 120 years old, which raises an interesting question of, is that a good idea? If you’re going to do Henry VI should you wait a hundred years until all of the dust settles and you’re able to look at it… however much information there was available at the time that Shakespeare would have access to, and do a better job of it because it was a hundred years old, or is God looking at it, going, “You can’t do a history with something that’s a hundred years old? Do you have any idea how badly mangled this stuff gets? Well, it doesn’t matter, you’re going to go ahead and do it anyway.” Which he did. “Henry VI, Part I” and “Part II”. Next one, “Richard III”, which he wrote in 1593, that was 1483 to 1485, very short reign, but obviously looking at it and going, “this is really interesting what Henry VI led to, so let’s do what Henry VI led to.” And then, went backwards from “Richard III” to “Richard II”, 1595, 1596… which was, his reign was 1377 to 1399 in… marked down from $15.

Matt: (laughs)

Dave: Then, “John” which he wrote… no, wait a minute, “Henry IV” part one and one part two, that’s 1399 to 1413. So it’s interesting, because, yes in the one sense, the David narrative is very, very compelling. Obviously, it’s something that looms very large in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. God… Sura #38 is about King David. I don’t know if it was necessary to do the English King, but at the same time it worked well because Shakespeare writes his plays from about 1590 to about 1613, and conveniently, is in position when the definitive translation of the Bible is being done, the King James Version in 1611. It’s well positioned as the guy who not only pretty much created the English language and what is the best usages in the English language. What is good expression in the English language. And just about at the tag end of everything, why yes, you’re going to have a general edition, the King James Bible, and we’re going to get William Shakespeare to help with the translations of it. So, ya know, talk about sharpening your abilities as somebody who writes English for about 20 years, and at the peak of your powers, or if not at the peak your powers still very very able to do this, helping with the translations. William Shakespeare is to the English language what Dante was to the Italian language and what Mohammed was to Arabic. The guys who created the definitive versions of each language, and were also obviously associated with extremely devout religious observance. So, there you’ve got one step away from what I would call the narrator. God and YHWH are the narrators, William Shakespeare is like in English the King Samborg??? of God and YHWH. The guy who flowered the whole thing up and did definitive stories, but the problem I see with that, is he was also making stuff up. Which is, okay, here’s when I think God starts to have a problem with it. It’s like, “I understand your enthusiasm. I understand your thinking, uhh yes, the English people should have books about their Kings the way the Jewish people have books about their Kings.” And it’s like, “yeah, but First Samuel, Second Samuel, First King, Second King, that’s not made up stuff, that’s stuff that actually happened! And it’s the agreed statement of fact, you coming along and making stuff up, you’re gonna make people think that that stuff is made up.” Particularly when he then starts branching out and it’s like, “Okay, I’ve done Henry VI, Richard III, Richard II, Henry IV, Henry V, now I’m gonna do Julius Caesar”! (laughs) It’s like, “You don’t know Julius Caesar! Now you’re going… ohhh, okay, you go ahead and you do Julius Caesar, and you do Othello, and you do King Lear.” And it’s like King Lear didn’t really exist or there’s a legendary King Lear, but now you really… on the one hand, you’re making everything beautiful for the King James version of the Bible, which never would have existed in the form that it did without William Shakespeare, but he’s also the first guy who makes it okay to make stuff up. As long as you’re doing a Julius Caesar with a good moral core to it and a very valid point and dramatic enactment of power and what it does and all of the pressures and stuff like that. But it’s still making stuff up, and putting sort of in proximity to the Bible. Okay, jumping way, way ahead of that, then you got somebody like Dave Sim, who comes along and has never read the Bible, has no interest in reading the Bible. But he’s gonna do a 6000 page graphic novel because this will be my question for truth, this will be my way of trying to get as close as possible to the truth. And it’s like, “well, there ya go, that’s where that kind of erosion goes. You can make stuff up as William Shakespeare did, and make it very edifying material. It is, ya know, enrichening as opposed to I’m sure the popular entertainment at the time. “Moby Dick” is edifying, but it’s also made up stuff. Here’s let’s take this thing that actually happened and let’s make a grandiose novel out of it. So at that point, then you get to the question of when people ask writers, “where do you get your ideas?” Like, we have no ideas. You didn’t have an idea five minutes ago, you thought about it and thought about it and thought about it, and you go, “Okay, now I’ve got an idea. I know exactly how to get from page 10 to page 15 on issue 182” or whatever it is I was trying to do at the time. And then there are weird things which particularly, looking back from my vantage point here, where ya know I’ve become a devout monotheist. Things like issue 17 of Cerebus, when Cerebus takes over the hovel by offering them 3 gold coins to just move out. And the kid’s got, ya know, a broken leg, and is completely lame, but Dad’s getting three gold coins, a walk will do him some good. And the kid’s name is Theophelus., And it’s like, Theophelus is the name that Luke’s Gospel is addressed to. Now, where would I have gotten the name Theophelus from in whatever year that was? 1980? 1979? So, when you’re asking, “who’s the narrator”, you’re asking me a question that I don’t know… 

Dave: So, when you’re asking, “who’s the narrator”, you’re asking me a question that I don’t know myself, about myself. Like this is, because of my… conclusion that I’ve come to, that scripture, whether it’s the Torah or the Gospels or the Koran, is a dialogue between God and YHWH. So, it becomes interesting while I’m reading it, I’m really focusing on it, to go, “Okay, who’s this? Is this God or is it YHWH?” It can sound like a very high-minded, divine edict, or it can also be read as a tongue-in-cheek, ironic puncturing pretension of what it is that that’s saying. In this case, it’s YHWH that’s saying it. I don’t know how much participation there is in the world just for writers, generally. I mean, are we making stuff up? Am I, the individual Dave Sim making this stuff up, or am I just a conduit for a different kind of conversation at a much lower level than what you get in the Torah or the Gospels or the Koran?

Matt: …Okay…

Dave: (laughs)

Matt: The only reason I asked about, was Po the narrator, because after Po leaves in “Women” there really is no narration until “Latter Days” when it’s Cerebus telling what happened after “Form & Void.”

Dave: Right. Right.

Matt: And it was one of those, I just happened to hit the panel in “Reads” where Po says, “I’ve seen you every day of your life, I know your innermost thoughts and there isn’t a day where you don’t surprise me” and I’m like, “wait a minute. That kinda lends itself to the idea that Po’s the one narrating the stuff that couldn’t possibly be narrated, like the First Ascension, and I’m tryin’ to think of some other things that just… it’s one of those, I know that… I think it was “High Society” or “Church & State”, one of them has the “next issue the return of the all-knowing narrator.”

Dave: That’s 102, “The Sudden Return of the Melodramatic Narrator”.

Matt: And that’s why I’m thinkin’, “Well, maybe the Melodramatic Narrator was Po?”

Dave: Uhh, that would be one of those questions where Po probably wouldn’t know. Like, obviously he decided to opt out of society in any kind of conventional sense, and obviously developed whatever kind of connection that he has an aardvark to Cerebus and Cirin, and particularly in the case of Cerebus, was either omniscient, or as has been said of Satan, at least very well informed. In which case, he becomes a proxy for me in the sense that I’m pretty sure Suenteus Po had no idea who Dave Sim was. But, he would know the concept of who Dave Sim was, relative to Suenteus Po.

Matt: Well, that’s, uhh… “Mind Game II” is the one where… when I get around to “High Society” I’m probably gonna send up the question of, “So, when did you know that Po was an aardvark cause in ‘Mind Game II’ there’s the bit where Cerebus is putting Po off his game and he mentions the Regency and Po’s like, ‘I’ve never set foot in the Regency’ and Cerebus is like, ‘no, you asked where I was stayin’, that’s where I’m stayin’.” If Po is omnipotent at that point, then Po would know Cerebus is messin’ with him, and that’s when your brain starts getting twisted into a pretzel tryin’ to figure out what’s goin’ on, and then you remember it’s just a comic book and you can go on with the rest of your day.

Dave: (laughs) Well, that’s… see, I wouldn’t think that that was the same Suenteus Po that turned out to be the Aardvark. I think, again, Suenteus Po was the name that Illusionists adopted, because, ya know, the slight of hand, magician type illusionists and people who had a firm awareness that everything is pretty much an illusion. Like the whole physically incarnated world doesn’t actually exist. You have to get to quantum physics before you actually go, “Ya know, actually that’s true, it’s just wave particles flying in loose formation, they just seem to be solid objects.” Same as the first Suenteus Po that we meet is like a drug guy. Like he’s smoking hash and stuff like that. I don’t think that’s the Suenteus Po that we finally meet in “Minds”.

Matt: Okay. That’s what I was just gonna say, so the first two “Mind Games” that’s not the “real” Po, that’s just “A” Po.

Dave: Uhh, well the question would come in of, if it was a, let’s call them, a lesser Po, in those two instances, is the lesser Po under Suenteus Po the aardvark’s jurisdiction?

