There’s nothing wrong with McCain talking about his Vietnam experience all day long, but I find the way it’s framed funny. From the June 11, 2008 AP story “McCain Reluctant To Talk About Vietnam“:

NEW YORK - Prodded on the campaign trail to talk about his compelling personal story, John McCain usually demurs. “I’m very reluctant to do so, as you know,” the presumed Republican nominee told a donor at a small fundraiser here this week.

McCain explains to CNN why ABBA’s “Dancing Queen” is his favorite song:

“If there is anything I am lacking in, I’ve got to tell you, it is taste in music and art and other great things in life,” McCain joked. “I’ve got to say that a lot of my taste in music stopped about the time I impacted a surface-to-air missile with my own airplane and never caught up again.”¹

On the other hand, his taste for ABBA is pretty much the thing I like best about McCain.

1. McCain’s plane was shot down about five years before ABBA came along. (back)

“Journey” is the story of Josh “Wolverine” MacAlistaire, a 19th century frontiersman in isolated Michigan, who considers moving further west because hated “civilization” is beginning to catch up to him. This book is the first of two reprint volumes. “Journey” was originally published in the early 80s, and has been long out of print.

A lot of “Journey’s” story is concerned with going-ons at Fort Miami in Michigan, where white settlers are in conflict with American Indians (Loebs seamlessly mixes historic and fictional characters). Loebs avoids traditional “brave white man fighting savages” cliches, thankfully.

The strength of the comic, however, is Loeb’s brutal, thrilling depiction of MacAlistaire’s life in the Michigan wilderness. Whether fleeing an accidentally enraged bear (there’s no question of fighting it), nearly getting killed by a tornado, or hugging a dog for warmth after falling through ice, the most vivid parts of “Journey” are the stories of how MacAlistaire survives.

Read the rest of this entry »

From Jewel Woods. There’s too much great stuff to quote; here’s a little bit of Jewel’s discussion, but you should go and read the whole thing.

The Black Male Privileges Checklist was born out of years of organizing men’s groups and the numerous — often heated — conversations I have had with men while utilizing Barry Deutsch’s The Male Privilege Checklist. In my experiences, most men would object to at least some items on the Male Privilege Checklist. However, “men of color”, and especially African American men, often had the sharpest criticisms of the Male Privilege Checklist and the most problems relating to the idea of male privilege.

There are many reasons why black men would be reluctant to identify with the concept of male privilege. One of the most important reasons is that our experience with privilege is based on a history of political, economic, and military power that whites have historically exercised over black life. This conceptualization of privilege has not allowed us to see ourselves with privilege because the focus has been placed largely on whites. Privilege is not restricted to economic, political, or military areas of life. Privilege is also social, cultural, sexual, institutional, and interpersonal in nature. Our inability to have a more expansive understanding of privilege and power has foreclosed important insights into virtually every aspect of black men’s lives and other “men of color”.

As black men, we have also been skeptical of pro-feminist males, most of whom were white and middle class. Black men who fought for freedom during the Civil Rights Movement and the Black Power Movements were suspicious- to say the least- of the motives of white men who were requesting that black men give up the privilege they never felt they had. Given the timing of the pro-feminist male movement and the demographics of these men, it has not been easy to separate the message from the messenger. Black men had a similar reaction to the voices of black feminists, who we saw as being influenced by white middle class feminists. Alongside this, there has long been a belief among many black men that racism provides privileges to black women that are denied to black men.

In addition, many of the items on The Male Privilege Checklist simply did not to apply to black men and other men of color. As a result, many black men argued that the list should have been called The White Male Privilege Checklist. In light of these considerations, the Black Male Privileges Checklist differs from the Male Privilege Checklist in several respects.

From Johann Hari:

On January 20th 2009, either the president of the United States will be a man who used to snort coke to ease his blues, or the First Lady will be a former drug addict who stole from charity to get her next fix. In this presidential campaign, there are dozens of issues that have failed to flicker into the debate, but the most striking is the failing, flailing ‘War on Drugs.’ Isn’t it a sign of how unwinnable this ‘war’ is that, if it was actually enforced evenly, either Barack Obama or Cindy McCain would have to skip the inauguration — because they’d be in jail?

