I sometimes get notes from people who point out that, while the web site is called "Comic Strip of the Day," I tend to deal with editorial cartoons a lot.
So we'll lead off today with Monty, a comic strip.
The joke, of course, is that the elections aren't rigged and we don't actually have re-education camps.
We don't need them.
We've done this to ourselves.
Orwell saw this nearly 75 years ago, though we should note that he was British and was writing about humanity in general, not specifically about the United States.
In fact, it's universal: What people want is not for this side to triumph or for that side to win.
What they really want is to be left alone.
I remember meeting a Vietnamese student at the University of Toronto in 1969, the first Vietnamese person I'd ever actually run into. She told me she was not in favor of a Communist takeover but neither was she supportive of the war, because it wasn't working.
Most people, she said, didn't care who was in charge or if the government was in Saigon or Hanoi.
What they wanted was to raise a crop of rice without tanks running through and destroying the centuries-old paddies.
That's not the logic of peasants. That's universal human nature.
New Hampshire Public Radio had a report yesterday about people in Sherburne, a little town that has proven a good political windsock. The reporter went to the Transfer Station, where there is a coffeepot and donuts each Saturday and people stop by to drop off their trash and talk.
And what he found was people who weren't necessarily thrilled with the President, but who were even more critical of the media.
Sean Reardon’s answer to my question - “How do you think the President did his first year?” - could stand in for almost every response I get. “I voted for him and I definitely think government needed to be changed a little bit,” Reardon says. “I do think the media is a little ridiculous with the, you know, seven hours of negativity a day versus fifteen minutes of positive.”
You can argue back, demanding "What are we supposed to do? Not cover it?"
But, just the farmer doesn't care whose mortars destroyed his rice crop, a lot of people don't enjoy an endless barrage of conflicting, toxic reports and aren't interesting in trying to sort out the ones that are accurate.
“Americans used to turn to the media to get what was going on,” Reardon says. “The truth, the weather - and you just can't believe anything anymore. No one knows what to believe.”
Again, that's not "peasant" thinking and shame on you if you divide the world into college graduates and stupid people. That's not on them; that's on you.
I'm a college graduate and I have no intention of turning on the TV on this Sunday morning to watch a procession of hand-picked, partisan talking heads repeating their committee-approved partisan talking points.
That's before we even get to the chaotic muddle of delusional amateur news sites, Russian troll postings and other confusing, indecipherable faux-news.
There may be a pony in there some place but I'm damned if I know how anybody, no matter how well-trained in evaluating news, can sort through and find it.
Mark Streeter nearly seems to be walking away, but I think -- I hope -- he's simply expressing frustration.
Year One has been pretty horrible, and, in this NYTimes analysis, a history professor does not accept the "they all do it" shrug: He compares Trump's first year to that of the worst of our Presidents and finds the current holder seriously lacking.
And if you prefer your analysis in graphic format, go here and see how Ann Telnaes lays out the disaster in which we find ourselves embedded.
Not only is her analysis solid and trenchant, but, as a bonus, she links to a breakdown she did before the election, analyzing the Trump candidacy and explaining how that could have happened.
It's good stuff, though it's not fun reading.
As Marshall Ramsey notes, we want winners and losers, friends and enemies, and it doesn't have to be logical, consistent or ... god knows ... true.
Democrats ask why, since they control the halls of government, the Republicans can't pass this needed legislation, and the retort is that they need 60 votes, not 51, so it's the Democrats fault.
Which neatly ignores the transition we've made from viewing the other party as "the opposition" and declaring it "the enemy."
And, no, that can't be brushed away as "they both do it."
It was initiated back in the days of Grover Norquist and Newt Gingrich and has metastasized into the current situation. You can play "whatabout" until the cows come home, but this was the goal of the GOP's rightwing fringe and they have since wormed their way to the center of the party (hence the stream of retirements).
Should the media report on this, or is it too upsetting?
Well, it's certainly complex and I'm not sure the majority of people want to sit through it.
It is clear, however, that a large part of the problem is an inconsistent President who has no sense of how to negotiate, despite his claim to be an expert deal-maker. Even Mitch McConnell admits, "As soon as we figure out what he is for, then I would be convinced that we were not just spinning our wheels."
The alternative to figuring him out would be sitting him down for a serious conversation, but we haven't had serious conversations for years.
Meanwhile, however, while we wise men are sipping our sherry, enjoying our cigars and -- harumph, harumph -- reliving the battles of the Crimean War, the ladies, god bless'em, have gone for a walk.
And, as Kevin Siers notes, decided to change that walk into a run.
If this past year is what it took for that to happen, then it was a very good year indeed.