Matt: And that would be? That’s, I know, I mean, in “Reads” when Serna/Cirin accuses him of being an Illusionist, ya know, he’s greatly offended and I have a… with what you’re just sayin’, I’m thinkin’, “that actually lends itself to the idea that the Illusionists are founded by a lesser Po in the name of the aardvark Po who doesn’t want anything to do with it, he just wants to sit in his room and play chess.”

Dave: Right. Which also raises a question, is the aardvark Suenteus Po the highest elevation Suenteus Po?

Matt:… I’m gonna go with, probably? Only because of the trial at the end of “Church & State” where Cerebus and Astoria see the echo… well, not the echoes, but the previous incarnation of the Cirinist and Po, and Po remembers all his lives…

Dave: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, that’s one of those, I do go, at least in as so far as the kind of stuff that Alan Moore is into, I do acknowledge the validity of “as above, so below”, so I assumed then that the story that I was telling by creating a character with an elevation above a 2-Dimensional character but not 3-Dimensional like me, I assumed that that reiterates itself upon me. Which is why when I started reading the Bible, it’s like I’m doing,” Yeah, why are you resistant to calling that God? Why are you always talking about ‘whoever it is that’s in charge of the universe’?” It’s like, “well, who does that sound like to you, Dave?” And, at that point, yes, I got very self-conscience about, “Oh hey, wait a minute, I didn’t know I was doing that.” Yeah, I know you didn’t know you were doing that but you do know you’re doing that, and you do know that you did do that, so what’re you going to do now?

Matt: Right…. Which, ya know.

Dave: And, the answer to that is read lots of scripture aloud, fast a lot, pray, fast in Ramadan, and try to keep thy nose as clean as possible, because I think I’ve been mucking around in stuff that I’d probably be better off not mucking around in.

Matt: Well, that’s… Douglas Adams in the last book they published under his name, which, it’s the beginnings of his next book that he died before he could finished and then a series of articles, and one of the articles, he was an avout atheist ,but he was talking about fung shui, and he said, “just because, there are no dragons, the whole point about fung shui is you have to allow the energy dragons to flow through your house and that’s why you have to move the lamp there and have a potted plant there and stuff”, and his point was there are no dragons, but if you design your house to let the dragon come through and you sudden realize, “hey, this is a better layout for my house, ya know, I’m more productive, the light’s better and all this” doesn’t prove there are energy dragons, it just proves that that’s the way you should lay out your house. And, so, not saying there’s energy dragons, but maybe we should think that. Which, ya know, it’s the same thing of, there is a God, or there isn’t a God depending on where you fall on that line, but if you live like there is a God and he’s going to be mad at you for what you did last Friday, so you’re not gonna do what you did last Friday ever again, you’re gonna live a better life, and ya know, you’re not gonna wake up hacking up a lung, you’re not gonna wake up tryin’ to remember where you are cause you went blotto last night and woke up on a park bench. Ya know, you’re gonna have…

Dave: Oh you will, oh you will for a period of time. It’s like, one of my first things once I was aware that, “okay you’re talking about an omnipotent being, that means he knows everything that you’re thinking” and it was, okay, cigarettes and alcohol are off the table. It’s like, I understand that I’m supposed to give those up, but I’m not giving those up, I just want you to know that off the top. And it’s like, uh yeah whatever. (laughs) And it’s like, three years later, the cigarettes are gone, five years later the alcohol’s gone.

Matt: That’s… I’m tryin’ to remember, there was a famous quote about… or no, it’s the old caveat of “if you want to make God laugh, tell him your plans.”
Dave: Yes, exactly. Exactly. It.. I think it’s far better served just, like I say, try and figure out how to keep your nose as clean as possible. What does that mean to me? Where do I have to improve and what do I have to improve on? And just work on that, stick to your own plate, and interpret it the best way that you can. And then, hope for the best. I’m still convinced there’s gonna be a lot more unhappy stories on Judgement Day than there are going to be happy stories, and I think a lot of people who thought they were doing good, which I don’t even try to get into, because, it’s like, I… I don’t even see it that way, I see myself as a massive reclamation job. Like I’ve just passed through the threshold of having been celibate for as long as I was sexually active. And it’s like, thinking back, ya know, 21 years of scrubbing the frying pan and 21 years of dirtying the frying pan. I don’t know if I’d give me FDA??? on Judgement Day.

Matt: Well, ya know. That’s what, when, years ago, when you had said, your bags are packed, you’re ready to go, whenever God wants ya, and I’m like, “Yeah, my Grandma said that when she turned 60, she died when she was 91.”

Dave: Yeah.

Matt: Ya know, “your bags are packed, you’re ready to go” but you might not be gettin’ on the bus for quite a while.

Dave: Yeah, yeah. (laughs) And it’s like, it’s probably not a good idea to pack your bags that early, it’s almost like you’re daring God to keep you around for another 30 years. No, anybody who thinks he’s gonna pack his bags, no, you’re just asking for it that way, buddy.

Matt: (laughs) That was, when my Grandma died my Aunt took a picture cause she’d been sayin’ for years, “when I die, I want to go in my sleep”. And, so I go, I’m at my Grandma’s apartment, we’re helping clean everything up and my Aunt shows me this picture, and she’s like, “you want to see the picture?” and I’m like, “not really” and she shows me and I’m like, “she looks like she’s asleep”. It’s like, yeah, nice smile on her face, looks like she’s dreamin’. And I’m like, “yeah that’s what she wanted, but at the same…”

Dave: Yep. Yep. And I have to say, I only know your Grandmother from the book, that she wrote about… how many kids was that, that they pulled out of the bus?

Matt: Eleven.

Dave: How many?

Matt: Eleven.

Dave: Eleven kids, yes.

Matt: My Aunt Katie, who just was up to visit, was… six months old, I believe?

Dave: Right, she was a baby.

Matt: Yeah.

Dave: Like, flipped over in a drawer, kind of thing.

Matt: Yeah, and that’s… Grandma actually has, I think, five books, a couple of them are just more in the vein of the one I gave ya, but she does have a novel she wrote based on, I think it’s her mom or her grandma’s life, and how she met her husband and stuff like that, it’s called, “They Do It In Church”.

Dave: Right, actually, you sent me that one, I have that one in the Off-White House Library.

Matt: Okay. Cause I know there’s a couple more books, but that’s… when Grandma died I become the literary executor of the estate because I’m the only person who understood what that was.

Dave: Okay, well, if at some point you want to will a complete set to the Cerebus Archive I would be very interested in having those, cause that book about the trip was just absolutely amazing.

Matt: Well, that’s… it’s a great book if you’re not a member of my family, because if you’re a member of my family it’s a, “that’s not how it happened, she lied!” (laughs) And I always say, everytime it comes up, I need to get a video camera and film all my Aunts and Uncles saying, “this is what she got wrong, this is what she got right, this is what we remember.” My favorite part is when members of the family say, “oh no, that didn’t happen”, and I’m like, “at that part of the book have the kids were gone, and you were in the half that’s was gone, how do you know?”

Dave: (laughs heartily) What’s the consensus on the Disneyland story?

Matt: Umm

Dave: Mom wasn’t going to let them make a big fuss over them at Disneyland and like Disney really wanted to play this up, but she didn’t really want the exploitation, sort of thing.

Matt: Yeah, she didn’t want the kids gettin’ big heads, so she said no, but yeah, Walt Disney wanted to feature on the Wonderful World of Disney that week when they were at Disneyland. And that’s true, Disney was gonna lay out the red carpet and let these eleven kids from Wisconsin do whatever they wanted and have a run of the park type thing and Mom said no.

Dave: (Laughs) Boy oh boy, you wouldn’t find a Mom who would dare do that in this day and age.

Matt: Well, there were a number of newspaper stories about the trip that, ya know, reporters would be, “oh yeah we heard you were comin’, can we do a story?” “No, we’re really not interested” and ya know, the bare Joe Friday, “Just the facts, ma’am” kind of thing. A little bit of an interview, no real talkin’ to the kids, because, again, she didn’t want them gettin’ big heads.

Dave: Right, right. And the kids are going, “couldn’t we get just tiny big heads”?

Matt: That’s… when I read the book, I’m like, “this is amazing” and I start talking to my Mom about it, and she’s like, “yeah, it’s amazing now, but at the time we really pissed when we found out we could’ve had the run of Disneyland and Mom said no.”

Dave: (laughs) There ya know, it’s a wonder that the kids ever spoke to Mom again.

Matt: Well, that’s… they loved their mother, but when she died, the stories kept comin’ up, like, I mean… My grandma had a nightie that she wore for probably 30 years. And at one point my Mom found a nightgown at St Vincent de Paul’s… ya know, it’s $2. Bought it for her, gave it to her, next time she went to see her Mom, and her Mom put on her nightgown and it was the same old rag she had for 30 years.

Dave: Uh-huh.

Matt: “This is all I need, I don’t need anything else”, yeah, but it’s see-through because it’s so old.

Dave: (laughs) Don’t talk to your mother that way. “If I wanna wear this, I wanna wear this.”