At least their time in the slammer would feature some familiar faces: they could share a cell with Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and some 46 percent of the US population.

(Has Bush actually admitted to illegal drug use? I thought he “no commented” it.)

Obama was never officially charged — if he had been, he wouldn’t have had a political career. Cindy McCain was caught, but she was also rich, white and well-connected, so she never faced any punishment worse than humiliation. From a 1994 article in the Phoenix New Times:

“If she were charged in state court–and there is an offense that fits her case to a T–she’s looking at Class 3 felonies,” says one defense attorney. “If we assume conservatively that there were six separate counts, her liability in state court is astronomical. She could have been looking at ten to 20 years, with a presumptive sentence of 11.25 years and two-thirds served before she would be eligible for parole.

“If I had a client named José Lopez, I’m not so sure we wouldn’t be looking at that.”

But because it was Cindy McCain, strings were pulled and her case was softballed in Federal courts.

Hari suggests some debate questions: “Before this campaign is out, Obama needs to be asked: do you really think you should be in jail? McCain needs to be asked: do you really think your wife should be in jail?”

I’d love it if the press was willing to press the candidates this way, but it’s unlikely.

Nor would either candidate say what they should — which is no, Cindy and Barry didn’t deserve to go to jail,¹ and neither do other non-violent drug offenders. But neither candidate will; even if one or both of them privately realize that the drug war has been a horrible failure, the dynamics of running for President make taking an intelligent position on drug use virtually impossible.

1. Ignoring for now Mrs. McCain’s drug-related crimes such as theft and forgery (back)

I now have the trade paperback collection. so I’ll mail the first five issues of Buffy season eight to the first taker.

(My guess is that it’ll cost a couple of bucks to mail, which I’m happy to pay for, but if you live on another continent and can paypal a few bucks to defray the additional mailing costs that would be cool.)

From AV Club:

Ah, the Manic Pixie Dream Girl, that sentient ray of sunshine sent from heaven to warm the heart and readjust the attitude of even the broodiest, most uptight male protagonist. In his My Year Of Flops entry on Elizabethtown, Nathan Rabin coined the phrase “Manic Pixie Dream Girl” to describe that bubbly, shallow cinematic creature that “exists solely in the fevered imaginations of sensitive writer-directors to teach broodingly soulful young men to embrace life and its infinite mysteries and adventures.” […]

Like the Magical Negro, the Manic Pixie Dream Girl archetype is largely defined by secondary status and lack of an inner life. She’s on hand to lift a gloomy male protagonist out of the doldrums, not to pursue her own happiness.

See as well a post on PopPolitics, quoting an article by JiJi Lee:

At the heart of these films is the implication that women have the desire and energy to devote themselves to their troubled male counterparts, further ossifying the traditional roles that men and women are supposed to play. While the progressive twist depicts men as the ones in distress, women are still meant to cosset them. […] She brandishes a bottle of scotch instead of an apron, but the quirky girlfriend is the modern version of Donna Reed or the flashy new sports car, serving as an antidote for the man’s emotional ailment.

Some of the examples given on AV Club: Natalie Portman in Garden State, Meg Ryan in Joe Versus the Volcano, Hepburn in Bringing Up Baby, Melanie Griffith in Something Wild.

I can think of some other examples: Mimi from Rent, Mary from Something About Mary (although that’s partly a satire of the form, so including Mary may be unfair), Charlotte from Lost in Translation, Geena Davis’ character in The Accidental Tourist, and definitely Ana from Stranger Than Fiction. And maybe Clementine from Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, although maybe not.

I really like most of these films — and I’ve found the stock MPDG character attractive lots of times — but the critique seems spot-on to me. It’s lazy and shallow filmmaking, and sexist to boot.

So are there Manic Pixie Dream Boyfriends? Maybe — someone in the AV Club thread suggested Benny from Benny and Joon– but I don’t think these guys are nearly as common, because that’s not the slot movies shove male characters into. I do think there are sexist tropes for male characters, but “manic pixie” isn’t one of them.

A California Court has ruled that proposition 8 — which, if passed, will change the California constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry — can be officially described as: “Changes California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry.”

The folks behind proposition 8 had sued to… well, to prevent voters from being told exactly what their measure does. Apparently they feel that the more voters know what proposition 8 does, the fewer will vote for it.

