Examples Of Political Cartoon

Thomas Nast is known as the "Father of the American Cartoon," having created satirical art during the 19th century that critiqued slavery and crime. In this political cartoon, Thomas Nast as an artist reflects on the differences between the Republican and Democratic parties. The political parties now are different from when the cartoon was published. The Republican Party was the party of the people, mostly supported by the North. The Democratic Party, on the other hand, was the party of the South, of business, and was noted for being supported by former Confederate soldiers and sympathizers.

" Analysis of a political cartoon

Political cartoons could be defined as illustrations or cartoon strips that contain a social and/or political message in them. Political cartoons are often based on the current events around when they were written.

Under the U.S. Constitution, this appointment is a lifelong position that will only be nullified if the judge resigns their post or dies in office. This creates serious contests within the partisan political environment found among federal representatives, for any candidate appointed to this post helps define the direction of the Supreme Court for the rest of their life. Thus, it is frequently believed that a president who appoints a judge to the Supreme Court is creating a legacy, helping to shape the direction of the laws for the country for a time long after their presidency has expired. This makes the selection of a judge a hotly contested process.

The above facts and details of appointments serve as great strengths for Greenburg, but there are also weaknesses she failed to touch on and include in this book. Greenburg fails to consider how the same scare-tactic rhetoric used by democratic and liberal senators nearly every time a conservative justice is nominated as well she only glances and summarizes the events of Thomas’ confirmation hearing and the attempted filibuster of Samuel Alito’s nomination. These accounts would have provided more information and context for the book to give a more well-rounded account of these appointments

Originating in the 19th century, political cartoons are created and drawn as a means to deliver a message. Whether it be about politics, events or social concerns, the artist is able to express themselves creatively. The cartoons are not only meant to express the view of the creator, but are also open to interpretation. Most political cartoons have a biased point of view and uses rhetoric to persuade its audience.

There is an open seat in the supreme court. Since the death of justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016, President Barack Obama has attempted to appoint judge Merrick Garland to fill this vacancy. However, the currently Republican U.S. Senate has refused to act on the nomination. This is not the first time the Senate has disagreed with the president's choice of nominee. The Senate confirms just around eighty percent of the president's nominations. There is a strong rationale behind this two-tiered appointment system. Seats in the Supreme Court are extremely important positions to hold; the Supreme Court has the role of interpreting the text of the Constitution and using that interpretation

By using a hurricane to describe the immigration politics hitting the Whitehouse, the author uses both pathos and logos to further his belief that chaos will ensue when the congress must come together to please the president, the supporters of DACA, and the immigrants. However, ethos is where the author lacks rhetorical persuasion as this cartoon is mainly driven by pathos and

Since the creation of the judiciary there have been many modifications that have occurred. To start as it talks about in our textbook, justices began serving on the Supreme Court for a much longer term. Until recently, most justices were confirmed by the Senate, and from 1947 to 1985, almost all persons nominated to be a federal appeals court judge were approved. But of late, these nominations have had a less certain reception in the Senate. In 1986 President Ronald Reagan nominated Antonin Scalia for the Supreme Court, the Senate confirmed him by a vote of 98 to 0, but one year later, when he nominated Robert Bork the Senate rejected him. The different parties in the Senate try to block the vote based on the political party of the current President. In the textbook, it talks about how much harder the Senate is to confirm the nominees by a high yes

Republican claim says that we do not have enough time to elect a new justice but I believe we do. The longest election was 100 days long and we have way more than 100 days before the new President takes office. The Republicans are also being unconstitutional.

The Mueller indictments, in the cartoon, are illustrated by the cartoonist, by displaying a man who is standing with a very strong featured face. The cartoonist displaysThat

President Clinton and President Obama did not pack the courts based on agenda and it was not for lack of interest. Clinton and Obama did not try to appoint those with a direct agenda. They had a different prospective to appointing justice, as neither one of Obama’s appointments

The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia set off shockwaves throughout a polarized Washington D.C. Senate Republicans wasted little time stating that any nominee from President Obama would not even get a hearing. Claiming that the people of the United States should have a voice in this process. Or in other words “We are stalling and hoping that we win the White House in November”. While it is only one seat, that one seat could drastically change the course of American history.

NPR’s legal affairs correspondent, Nina Totenberg, described a “horrible political storm” brewing over the Supreme Court of the United States (“CNN,” 2016, p. 1). While reporting for CNN, Totenberg used these words to draw attention to the untimely death of Justice Antonin Scalia in an era of modern politics in which the court has become more polarized than ever. The Supreme Court, the highest court of the land, is not only being severely impacted by partisan ties, but is now also deciding cases according to these biased beliefs. The Democratic and Republican parties, after corrupting and encroaching upon the federal judiciary, have made court nominations and rulings into a game of party politics, inevitably destroying the impartiality of the

Article 2 section 2, of the constitution, says “and he shall, nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court.” This is the exact passage from the constitution, and it is addressing the process in which a supreme court justice is supposed to be replaced. Furthermore, it says that the President is to nominate a candidate and the Senate is to approve the nomination. The constitution does not suggest any limitations within a Presidents last year to nominate justices, or even perform any of their constitutional duties differently for that matter. It is crucial that the American government acts consistently while interpreting the constitution; furthermore, it is even more important that the Senate and the President act consistently upon their constitutional obligations (Hovenkemp, 2015). The Senate is not willing to fulfill their constitutional duty which violates the separation of power between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches because the Senate is using Justice Scalia’s death for their own political reasons, which is a violation of the separation of powers. Moreover, the Senate is really susceptible to special interest groups, so by preventing the nomination until the next president, which could be a Republican and the Senate