Matt: For their 50th wedding anniversary, my brother got a plate that said, “50th anniversary” and it had a gold leaf circle around the edge of the plate and the 50th anniversary was in gold leaf. And he gave it them. He gave them this platter on their 50th wedding anniversary, because we had a big party. And about a month later we went down to visit, and there’s this plate on a pile of stuff by the back door, and my brother’s, “what’s this?” And Grandma goes, “Oh, I’m giving that stuff to Goodwill”, and he’s like, “No you’re not!” and he took the plate and brought it home, he’s like, “if you don’t want it, I’m keepin’ it.”

Dave: (Laughs) Well, at least, scraping the gold off of it.

Matt: And that’s why, I’m like, this is real 24 karat gold, Grandma, why were you gettin’ rid of it? “Well, we don’t need this plate, ya know we already had our anniversary, we’re not gonna have another 50th anniversary”. And I see her point, but at the same time… she didn’t have a lot of sediment, it’s was like, “alright, we’ll hang onto this, but, ya know, like when they sold the house to move into an apartment, it was, my Grandfather and all this stuff that he had carved. And he had a piece of ivory he carved into a skull, and Grandma thought it was plastic and put on the sale pile and somebody was like, “Dad carved that!” and grabbed it out, ya know, we’re savin’ this family heirloom and she’s like, “oh, I thought it was plastic, and it’s just a cheap skull, we don’t need it.”

Dave: There ya go. (laughs) Man oh man. Moving onto David Johnson.

Matt: Yes!

Dave: David Johnson is an important guy to me, primarily because when I was finishing the Cerebus Marathon, the last last six months I’m doing the book, so from March until, not it’d be June until September 2003, I heard from David Wayne Johnson in Indiana… conservative estimate? At least twice a week, and usually like eight page letters and sometimes with drawings in them, and stuff like that. So there’s like, well, I always wondered what’s the last six months on Cerebus going to be like? And that was one of those things. David Wayne Johnson, I’ve got all of the letters as a separate file in the upstairs closet here. I couldn’t put my hand on them right away, but I know that they’re in there because… it was very important to me. When you find yourself running completely alone across this blank plane, the guy who shows up every once and while goes, “hey, by the way, I’m still here, still looking forward to issue 300”, so David is very important to me in that sense. He was also very important to me because he was writing to me about scripture and was quoting John’s Gospel. And I wrote back to him and said, “This is phrased in a very very unusual way, where are you getting this from?”, hoping that he wasn’t gonna say, “well, I’ve got a radio in my head, this is all being communicated to me.” But he said, “oh it’s the Kingdom Interlinear Version of the Gospels”, which is something that Jehovah’s Witnesses have as a book, he got it from a Jehovah’s Witness. And I said, “Ahhh, could I borrow that sometime?” and he said… uhh actually, I think he had two or three of them at the time, and he said, “I can send you one”, and it’s like “well, that’s very nice of you, if you’re sure you can spare it, I would be interested in looking at it.” And it’s definitely one of my most treasured possessions. Again, talking about just how beautifully crafted the King James version is, and I was going, “I don’t know who this kid is or where he’s getting this mangled version of John’s Gospel, but he really needs to get the King James version”. And of course I barely look at the King James version of John’s Gospel now, I always read the Kingdom Interlinear version, because it’s amazing in sofar as, “okay, here it is in Greek. Here’s the coined??? Greek on the one line, here’s the English on the other line.” And if you read it aloud, it’s so immaculate, it makes the King James version look gaudy. So I always owe David Wayne Johnson big time for the fact that he got me this. He actually sent me two copies of it, and I went, “well, I don’t really need two copies, but I appreciate you sending it to me.” And then I heard through the grapevine, actually it was a news story. Probably this was going back far enough that it was in Comics Buyer’s Guide. Somebody was asking Frank Miller in an article about Frank Miller what his next project was going to be, and he wrote on a piece of paper, and I don’t know if I’m mis-remembering that part, he wrote on a piece of paper, “life of Jesus”, and I read this at just about the same time as I was getting this Kingdom Interlinear version from David Wayne Johnson, and getting a second copy of it, and I was going, “Well, if I was ever looking for another person to give my spare Kingdom Interlinear version of the Gospels to, I think Frank Miller would be a good bet. He’s doing the life of Jesus”. So, I did that, I actually wrote a letter explaining how I’d gotten it and saying, “if you’re serious about doing a life of Jesus, I think it would be amazing if you took the actual Greek and put that in the word balloons and had the whole thing footnoted with what, word for word translation is of it. Whatever you’re gonna do with the graphics”, and it’s Frank Miller, the graphics are gonna be amazing. I think, just having that as the structure, I definitely want to be in the front row on opening night for that. That kinda of thing. And that was literally, I dunno what happened, but whatever relationship I had with Frank Miller to that point, it was over. I tried phoning him when I was in New York, leaving a message. “Frank, it’s Dave, I’m in town. I don’t know if you’re busy or you wanna hang out or whatever else. Here’s the number at the hotel, give me a call.” Heard nothing from him, heard nothing about the Kingdom Interlinear version, so… (laughs) there you go! That’s one of those perfect Dave Sim stories. I don’t know what happened there. I don’t know if I did something seriously wrong doing that, but… I still think that if Frank Miller would, ya know, copy the Greek characters line for line and put them in the word balloons and do his Jesus and footnote it, I think that would be an amazing thing. I did that with some of Chester Brown’s stuff, when Chester and I were still on speaking terms. I said, “I’m gonna photocopy some of your adaptations of the Gospel of Mark, because that’s the Jesus not the Jesus that I picture, so I’m just gonna glue blow-ups of the Greek into the word balloons.” It was pretty interesting, but Chester’s adaptation wasn’t a literal adaptation. It was… here’s what the text says, and here’s the dramatization that I’m gonna do of it. It’s one of those, (laughs) I really wish people wouldn’t do that. I really wish somebody would do a movie of John’s Gospel, just John’s Gospel. Don’t fluff it up, don’t try and William Shakespeare it. Just have the narration, have the actual dialogue, film that. When I read John’s Gospel aloud, which I’ve been doing lately as part of my protests against the safe injection sites in Kitchener, it’s like, I have my ???Waterloo region says those who opioid injection sites signs??? and then I just sit outside the council chambers and very quietly read John’s Gospel aloud. It’s two and half hours, beginning to end. It would make a great two and a half hour movie. I think, God did it that way, or at least partly did it that way going, “Well, you know, it’ll be possible for them to do this. Nobody will do this, but… or they’ll finally do it in 2250 or 2371 whenever somebody goes, “Hey, let’s actually film John’s Gospel exactly as it is and let’s not make up any stuff. Let’s just do this.”” So, uhh, there ya go, that’s a story that I haven’t told before, but it’s one of those, “I don’t know what happened there”. I still hope that Frank’s got it somewhere and at some point Frank is gonna do his life of Jesus, and I would strongly recommend just stick to the text that’s there and just be Frank Miller with the rest.

Matt: (laughs)

Matt: That’s… the latest I think I’ve heard he’s doin’ is a Superman series. I think he’s just writin’ it, I don’t think he’s drawin’ anymore, I think he’s slowed down drawin’.

Dave: Well, we’re all getting to that point.

Matt: Yeah.

Dave: It’s uhh… yeah, yeah, Frank is obviously a very important guy. If you look at the whole Batman franchise and how much of the Batman franchise is based on Frank Miller’s “Dark Knight Returns”. That was an absolutely amazing thing to do at the time. Completely out of left field. Completely gutsy. Completely unprecedented, but also… he’s… I don’t know if he’s in the same kind of weird category I am or if he’s in a related weird category I am. What I was going to always find funny was going to Paradise Comics and, ya know, Paradise Comics was a real mainstream superhero back issue CGC kind of store primarily. But, it does have other stuff. So when I’d be hanging out it would be, “um, I think I’ll look around, see if there’s anything here that I want to pick up.” And it’s like, “Oh, Frank Miller, I wonder if there’s Frank Miller stuff I haven’t seen… Oh, ‘Holy Terror’! No, I think I heard about this but I don’t… I don’t know anything about except for the fact that it’s called ‘Holy Terror’ and was obviously done by Frank Miller.” Picked it out, and checking it out, and Pete Dixon looks at it and says, “No refunds on those.”

Matt: (laughs)

Dave: (laughs) It’s like, I go, “Not really looking for a refund. Is this like a common thing? Were people bringing this back and wanting a refund on ‘Holy Terror’”? And it’s like, “Umm, okay, I guess” and I’m reading it, I go, “Okay, this is… we can probably call this Islamophobia.” Ya know, speaking as somebody who fasts in Ramadan and reads the Koran all the way through just about every thirty days, I’m not offended by this. (laughs) It’s like, I think Americans are entitled to be a little steamed about Islam. I would be surprised if Americans weren’t a little steamed about Islam.

Matt: Well, did he tell ya what the story behind that book was?

Dave: It was a Batman thing, I think somebody told me.

Matt: Yeah, Frank had proposed it as a Batman story and DC went, “Enhh, we’re a little uncomfortable publishin’ this” and he just changed the costume and the name and went, “Okay, I’ll just do it like this.”