Best line from the judge’s ruling (pdf link):

There is nothing inherently argumentative or prejudicial about transitive verbs, and the Court is not willing to fashion a rule that would require the Attorney General to engage in useless nominalization.

Personally, I’d enjoy watching the news if high government officials were required to engage in useless nominalization at all times.

Please feel free to use this as an open thread, posting whatever you like, for as long as you like, with whomever you like.¹ Self-linking is not mandatory, but it’s certainly encouraged.

Here are my current open Firefox tabs:

1. Orson Scott Card has a new homophobic essay out, explaining why marraige laws that discriminate against same-sex couples are good for homosexuals. Yonmei at Feminist SF has written an excellent, substantive and detailed response to Card.
2. Obama adviser is, in effect, attacked by the right-wing for being part of the Muslim community. Obama, typically, didn’t lift a finger to defend the adviser or speak out against the bigotry.
3. That’s part of the reason I’m planning to vote for McKinney and Clemente, the only all-woman-of-color ticket in the race. Of course, I live in a “safe state.”²
4. The McCain and Obama health care plans are given a detailed, side-by-side comparison.
5. Why political comics have historically been a nerdy guy thing and how we can change that. (By Jen Sorenson, who does the wonderful strip Slowpoke).
6. Sam at Feministe has some thoughts on homosexuality and Judaism. I disagree with Sam, by the way; Tster’s comment is closer to my view. I’d also recommend this page for some alternative rabbinical interpretations. Or, for a less deep and Christian-biased but easier read, this page on religioustolorance.org.
7. This is what anti-semitism looks like, from The Girl Detective. Again, I don’t completely agree with the post, but it’s interesting, and so is the discussion.
8. The Girl Detective recommends The Past Didn’t Go Anywhere, a long essay on anti-Semitism and the left. I second her recommendation; I read this several months ago and was quite impressed.
9. That reminds me, I also highly recommend Girl Detective’s blog Modern Mitzvot.
10. Ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel are using physical violence to enforce a “women sit at the back of the bus” rule — even on buses that have no such rule. People who act like that are genuinely disgusting people who should be thrown in prison. Curtsy: Sam at Feministe, who entitled her post “I can’t believe it’s not the Taliban.“
11. Someday I will do a “Hereville” storyline about an eruv. If you’re not sure what an Eruv is, Wikipedia explains at length. This is a feminist issue, because in practice it’s more of a hardship for those tasked with infant care to not be able to carry objects on Shabbos.
12. Eating disorders plague the Orthodox world, on Jewcy and in The Forward. Because there is so little contact between prospective brides and grooms in Orthodox culture, the pressure on Orthodox girls to in effect cultivate anorexia can be enormous. This also effects some mothers: “Wanting to predict what a young woman’s figure will be when she turns 40 or 50, some men go as far as asking what the size of the potential bride’s mother is. This obsession with physical appearance has led to an increase in eating disorders among middle-aged women.”
13. The Should I Write An Angry Response To Being Called A Racist flowchart! The end of the flowchart refers to an old post of mine, which I of course find enormously gratifying.
14. Posts on the mikvah (Jewish ritual bath): 1, 2, 3.
15. What happened to Mary Berg? “A young girl’s account of the Warsaw Ghetto was a big success. Then the diary—and its author—disappeared.”
16. Tirtzah: A Community of Frum Queer Women
17. The Racial Slur Database. 2649 slurs and counting.
18. Completely awesome fountain, which uses falling water to create words and images, in a Japanese mall.
19. Sexual harassment okay as it ensures humans breed, Russian judge rules.

(Thanks to Bean for the final three links.)

1. I’m gonna keep using this line until someone tells me they recognize the reference. (back)
2. Actually, right now it’s not looking so safe, but I suspect that as we get close to November it’ll firm up. (back)

Dear Delegate Lingamfelter,

In a recent appeal to your constituents, you wrote:

Lastly, I want to close by asking you to carefully consider the words of Senator Barack Obama, which is enough to make any Democrat yearn for McGovern, Mondale, or Dukakis: “My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you’ll join with me as we try to change it.”

However, nonpartisan websites like factcheck.org and snopes.com have documented that the quote is a fake. Obama never said it; it was made up as a joke in the National Review, and then misunderstood by some of the Review’s readers.

Voters should be able to rely on elected officials to be truthful, especially in official correspondence and newsletters. Believing they can rely on your newsletter, some of your readers are now spreading the fake Obama quote you sent them.

Will you be issuing a public correction, as well as an apology to Senator Obama?

Best wishes,

Barry Deutsch

* * *

Of course, Delegate Lingamfelter isn’t the only right-winger spreading this myth, but it should be embarrassing to him that he’s doing it in his official newsletter. I’ll update this post if I get a response.

This is a repost; I originally posted it about five years ago, and Jeff’s post today reminded me of it.

Historian Gar Alperovitz, among others, has argued that US leaders knew they could have gotten a surrender from Japan, without dropping the bombs. There are a number of impressive quotes in support of this idea, like….

“Experts continue to disagree on some issues, but critical questions have been answered. The consensus among scholars is that the bomb was not needed to avoid an invasion of Japan and to end the war within a relatively short time. It is clear that alternatives to the bomb existed and that Truman and his advisers knew it.” -J. Samuel Walker, chief historian of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

“It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender.” -Admiral William D. Leahy, Former Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

“…Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary […and] no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at this very moment, seeking a way to surrender with a minimum loss of ‘face.’ ” -General Dwight D. Eisenhower

“P.M. [Churchill} & I ate alone. Discussed Manhattan (it is a success). Decided to tell Stalin about it. Stalin had told P.M. of telegram from Jap Emperor asking for peace.” -President Harry S. Truman, Diary Entry, July 18, 1945.

For a summary of the most radical “dropping the bomb was unnecessary” view held by any respectable historian, check out Gar Alperovitz’s 1995 “Foreign Policy” article. I’m not sure that I buy all of Alperovitz’s conclusions, but that the war could have been ended without either the A-Bomb or a full invasion of Japan is a fairly well-supported view. (Of course, some right-wing historians - notably Robert Maddox - disagree. But theirs is not the mainstream view.)

The issue wasn’t if the Japanese were prepared to surrender - but if they were prepared for unconditional surrender. Then and now, many experts believe that the Japanese would have surrendered if they had assurance that they would be able to retain their Emperor in some capacity. As Japanese Prime Minister Suzuki announced on August 9, 1945 (three days after Hiroshima, the day Nagasaki was bombed) “Should the Emperor system be abolished, they [the Japanese people] would lose all reason for existence. ‘Unconditional surrender’, therefore, means death to the hundred million: it leaves us no choice but to go on fighting to the last man.”

What Americans usually forget is that the Japanese didn’t surrender after August 5, 1945; nor after August 9. On the contrary, Japanese hawks were quite prepared to fight to the death after the dropping of the bombs; that the US so vastly out-powered them only added to the romantic fatalism driving their pro-war views.

So what did bring about the Japanese surrender? On August 11th, the Americans finally gave the Japanese Emperor and doves what they had been waiting for: surrender terms which said “the authority of the Emperor and the Japanese Government to rule the state shall be subject to the Supreme Commander of the Allied powers.” This amounted to an explicit statement that the Emperor would not be removed from office. After a few days of studying the terms, on August 14 the Emperor asked the Cabinet to accept the surrender offer; the Cabinet unanimously agreed to surrender that same day.

To the Japanese hawks, this was the one request for peace that could not be turned down. The Emperor was considered a god, after all. It was the Emperor’s request - not the two atomic bombs - that convinced the hawks in the Japanese Cabinet to surrender.

For further reading on the Japanese surrender, I recommend Doug Long’s essay Hiroshima: Was it Necessery?, as well as the Gar Alperovitz essay I mentioned above. Also, check out the Slactivist’s post on Hiroshima.

Simon at Webcomic Musings reviews Hereville. The review is positive, but critical. He thinks my muppet-like jaws are a bit too much, drawing most of his examples from the early pages. I have to admit, I agree with him about that; especially in the first 20 or so pages, my devotion to big muppet-like mouths goes too far (if such a thing is possible!), and prevents me from using appropriate expressions. (In my opinion, anyhow.)