Dave: (laughs) He shoulda gone and done it as Batman. What do you think’s going to happen? Well, at the same time, it’s…

Matt: Well, remember, there’s Frank Miller’s Batman and there’s Batman that’s on underwear that they sell for kids.

Dave: Right.

Matt: Warner Brothers is gonna protect the Batman that’s on the underwear they sell for kids.

Dave: Right.

Matt: I mean… that’s…

Dave: Yeah, I… I think Frank has always pushed the envelope on that. Why can’t why we have Batman doing it? It’s only lines on paper???

Matt: And that’s, I mean, ya know, there’s Batman that I let my kid watch and there’s Batman that my kid’s not gonna see till my kid’s a lot older than she is now.

Dave: (laughs) Yes, and not without a written note from her parole officer.

Matt: (laughs) Not quite that strict, but when I was… 8 or 9 my dad gave me “Batman: Year One”, cause that was around the time that the movie had come out. No I was 10! I was around 10 cause that was when the movie came out and Batman’s everywhere, and the kid loves Batman? Okay, here’s a Batman story. And I read it, and I’m like, “this is pretty good”, but at the same time lookin’ back, ehh, it’s a little bit beyond where I’d want a 10 year old to be readin’ Batman.

Dave: I would think so.

Matt: To be fair, at the same time, he gave my brother Grant Morrison’s “Arkham Asylum” and flat out told my brother, “don’t let Matt read this.” (laughs)

Dave: Right.

Matt: And when I finally got older and I read it, and I’m like, “yeah, I’m like 18 and this book’s creepin’ me out.”

Dave: Well, I’ll tell ya, I don’t think I’ll ever be old enough to re-read “Killing Joke”.

Matt: I… yeah, now that I think about it, that’s the other Batman story that… ya know, my kids want to read Batman, enhh, no, putting “Killing Joke” back, you’re not old enough.

Dave: Yeah, yeah. I mean, there’s stuff in that book you’re never gonna get out of your head once you read it. So, my recommendation would be, if you could do an edited version where you go, “okay, let’s take all the money shots out of here, and here’s Brian Bolland’s artwork in black & white” I’m tight with that. But, man oh man, actually reading that again? Nah, I think we’ve all of us went a little overboard in the 1980s, just cause they let us.

Matt: Well, that’s…

Dave: I wanna get back to David Johnson just a…

Matt: Sure!

Dave: You got an 18 page letter from, I think David Birdsong got an 18 page letter from him, I got an 18 page fax from him, which I just happened to be upstairs checking to see if Benjamin Hobbs’ new strips had come in. At the exact point that it had started to come in, I looked at the screen and it had, ya know, 18 pages on the way. (laughs) It’s like, well at least I’m able to pull them off one at a time and keep them in order and fax back to David saying, “the fax machine is really just for business stuff, so please don’t do this. You can send me anything you want in the mail and if you start sending as much stuff as you used to, now I’ve got correspondence boxes. Like Jim Binkofski???, who, to me, is the Jim Binkofski???, whose name I always knew from the covers that he did on the Comics Buyer’s Guide, who started writing to me a while ago and started sending me his comic books, sending me newspaper articles and stuff. So I’ve got two boxes of Jim Binkofski??? stuff, and he’s a Seventh Day Adventist so (laughs) it was definitely, I think it was about 3 or 4 months of a real crash course in everything having to do with Seventh Day Adventist beliefs and uhh… most of the guys on Picairn Island, “Mutiny on the Bounty”, were Seventh Day Adventists. I didn’t know that and hadn’t remembered that from the book. But I’m very pleased to have that in the Cerebus Archive. Like, I responded to a certain amount of what he said, but I’m not really… turning 63 in a couple of weeks, I’m not really in the market for other people’s theology and discussing other people’s theology. But I am interested in having anybody’s viewpoints on Cerebus and my theology and their own theology as part of the Cerebus Archive. So that’s really how I’ve left it with David Johnson. You can send me stuff, if I have time to read all of it I’ll read all of it or I’ll skim it, but I will definitely have a David Johnson correspondence box in the Cerebus Archive, or two of them or three of them or four of them or however many it works out to. David Birdsong… (laughs) David, you were just working on Cerebus In Hell? with Dave Sim, you’re not Dave Sim, you don’t have to respond to someone on these things. Cause, we got what feels like a 20 page letter and a trade paperback… a paperback book from some guy… from David Johnson, David Birdsong care of Dave Sim, Aardvark-Vanaheim. I’m happy to forward it to David Birdsong, but I don’t want David Birdsong thinking that because Dave Sim is forwarding David Johnson’s things to David Birdsong that this is Dave Sim saying, “here you have to deal with it”, no, it’s illegal for me to open it. It’s not a ??? If you don’t want to get stuff from David Johnson, you tell me and I’ll tell David Johnson, please don’t send more stuff to David Birdsong. I gave up commenting on the Genesis Question the Book, because as much time as I spent working on it, no I really don’t want to do this. I don’t want to be… here’s somebody who thinks God and YHWH are the same being, which most monotheists do, certainly most Jews, or… all Christians and all Jews. I don’t. So, that’s kind of a break, thing. A deal-breaker, as far as I’m concerned. It’s like, ahh, I’m interested in listening to what you have to say, but fundamentally I’m not in the market for finding a different viewpoint on God and YHWH. I think my theory suits and matches the text of the Torah, the Gospels, and the Koran in a way that your philosophy doesn’t. You’re more than welcome to believe what you want to believe, and I’m always happy to discuss the finer points of it, and to hear what people have to say about it. But I really don’t have to be doing, ya know, 15 page letters going, “well, no, here’s where I disagree with you” and you had the same reaction that I did and the same reaction that David Birdsong did. A lot of what David was writing was just factually inaccurate. I didn’t say that. Matt Dow didn’t say that. This wasn’t what happened in the book. So, there’s only so many hours in the day. You can’t… somebody who’s making those kinds of… anybody who knows what you’re talking about knows that that’s inaccurate information. There’s not enough hours in the day to spend correcting that. You said that in your fax to me, that you started responding to it, and just went, “ah, I don’t know where to start with it.”

Matt: Well, I was goin’ through his… cause it’s an email, and I was goin’ through the email, and okay, this is where I disagree, not because I disagree, but because you’re sayin’ something that I can prove to you is wrong. Ya know, your interpretation is wrong. And I just started goin’ through, ya know, cause one of his points for the viewers at home is that Cerebus’ son… Cerebus signs Cerebus’ son’s petition. Well, no, it wasn’t She-shep’s petition, it was the Upper Feldan Foo-Foos. Ya know, that’s a slightly different interpretation dependin’ on who’s petition it is and I was goin’ through thing by thing and after 2 hours it was like, “it’s actually Easter morning, we’re goin’ out to Easter brunch, it’s time to get dressed up, ya know, put on my tie and go. So I’ll come back to this later.” And when we got home, I’m like, “I just don’t feel like dealin’ with this” because it is an 18 page letter and… I was flippin’ through it when I was sending it to you, just skimmin’ it and I’m like, “he talks about the Strange Death of Alec Robinson and I’m like… that’s not the book you’re workin’ on, I don’t even think that’s a real person…” And ya know, I want to respond, because I feel I owe him a response of, “hey, you took the time to send this in, but we’re comin’ from two very different worlds here where I’m not sure what you’re talkin’ about because you’re twisting reality to fit what you want to say but that I don’t think that’s reality.”

Dave: Maybe what you can do, I mean if you were inclined to do it. I’ve got it in the correspondence files for that month, so it’s in the April box that is just getting prepared. If you just said, “okay, most of what you’re writing here is factually inaccurate”, and just took a yellow highlighter pen and anytime you read something or you went, “okay that’s just wrong” instead of taking the time that it’s gonna to take… excuse me (sneezes)… to actually write back and address and cut & paste and everything and retype what it is that he says, just say, “Okay, here’s yellow highlighted. Anything I put in yellow highlight is factually wrong to the extent that it’s just not even worth talking about” and then see, okay, how much of the letter is left over that isn’t in that category?

Matt: That’s… I mean, that’s a good idea. I might end up doin’ that. I mean, his big contention, which is one of the reason I sent it up to you, was that he believes that you don’t want people to sign the petition.

Dave: (laughs)

Matt: And I’m goin’, “Dave’s been fairly vocal about what he was intending when he made the petition and why he keeps... ya know, sent the form letter sayin’, ‘I have a petition, please sign it if you want to contact me’”.