Simon is also critical of the Shabbos sequence:

The plot looks like it will be an interesting one; it’s the first I’ve heard of a Jewish dragon-slayer, much less one who looks to be about twelve or so (unless I’m mistaken, which I often am). The upshot of this is a unique viewpoint for the main character and a really novel setting and personality for people. The downside of this is that right as the Marilyn Manson impersonator reveals how Mirka can get started on the path toward dragonslayerhood, the plot gets interrupted for The Great Muppet Shabbat.

(A side note: challah is delicious bread, and I wish I lived closer to a Great Harvest store so I could buy it more often, but after seeing this page, I will spend the rest of my life checking my loaves of bread for ethereal possession or possible interment of small young girls.)

The downside of any comic that cuts the action in order to present a tidbit of information in earnest (as opposed to Terry Pratchett or Douglas Adams novels, which play such up for laughs) is that the reader generally feels cheated. It may be interesting, it may be essential, but it’s not what the reader came for. It’s like when I went to Subway recently and they mixed my order up with another person’s, so I ended up with roast beef and mustard instead of peppered turkey and mayonnaise. Sure, it was still a good sandwich, but it’s the principle of the thing.

Steven Bergson, of Jewish Comics Blog, emailed me:

I understand his point, but personally I not only didn’t mind the “interruption”, but enjoyed it. I don’t think one has to be Jewish to appreciate that section of the story, but when one is Jewish (even if non-observant), one understands that in “real life”, shabbos is a kind of interruption, but one that (usually) one looks forward to. Mirka isn’t the type of character who would ignore shabbos just to hunt trolls (there are priorities, after all) and I think it would be dishonest to purposely leave out shabbos from her narrative since it is an important part of the character’s life.

I can see both their points. I wanted to really get across how central and important shabbos is in Mirka’s life (and the lives of most folks who live in Aherville). And I wanted to “show, not tell” — hence, many pages were devoted to shabbos. But it’s one of the things that I know could throw some readers off, so I certainly understand Simon’s criticism.

Anyhow, thanks to Webcomic Musings and Simon for his review, and to Steven for his thoughts.

Remember, you can own a paper copy of “Hereville” of your very own!

For folks that pay extra, I do a sketch on the title page. Each sketch is different. Here are two sketches I did recently; you can see a bunch more here.

Read the rest of this entry »

Just clearing out my open tabs… but please feel free to use this thread to post whatever you’d like. (Self-link love is a healthy activity that everyone engages in, and I encourage you to do it without guilt.)

My open tabs:

1) Orson Scott Card calls for overthrowing government if same-sex couples can marry in California. Curtsy Box Turtle Bulletin. See also Feminist SF Blog’s post on this, which is by far the best and most thorough post on this subject I’ve read.

2) Speaking of Scott Card, John Kessel’s analysis of Ender’s Game, “Creating The Innocent Killer,” is excellent. (Previous “Alas” posts mentioning Scott Card: 1 2 3).

3) Should the obese have to pay more for airline tickets? Newsweek says no.

4) Delta Makes Woman With Muscular Dystrophy Crawl Off Plane

5) Rebecca Allen, a nerd at peace, explains why pop culture analysis matters. There’s also some discussion of Joss Whedon’s upcoming series “Dollhouse” in the comments.

6) Uh-Obama: Racism, White Voters and the Myth of Color-Blindness. I love Tim Wise’s writing. (Curtsy: Racialicious).

7) How do we deal with a great and important work of art, that’s also disgustingly racist? Roger Ebert discusses “The Birth Of A Nation”.

8) The Opt-Out revolution among working mothers is a myth.

9) Police arrest 6-year-old black girl for throwing tantrum, charge her with resisting arrest. (Curtsy: Racialicious)

10) Bush Justice Department fires employee for being suspected of being gay.

11) Five year old American Indian refused admission to kindergarten because he has long hair. But, basically, it’s because where conservatives dominate local schools, local schools are mean-spirited xenophobic and racist. (See also.)

12) The limits of superhero movies are limitations inherent in movie executives, not in the superhero genre.

13) Kitten vs. Fan. The cuteness! It burns! It burns!

(Thanks to Bean for several of these links.)

Including a behind-the-scenes photo and everything!

My newest cartoon is online at Dollars and Sense.