Dave: Right. Yeah, it’s… to me, the petition is for other people’s benefit. I’m fine with what I believe, I don’t believe that I’m a misogynist. I’m definitely not a feminist. But I don’t believe that I’m a misogynist. But I think the further along we go, the clearer that’s going to become to society, that the two are not interchangeable. That you don’t hate women… it’s not necessary to hate women to not be a feminist. It’s like, I’m not a feminist because I don’t agree with it. I don’t think it makes sense, and, ya know, I just off the top of my head came up with 15 things of, “here’s why I don’t think it’s got all of the intellectual underpinnings and legs that will sustain it”. I think if you sign the petition, it’s a way of acknowledging for posterity, “yeah, I understood what Dave Sim was saying at the time, that not being a feminist makes you a misogynist, it’s just means you’re not a feminist.” Feminism doesn’t add up, logically. So…

Matt: I remember when the petition…

Dave: In a sense, he’s kind of right, in saying that Dave doesn’t want people to sign the petition. It’s like, I don’t want them to or not want them to, it’s really completely separate from me. This is, I think, this is something where I think you want to come down on the right side of human history and here’s an opportunity to do it. You don’t want the opportunity to do it, I completely understand that. The consensus definitely runs against me, but… it’s not a “I want you to sign the petition” or “you need to sign the petition” or “you have to sign the petition for my benefit”. The petition, whenever it comes up, always gets explained away, so… that becomes the bottom line on that. That people go, “Oh well, all of these things… that people did on Dave Sim’s behalf to get signatures that weren’t legitimate”, it’s like, oh okay. If that’s what we want to turn the discussion into, then that’s even worse than allowing people to infer that you think that Dave Sim is a misogynist, which is where we started out with. Now, you’re not only not cleaning it up, you’re making it fuzzier.

Matt: Well, I remember when the petition first came out, and there was a lot of, “it’s a simple declarative sentence of ‘I don’t believe Dave Sim is a misogynist’.” Period. And there’s so much that people have tried to bring to it after the period, and it’s like, “no no no, it’s a simple declarative sentence. I don’t think Dave Sim is a misogynist.” Period. Ya know, there’s no… any baggage people want to throw at it, we can, but, again, it’s just a simple declarative sentence. And… David’s letter to me, or email to me was, ya know, putting all this baggage on it and part of me was like, “It’s been fairly consistent since it was created, of, it’s just a simple declarative sentence. Ya know, either yes or no.”

Dave: Right.

Matt: It’s the equivalent of the old grade school, “do you like me? Yes / no”. You don’t have to write a 15 page response of, “well, the party of the first part shall be hereafter known as the party of the first part”, ya know. We don’t need a long complicated contract here.

Dave: Right. It was looking for clarification and I definitely got that. I mean… the best example I use on that was, if I had to guess between Chester Brown and Rob Walton, who would sign the petition, it would’ve been the complete opposite. I would have thought Chester would sign it, Rob not a chance in hell that Rob Walton was gonna sign the petition. And it’s like Rob was one of the earliest signers and Chester was one of the most vehement, “no I’m not signing it.”

Matt: Right.

Dave: I don’t know what to make of that in terms of, “okay, why did that happen?” I can certainly guess or try to guess, but that’s a good example of the kind of effects that you do get from a simple declarative sentence. That you’re going to get surprises on that. The fact that so few professionals signed it. Kevin Eastman, it’s like, (laughs) why would Kevin Eastman sign it? If there was anybody in the world who wasn’t beholden to Dave Sim and ya know, ???we could’ve get??? along fine in life without Dave Sim it’s Kevin Eastman. Why would Kevin Eastman sign it? And it’s like, well, that’s well worth knowing. Kevin Eastman was in a category that I had no idea that Kevin Eastman was in.

Matt: Right…

Dave: Okay! We’re past the hour. Is there anything that we forgot to talk about that was in the…

Matt: Uhhh… looking at the printout… uhh, no! That was pretty much it.

Dave: Alrighty. Well. As always, I appreciate the opportunity to do this, Matt. It’s once a month, find out, okay, anybody have any questions? And if you don’t even get any questions that month, we’re gonna take that a vote of confidence.

Matt: I did get two questions, Jesse Lee Herndon asked if you were aware of the CBC cartoon “The Racoons” which had a villain was Cyril Sneer, a cartoon aardvark?

Dave: Uhh, that sounds vaguely familiar, but no I was not consciously aware of it. Did you put that up on A Moment of Cerebus at some point, with a picture of him?

Matt: Uhh, he commented with a link, I’m gonna do somethin’ with it. Cause, apparently the character appeared almost 40 years ago and I’m like, “okay”. I clicked his link, I looked at the picture, and I’m like, “doesn’t look familiar at all”. But then again, it’s a CBC show that they were showing on Disney, is what he remembers.

Dave: Sean Robinson is turning 40 this year, I wonder if that has something to do with it.

Matt: (laughs) I’m turnin’ 40 this year.

Dave: The Strange Death of Alex Robinson.

Matt: …Huh.

Dave: You’re turning 40 this year? Oh, okay.

Matt: Yeah, and then…

Dave: You were born in 79?

Matt: Yep! June 11th, the same day that John Wayne died.

Dave: I did not know that.

Matt: I only know that because my Dad started sending me the “this what happened on your birthday thing” and the first time it was a big thing, “John Wayne died on June 11th” and I’m like, “what time of day?” I was born at 6 in the morning, he died around noon. Okay, so if there’s reincarnation, I’m not John Wayne.

Dave: Uhh, yeah you could’ve gotten a little piece of the Duke depending on how many pieces were running around and where they went and whether that’s got any actual validity in it.

Matt: Well, that’s…. my Dad was big on reincarnation as a concept. He’s like… Janis was born a year after his Mom died, so he’s like, “Oh, Janis could be Mom” And I’m like, “No, she can’t”, and he’s like, “why not?” and I’m like “Cause Paula was born three days after your died and that’s not gonna happen.”

Dave: You don’t know. We don’t know anything about that stuff. I mean, in terms of know, there’s stuff we believe…

Matt: Well… let me put it this way, for my own sanity, I have to go with I don’t believe that just because I don’t want my wife to be my Grandfather.

Dave: (laughs) Oh, I can certainly understand that.

Matt: I’m willing to entertain the possibility, but only up to the point where I get a little creeped out and have to go take a shower.

Dave: This is true. This is true.

Matt: And then, the last question I got was Jeff Seiler said, he went, “Okay Matt, some questions for Dave since you axed first. Dave, why didn’t you call me on my birthday?” then a little bit more there, and then two, “well maybe you’ll call today, Mayday”, three, “who ultimately was more dangerous politically, Cirin or Serna?” and I’m like, I read it, and I’m like, “that’s a seperate, I gotta send that up at the beginning as a part of the agenda.” And then number 4 is what do you really think of Mr Trump and Justin, is he still the prime minister? And number 5, why do you put up with my silliness for so kindly for so long?

Dave: Well, I appreciate everything that Jeff Seiler has done. I felt bad not phoning him on his birthday. Donald Trump, I think, is the freedom of expression President, that America probably didn’t know that it really needed, and it’s just starting to take hold now of… we’re all living in democracy. I can say whatever the hell I want. This whole political correctness thing has gotten way way way out of hand. And Donald Trump is definitely a primary force in just saying, “Ahh, I’m not gonna do that. I will tell you exactly what I have to say. You may not like it. You’ll probably think I’m lying. I may even be lying sometimes. But I am going to tell you exactly what it is that I have to tell you and I’m ???. And that’s completely unprecedented in the Oval Office. Justin Trudeau is having a lot of trouble right now. I think liberalism generally is having a lot of trouble right now because there’s… the people who are the leftist extremists are getting so extreme. I forget who it was, one of the democratic candidates running for President, a reporter asking a “gotcha” question that should’ve been “if you want to become President you gotta know how to handle these”, “should the Boston Marathon bomber be allowed to vote?” And said, “I think we need to have that discussion”. (laughs) And it’s like, I don’t think that’s a discussion point. I think when you do things like that, whether you’re technically still a citizen or whether you’re even partly a citizen, uh, no, we don’t want you canceling out somebody’s vote in an election. And those are real basic things. Cow flatulence. (laughs) Ah, you kinda learn to steer clear of that, cause people don’t want to give the levers of power to people who really think that cow flatulence is a major environmental problem in the world. Just, personal opinion, and Cirin or Serna? I would say that Serna was probably the more dangerous as the enabler, which tends to happen in those situations. The one that seems to be the problem isn’t actually the problem, the one who is enabling the one who’s the problem.

Matt: Okay.

Dave: Okay! So, umm… that covers that, and I’m just gonna say, say hi to Paula and Janis Pearl and Natasha for me.

Matt: Will do. Uh, have a good Ramadan, because I know that starts on Sunday.

Dave: Yes, yes it does. The same thing happens every year where I feel like I’m going somewhere for a month so I have to get everything done and nailed down tight, and there’s a certain number of things that I have to do, but it’s… “Dave, you’re just not going to be eating during the day for 30 days.” But the intensity of the prayer and wanting to do 150 perfect prayers, I think I did 144… 145… last year. That was about as close as I go to 150 perfect prayers. I’m just ferociously competitive about that.

Matt: (laughs)

Dave: And wanting to do good, so, yeah, I appreciate the good wishes and uhh…

Matt: When does Ramadan end?

Dave: Uhh, the 5th of June, I believe, this year.

Matt: Okay. I will make sure that if the next Please Hold is gonna hit before that we just push it back a week.

Dave: Uhh, it’ll probably be no problem. I got the clock sitting right here, it’ll just be a little more abrupt best wishes to Paula and Janis Pearl and Natasha, because I’ve got 18 minutes to get downstairs and get the ablutions done and get myself into place.

Matt: Okay. That’ll work.

Dave: Okay! Have a good month there, Matt.

Matt: You too! Talk to you in a month. Bye.

Dave: Take care. Buh-bye.

Matt: Alright everybody, and the reason why we have Judenhass today instead of a funny little Matt drawing is that today is Holocaust remembrance day, sp… it’s not cause I didn’t…


Thanks again Jesse!

Next Time: Around the world and web with Oliver!


Anonymous said...

Wow! I haven't read it yet but what a lot of text!

Thanks for doing this Jesse Lee Herndon and I look forward to checking this out in the future.


A Fake Name

Mouse Skull Entertainment said...

A Fake Name,

Wait until we make the actual book of these.


Birdsong said...

I hope you kept a copy of your art you did for these to include.

Damian T. Lloyd, Esq. said...

I'm not one of the 20 people who watch these things on YouTube, and I'm sure not gonna read huge blocks of Dave's bloviations, but what I skimmed through confirms that he's (as R. Fiore said of Johnny Hart, another cartoonist who caught religion and went nuts), "an aging hipster who's lost touch." That's very funny to me. I did notice he's still ignoring my (accidental but definitive) refutation of one of his "15 Impossible Things". Amazing how often you can claim to be right if you simply never admit you're wrong no matter what the facts. Very courageous, Dave!

-- Damian

Anonymous said...


I'm holding out for the signed limited edition vellum bound hardcover with Iguana and Beer bookplates illustrated by Michael Zulli.


A Fake Name

Anonymous said...

You are not going to listen to the recording or read the text and yet you are going to make judgements about what you are not listening to or reading. Instead you choose to keep repeating yourself over and over in the vain hope your shouts will eventually be louder than Dave's. Neil was right, but he said it too politely, you are a dumb fucking Canuck, Damian.

You do a great job on this blog Matt Dow, but that one broken record keeps running on and on.

Michael Grabowski said...

I don't watch or listen to these, so, even two years later, I'm glad for the transcript. Thank, Jessie! Thanks, Matt!

I don't remember what the basis for the petition discussion above was, but I do remember that when the petition started, I got the form letter from Dave saying basically (to quote the kid from Charlie Brown's summer camp) "Shut up and leave me alone." At least, that's how I took it. In that way, the petition came across, "I inferred," as more than just a declarative sentence, since my own letters to Dave had nothing to do with his anti-feminism, they were just fan commentary and a few questions. I think his letter also expressed that he was trying to focus more on his creative work and didn't need to take time out to converse with people who thought he was a misogynist, which, fair enough, but it took me a long while to decide, not that he was not a misogynist, but that I was willing to comply with his silly demand so that I could send him a fan letter again. All that is probably beside the point of the discussion above, except that at the initial time he sent the letter it seemed to carry more weight with him than a simple declarative sentence.

Damian T. Lloyd, Esq. said...

Thanks, Anon @ 10:27 -- another individual who didn't understand what I said, misrepresented my comment, got his widdle fee-fees hurt that I criticized his DaddyLover, and confused "I want to hurt someone" with "making an argument". You go, girl!

Forgive me, for memory is mutable: who's Neil?

-- Damian

Brian West said...

Happy MLK Day, Damian.

Neil was the “anonymous” commenter in the thread to this moment:

Monday, 11 January 2021

“Don't shoot the messenger...”

He was looking forward towards reading more of your commentary in 2021.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the clarification, Brian W. It's weird that "Neil" refers to himself in the third person, and congratulates himself on being right as if he were someone else. Also interesting is that you abandon your stated position of ignoring / disrespecting anonymous commenters when you agree with them. It seems intellectual honesty and consistency are not priorities for either of you.

-- Damian

Mouse Skull Entertainment said...


I believe Brian was saying that the anonymous commenter (#6 in THIS thread,) was referring to another commenter on a different thread who also was titled anonymous, but signed with the name Neil in the body of their comment.

Not that #6 anonymous WAS Neil.

Hope that clears it up.
Manly Matt Dow
(Or else this is the whackiest "Who's On First?" sketch ever...)

Brian West said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brian West said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brian West said...


Manly is correct. You seem not to remember that I had stopped with the pretense of ignoring anonymous respondents on here a loooong time ago. Saw the error in my ways, thanks to opinions shared by other commenters here about my previous stance.

Believe it or not, in this instance, I was trying to be of service to you as far as your question about “Neil” was concerned.

Aware that you hold me in contempt, yet still I want to remain neighborly to you, because I believe it’s the Right thing to do.

Happy MLK Day.

Damian T. Lloyd, Esq. said...

Ah! Thank you, Matt D., for clarifying. Re-reading what Brian W. said in light of your clarification, I suspect that he meant to type "comment" where he typed "moment".

I'm afraid I completely dismissed Neil from my mind as another nonentity leaping to deploy the latest young-intellectual buzzwords from 2015 in a content-free emotional outburst. That lapse of memory is on me.

I continue to dismiss Anon @ 10:27 for his emotional outburst. He ably demonstrates that he is not arguing in good faith: of the three claims in my first sentence ("don't watch", "don't read", and "skimmed through"), I note that Anon disappeared the one that contradicts his claim. "How conveeeeenient!" He then proceeds directly to personal insults and xenophobia -- truly a very fine person. Yes, you're very clever, son, using four-letter words and everything; now put your wee-wee away, grown-ups are talking.

Brian W.: I had not noted that you had changed your policy of ignoring / disrespecting anonymous respondents (I'm afraid I think both little and seldom of you). I'm pleased to see you admitting that this was just a pretense; I recall you expending considerable effort to assert that this was a moral point to you. Again, consistency is not your strong suit.

Twice now you have wished me a happy MLK Day. Perhaps you are unaware that this is not a thing outside your country, but I will accept that you intend to convey well-wishes; thank you. It's interesting that you choose to honour this individual, when it was your side of the political spectrum that hated him to the day he died and beyond. But now that he's safely dead and you're assured that most people remember only four words ("I have a dream") out of the millions he spoke and wrote, you can safely pay lip service to him from a distance. Consistency ...

-- Damian

RSS said...

Er, I'm thinking if Damian is "a dumb fucking Canuck", [the admin is letting that slide?], then I best release the safety catch and get it over with.... xD

Seriously, though, had an idea to do this a few weeks back (transcribe the audio), glad someone beat me to it.

And the religion thing reminds me of our next 'issue' (in progress):
Hey kids!
Do the world a favour:
Cancel religion!

Brian West said...


Yes, it was a well wish, Damian. I had realized that MLK Day was not officially recognized in the Dominion when I sent the last comment . There's hope for you yet.

No, I DID mean moment, like in the name to this blog "A Moment of Cerebus." That comment I alluded to from Neil was from a particular "moment," when Matt shared the SPAWN goodies he had received, which you tried to derail with your tactless comment about Dave's "Monday Report" that day.

I think Neil was being charitable in his response to your latest tirade; but, like the churl you are, you couldn't resist responding to it in typical fashion, like a five year old who has been banished from the dinner table for a time-out by his father, but instead of reflecting on why he has been punished, just slings another insult daddy's way. Kid doesn't know any better.

Remember that "moment" now?

It's fine that you seldom think of me. You're not hurting my feelings there.

I reflect often on your commentary, I must say. I actually respect you, though I rarely ever agree with you. You are my whetstone. For that I am grateful.

Too, I do see the good in you, if you can believe it. It's just covered up in your own unique, oleaginous brand of cynicism. Your hatred towards Dave, your overwhelming inclination towards self-interest here, severely impairs your judgment, warps your ability to think objectively about Dave, about Cerebus, and inhibits your capacity to respond reasonably with others who comment here.

Your cynicism also keeps you at a distance from those who might be inclined to agree with you viewpoints here, if it were not for the vehicle through which you so often choose to deliver your arguments: the insult.

To be honest your comments here normally drag down the level of discourse instead of elevating it in a constructive or positive manner. You're the "Mama's Boy" Dave wrote about, who can never get a sense of where he belongs in a crowd, in the flow of a conversation, because he will never shut up long enough to observe, listen, and key in on the flow of the conversation at a given moment. He was never reared by his parent(s) to discern when it's time to hold his peace and when it's appropriate - or germane - to speak his piece. I think your "moment" with Neil illustrates that tendency of yours perfectly. You lack wisdom, Damian. You lack prudence, and, worst of all, you lack decency. cont'd

Brian West said...

Maybe elevating the discourse here has never been your aim or a concern of yours, Damian. Perhaps, you want to bring us fans to our senses or just sling another shot Dave's way to get your rocks off?

Maybe you envision yourself as being a crusader, the one person here who actually "gets" and appreciates Cerebus, Who appreciates it the right way, the one true way, and wants to save us who think differently from ourselves?

Maybe you think of yourself as the one who sees Dave Sim with clear eyes and thinks everyone else here is blind?