Also on D&S, “Ask Dr. Dollar” argues that the insanely high CEO pay in the US isn’t about productivity, and not just about crony capitalism: It’s also about political power.

And from Chuck Collins:

While average wages for all workers rose 3% in 1996, the average CEO salary and bonus rose 39% to $2.3 million — and that is without stock options. Benefitting even more than average were the top managers of the 30 U.S. corporations that laid off the most people last year, according to a new study, “Executive Excess: CEOs Gain from Massive Downsizing,” by the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy. The axmen who laid off between 2,800 and 49,000 workers last year upped their own compensation by 67%.[…]

Most corporate leaders would say any government regulation of CEO pay is an outrageous interference in the free market. But the government is already involved in CEO pay — through the U.S. tax code. The tax code allows businesses to deduct “a reasonable allowance for salaries or other compensation.” The catch is that the code doesn’t define “reasonable.” So companies can — and do — routinely deduct the entirety of grotesque executive pay packages. Corporations pay less in taxes than they should, and regular taxpayers pick up the slack.

Read the whole thing.

1) I’m not convinced McCain’s campaign purposely played the “sexually available white women” card. Maybe they did, maybe they didn’t; it doesn’t seem like a slam-dunk case to me either way.

2) But it doesn’t matter much. Even if the racist connotations weren’t intentional, they still reflect the McCain staff’s gross insensitivity or indifference to racist connotations. (If McCain’s staff included lots of Black people who give a damn about racism, this ad would have died on the drawing board.)

3) It’s not coincidence that our two most famously vapid celebrities are women. Britney and Paris are so famous for vapidity and partying because the media is extremely eager to trumpet those traits in young female celebrities (making them even more famous — a vicious cycle), not because no male celebs are vapid partiers.

4) It’s ironic that McCain’s ad — which presents the least substantive argument (”Obama is like Britney and Paris! So vote McCain!”) of any political ad so far this election — suggests that Obama is the vapid one. Got that plank out of your eye yet, John?

UPDATE: Bean sent me this link, to a BBC column about a survey showing that the most-hated celebrities are women.

I would have enjoyed winning (cue bitter tears and ranting), but to tell you the truth, I think the judges made the right choice. Congratulations to Cathy Malkasian for winning this year’s Russ Manning Award, in recognition of her gorgeous, eccentric graphic novel Percy Gloom.

Remember, you can own a paper copy of “Hereville” of your very own!

For folks that pay extra, I do a sketch on the title page. Each sketch is different. Here are two sketches I did recently; you can see a bunch more here.

Read the rest of this entry »

Post whatever you like, for as long as you like, with whomever you like. Self-linking is encouraged.

* * *

Amazon readers review a gallon of milk.

* * *

Some library patron objects to “Uncle Bobby’s Wedding,” a children’s book which includes a same-sex marriage. Her librarian, Jamie, replies with unusual thoughtfulness and thoroughness.

* * *

Punkass Blog argues being anti-war is feminist

* * *

And if that’s your cup of tea, be sure to check out “Ode To Joy” (love the detail of the top-left Beaker being frightened of the lower-left Beaker’s drumming) and “The Blue Danube Waltz.”

And then, for geek heaven, watch the Star Wars episode of “The Muppet Show.”

The current ReadComics Podcast includes a two minute discussion of my comic book “Hereville,” which they liked (phew!). The “Hereville” talk begins at about 42:15. This is, as far as I know, the first time “Hereville” has been mentioned on a Podcast.

One host, Marty, bought a copy of “Hereville” with a sketch on the title page. I’m pretty sure this is the sketch he bought; I’m glad to hear he liked it. (You can see a whole bunch of title page sketched I’ve done here.)

One of the hosts, Florence, mentions that she read “Hereville” (as well as Castle Waiting and The Underburbs) as an antidote for her depression after reading a ton of Warren Ellis and Walking Dead comics, which really amused me.

I haven’t heard this podcast before, but I enjoyed it, largely because they discussed several comics that I’ve actually read and heard of, so this doesn’t make me feel quite as outdated as some other comics podcasts I’ve heard. To make sure that I did feel old, though, the hosts spent a while discussing if Frank Miller drew “Daredevil” and “The Dark Knight,” before concluding that he didn’t.