Or maybe you're simply like Ledger's "Joker," and just enjoy seeing things burn, measuring each incendiary comment like a rioter pours gasoline into his Molotov cocktail. With each ounce of invective you hope to see this whole thing shut down. "Burn it down, burn it down," no?

Seriously, I don't really know your aims here. But you're certainly not raising the bar, that much I do know.

Speaking of which . . .

You don't know me, Damian. Not At all, especially when it comes to race.

If you did you would not make assumptions based on so little available information. Don't get $#!+ twisted in the virtual world, like President Trump did, and start standing by spouting falsehoods and lies. Cyberspace ain't the real world.

Unless you have walked in my shoes, seen the things I have seen, Damian, you don't know jack about my opinions and views about Dr. King, his philosophy of nonviolent direct action, or his Christian faith.

All you know about me is that I dig Dave Sim, I help promote CIH?, and don't particularly care for people tearing S#!+ up, especially public property (actions which King would have rebuked, but not condemned if it had occurred during his time).

You might add that I have mentioned to you elsewhere that I do identify as a conservative, but that identifier can cover a LOT of ground. (When you think of me as a con are you thinking of me as a MAGA conservative? A Reaganite? A Log Cabin Republican? A Catholic Conservative? An Evangelical one? A Black conservative? Which one of those cons do you think suits me?)

Other than those things I have just mentioned here you don't know me. So, unless you are willing to have an intelligent, ADULT, discussion about race and/or Dr. King with me, man-to-man, I suggest you stop talking to me about race and Dr. King.

Cause otherwise, as far and you and me are concerned, that's my business, Damian. It's never been yours, Damian.

Dunning-Kruger Effect, indeed.


Brian West

P.S. Read King's sermon "The Drum Major Instinct." It's available online.

RSS said...

More: These days I'm delighted by the 'cancel culture' movement, especially given something like "cancel religion" could actually happen, and the kids would triumph over something that's been forced upon them for centuries...

Birdsong said...

Great choice, Brian. You can listen or read the text of Dr. King's speech at the link. I really wish people would take some time to actually read and listen to MLK instead of assigning him to political parties or assuming they know what side he was on. He stood against the racism and brutality of his time and from what my ears hear and eyes see the only side he was on was God's.

Brian West said...

Thanks, Birdisong. You’re absolutely right. By any reasonable observer King was a follower of Christ. If King didn’t see God in it he wasn’t with it.

Damian T. Lloyd, Esq. said...

Thank you, Brian W., for typing all that out. You spend a lot of time telling me what my motivations and character are for someone who says I can't know your motivations and character from your comments online. Consistency ... If you can identify any "falsehoods and lies" I have made, I will revisit and reconsider them. Go ahead; I'll wait.

If MLK was a follower of Christ, what does that make the conservative side that hated and opposed him to the day he died and beyond? I'll wait ...

-- Damian

Brian West said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Brian West said...

No need for you to wait, Damian. I'm here and ready to reply to your nonsense.

"You spend a lot of time telling me what my motivations and character are for someone who says I can't know your motivations and character from your comments online."

I didn't tell you what YOUR motivations WERE. I commented on what I thought your motivations MIGHT BE. I still don't know what your motivations are here.

You avoided answering my questions in that regard. Only you can answer what your motivations are, what I say is merely conjecture.

"If you can identify any "falsehoods and lies" I have made, I will revisit and reconsider them. Go ahead; I'll wait."

Here's a falsehood: "It's interesting that you choose to honour this individual, when it was your side of the political spectrum that hated him to the day he died and beyond."

Not true. Not many Republicans hated King before 1964. If you knew some history about the changing dynamics of the two-party system of the USA before 1964 you would know that.

Before that time conservatives supported King. I am not talking about Southern Democrats - Wallace, Faubus, et. al - who did loath King and saw him as a trouble maker. I am talking about actual Republicans who, though not enthusiastic about the 1957 Civil Rights Bill which was being considered before Congress, did have kind words to say about King: Nixon for one, Governor Rockefeller another, President Eisenhower himself too.

There was even a Black man, who was registered as a Republican, a member of the NAACP, who chaired a campaign to repair several black churches which had been bombed by White supremacists in Albany, GA: Jack Roosevelt Robinson. Jackie Robinson was a die-hard Republican, a Rockefeller Republican. Still, he was his own man and did his best to follow his conscience.

He tried to appeal to President Eisenhower and Vice President Nixon to support passage of the 1957 Civil Rights Bill. Robinson had some hope after Eisenhower had ordered troops to Little Rock, Arkansas to safeguard desegregation of Central High School there. Nixon, a baseball nut, became pen pals with Robinson, assuring him that the President would do what he could to support the bill. Although the bill was watered down - the voting rights provision was gutted by segregationists in the Senate while in committee - the bill was passed and signed into law by the President in '57.

Though the bill lacked teeth as far as enforcement went, symbolically it was important for the Civil Rights Movement as a whole that the Federal Government did recognize it officially, and hence recognize the race problem in America.

Nixon and Robinson became closer, so much so that Robinson campaigned for Nixon during his run for the Presidency in 1960. Robinson, who saw things as really black and white, couldn't stomach Senator Kennedy, the Democrat.

Robinson did not like that Kennedy had voted with with segregationists in the Senate to send the 1957 bill back into committee, where the voting rights provision was taken out. He never forgave Kennedy for chumming up with a pro-segregationist Governor of Alabama, James Patterson for an endorsement in 1959. So, Robinson threw his hat in the ring for someone whom he trusted: Vice President Nixon.

Even while Robinson was doing this, he STILL found time to encourage and support Dr. King and his leadership of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Robinson even went as far as to organize a committee with the SCLC which funded King's Legal defense and helped to finance the SCLC's efforts to registered over a million NEW African American voters in the South before the General Election. cont'd

Brian West said...

So, you can read more about what happens next with King, Robinson and the GOP in the book FIRST CLASS CITZENSHIP: The Civil Rights Letters of Jackie Robinson. That's my source for all of the information above.

If you wanna know what happens to Robinson and the GOP in '64, look that book up. Reading it should further dispel falsehood #1 for you.

Now onto #2: "If MLK was a follower of Christ, what does that make the conservative side that hated and opposed him to the day he died and beyond? I'll wait ..."

Again, no need for you to wait. This is less nonsense than your other question, and more engaging to answer too.

Those actions might make those hypothetical conservatives of yours (You thinking 1960 Rs, 1964 Rs or 2020 Rs?) -- if they profess to be Christians -- hypocrites, but it does not make them any less Christian for doing so IMO. They can still be followers of "the way, and the truth, and the life" (John 14:6) and still commit sin, still err from "the way."

I think a better question to ask there, Damian, would be what would God think of those conservatives who might have hated and wished ill of Dr. King?

My answer to that is that I don't know, I am not God. Only God knows.

However, me being a puny human, I cannot help but make the assumption that they might not cut the mustard with God come Judgement Day (John 5:25-28) because of such thoughts and deeds. But that's just pure speculation on my part. As a flawed human being I don't have, nor will I ever possess, the capacity to judge who will cut the mustard. Only God can do that. It's his Will. The rest on my part is folly, great folly.

Because of that I know that it's not my place to say, maybe even think, whether or not someone I love, ignore, or loathe will make the cut, as it were. I am a sinner just like them, just like Dr. King was, who hopes to have been forgiven for his sins thorough the sacrifice of the "Lamb of God", Jesus.

Still, even with that belief of salvation in mind, I believe that only God knows, and therefore only God can reckon, my worth, the worth of any Christian, what they have done "into resurrection of life" compared to what they have "practiced into resurrection of judgment." The best I can do is be responsible for my own actions and decisions in the form of free will.

The best things I can do in my mind to exercise best my own free will is to read Scripture daily, to pray daily, and to participate in the community of my church home, when I can. That's the best use of my free will I can think of to see to it that I might have the chance to have "everlasting life." The way other Christians might describe it could be to say that everyday is a day to get ready for when Jesus returns on The last day. But, IMO salvation is not a guarantee for me.

So, regarding salvation for other Christians, Atheists, Heathens, et. al, when the hour is upon them, I think that is beyond my abilities to know nor my place to concern myself with. That's God's Will. Not mine, not yours, nor anyone else's for that matter.

Ok. I gotta go. Thanks for engaging.


Brian West

P.S. Strongly recommend you read or listen (thanks Birdsong) "The Drum Major Instinct."

RSS said...


RSS said...

Wiki say: "Religion is a modern Western concept that developed from the 17th century onwards, not before.[3][4][5][6][7] For example, in Asia, no one before the 19th century self-identified as a "Hindu" or other similar identities.[3][8] The ancient and medieval cultures that produced religious texts, like the Hebrew Bible, New Testament or the Quran, did not have such a conception or idea in their languages, cultures, or histories and neither did the peoples in the Americas before Columbus.[9][3][6]"

RSS said...

So a recent *vogue* that's still raging #strikeapose
Come on, you know you want to...
Alert Ozenfant

Anonymous said...

Good on you, Brian West. You are wasting your time, but good on you. Damian will never concede a point. He is as concrete a thinker as I have ever seen. No imagination. No insight. Unforgiving and incredibly stupid. No need to reply Damian, but you will because you think having the last word somehow makes you come out on top. I will be wasting no further time on you.

RSS, are you aware of how hard it is to understand whatever insane points you seem to try to be making?

Sorry for taking anyone's time away from Dave Sim or Cerebus related topics. I'll not be commenting here again,


Brian West said...


Thank you for taking time from your day to share here your thoughts on what was relayed to Damian. He tasks my grace. Still, God willing, from now on, I hope to show him the love and mercy he seldom has returned to me.

Sorry to hear that you will no longer be joining us. Best wishes to you, this year and beyond.

- Brian West

RSS said...

"RSS, are you aware of how hard it is to understand whatever insane points you seem to try to be making?"

The above extended quote ("Religion is a modern Western concept"), source:
"Criticism of Religion"
(links not allowed here? I never thought to ask)

Also in Wikipedia:
"Fluid and crystallized intelligence"
"Intelligence quotient"

Indeed, 'hard to understand'

RSS said...

Hey, we could try one and find out:

RSS said...

Omission: "No imagination. No insight." Is that irony?

"Sorry for taking anyone's time away from Dave Sim or Cerebus related topics."
O but this *is* about Dave, who, at least in my opinion, is an outright genius [see Dave blush; blush Dave, blush] (who's wasting himself on religion)
And, evidently, about others wanting to 'prove their genius' in kind
Unfortunately religion is one of the worst ways to do that
Hence "#cryptography"
Dave's 'unassailable position' lies in religion-as-cryptograph, a current fixation (as it was mine, at one point) which he repeatedly displays in the "Monday Report"

Me, I'm just getting warmed up...

ChrisW said...

Damian isn't on Cerebus fan-sites for himself, he's there for us. What would we have if he wasn't there to tell us how awful Dave is? And he's giving this all to us!

There are thousands of websites about comics in the world but they don't get such invaluable treasure. There are even websites about music, movies, tv, sports, so many others but he will not share with any of them this horrible Dave Sim, only we are fortunate enough to receive the gift. He wouldn't have it any other way.

Damian the Great is here. Do not question him, agree with everything he says, and it will be better for all of us. The alternative is too frightening to imagine so don't make me tell you again.

Damian T. Lloyd, Esq. said...

Oh dear, Brian W.; oh dear.

You said, "Not many Republicans hated King before 1964. If you knew some history about the changing dynamics of the two-party system of the USA before 1964 you would know that."

Unfortunately for you, I do know history. And unlike you, I have read more than one book about it.

The "party of Lincoln" never tires of pointing out that Republicans were on the right side in your civil war, conveeeeeeniently gliding smoothly past the fact that, whatever party label they adopted, the people on the wrong side were the same people: conservatives. Interesting that you draw an imaginary line at 1964. The period of 1958 - 1966 saw an interesting realignment of your country's two parties, and by 1966 the Republican and not the Democratic party was the party of racists and segregationists -- these same conservatives.

In MLK's life, it was George Wallace -- a conservative (and, yes, a Democrat) -- who promised "segregation forever" -- something you might recognize that MLK opposed. It was Jim Clark -- a conservative (and, yes, a Democrat) who called MLK "a common yellow cur dog". It was Barry Goldwater -- a conservative -- whose votes against voting and civil rights led MLK to denounce him and everyone associated with his position. It was William F. Buckley -- a conservative -- who said that MLK was "more sensitive, and so more bitter, than the average Southern Negro, and hence unqualified as a litmus of the Southern Negro’s discontent." (Buckley also made the argument conservatives are still using today: "You mean liberals called us racists, so that forced us to become racists.") It was Ronald Reagan-- a conservative -- who said MLK was unamerican and a communist; it was Strom Thurmond -- a conservative -- who urged the FBI to build a case against MLK because he was a communist (in fact, you'd be hard-pressed to find an anti-MLK voice that didn't call him a communist, despite MLK explicitly distancing himself from communists. To this day conservatives don't know what that word means; it's just a bad word to call their enemies). It was James Kilpatrick -- a conservative --- who wrote a book after debating MLK declaring, "the Negro race, as a race, plainly is not equal to the white race, as a race". It was J. Edgar Hoover -- a conservative -- who called MLK "the most notorious liar in the country" and tried to blackmail MLK into committing suicide. And, of course, it was James Earl Ray -- a conservative -- who murdered MLK.

And, lest you think I'm picking on conservatives alone, remember that in 1966 nearly three-quarters of all USAnians held an unfavourable view of MLK. So this is a general shame for your country. But your claim that Republicans or conservatives supported is simply factually false. Are you ignorant, or are you lying, Brian W.?

From the outside, it looks as if your Christianity is less a moral foundation and more a way to generate high-minded-sounding justifications for what you want to do anyway, to make you feel like you're a good person no matter your actions. I think you demonstrate this when you say that hypocrisy doesn't make you any less of a Christian. So as long as you feel like a Christian, it doesn't matter if you act in an un-Christian way?

Then for some reason, you start blithering about your imaginary friend. That wasn't a thing we were talking about, and I don't care, dude. You say, "IMO salvation is not a guarantee for me." Yeah, IMO also. If your god exists, and if he has been quoted accurately, then I suspect that you are in for an uncomfortable eternity.

Neil said, "I'll not be commenting here again." Great! The average intelligence of the comments just went up. I would reply to the things you've said -- but you haven't said anything other than, "Waaaaaaah! Stop hurting my feelings!"

Thank you for your comment, Chris W.

-- Damian

Brian West said...

So, Jackie Robinson doesn’t count, Damian? Nor Eisenhower or Nixon? They don’t count either?

I know about the “Dixiecrats,” about the founder of the National Review and his views on “the Negro Problem,” aware that Reagan’s change of party affiliation is matter of public record.

Nevertheless, I would have a expected a better rebuttal than that from you. Give me some justifications why the figures I mentioned before don’t qualify as conservatives, the Compassionate Conservatives, if you will.

I know you hold no truck with faith. So there’s no use in arguing with you about what you think. That’s between you and God, though I gotta say that you were the one who brought God in when you asked me the rhetorical about MLK hating Christians. I gave you my opinion, which you asked for. So, you got nobody to blame for the “blithering” but yourself.

But I digress. Make your definition of a conservative plain, dude. Cause from where I am standing your use of the term is looser than a used condom. What’s your “Time for Choosing”?

I’ll wait.

- Brian West

P.S. Thanks for the well wishes to me and my fellow Americans today. The Republic endures.

Jeff said...

Aren't you guys glad that I restrained myself from engaging in *this* thread?

Brian West said...

Me, Jeff?! Heavens No! I enjoy your company.

However, in this instance I think you made the right call.

Anonymous said...

Tell us how much you love Dementia Joe, Jeff.

Jeff said...

Um, I likes me some DJ's, Anon, especially the beautiful and talented and sweet and sexy and out of work Reina Starr, but I have less than zero idea about who Dementia Joe is.

But, thanks for playing. Here's your parting gift.

(It's a GFY, Damian.)

Brian West said...


Jeff, now that Anon at 19:44 mentioned it, "Dementia Joe" does bring to mind Damian's comments here in one respect, if Anon was referring to President Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr in the comment.

When Damian tried to put into question my admiration of MLK here his mentality really was no different from that of then Presidential candidate Biden's in his interview with Charlamagne Tha God [sic] in May 2020.

On "the Breakfast Club" he tried to bamboozle an African American audience into thinking he was the only choice for President saying,"If you have a problem figuring out whether you are for me or for Trump, then you ain't Black."

I believe that the same racism and prejudice in President Biden's remark is the same fuel behind Damian's comments to me throughout this thread. Because, contrary to popular belief, liberals -- even radicals -- can hate too. Damian doesn't need to wear a white hood or a MAGA Hat to be a racist, but as he pointed out above, there have been and there are "Blue" devils among us. As he demonstrated here, Canadians are not immune to the sickness.


To paraphrase Daniel Cameron's comments during the 2020 RNC Convention, "my mind is my own and you can't tell me whom I should vote for" (which is none of your business, I might add), whom I should admire, and most definitely which comics creator I should take my time to support.

You ain't Black and Dave Sim is NOT a misogynist. You can bloviate about the latter all you want here. But as far as the former point is concerned, you need to stay in your lane. Don't drive up and try to spew your mess onto me anymore.

That being said, I will allow a rebuttal, a well considered, thoughtful,and respectful rebuttal. You have my email address.

EVERYONE ELSE: Ok, that's the last comment I will add to this thread. I apologize sincerely to everyone else who has had endure my comments and Damian's. I showed poor form here. And for that I am sorry.

Was not my intention to derail the conversation here, but when a person tries question me on things he has no intimate knowledge of and would presume as to know my concerns, let alone my lineage, I have to defend myself.

In the future I promise to be more serious here and entertain less of Damian's comments. More often than not they cause division within the blog, instead of enhancing the discussion at hand within a given thread. I will no longer be a party to his fatalist brand of cynicism here, whenever I think it is evident in his comments.


Brian West