#russ andru

[dynamobooks]

Roy Thomas, Gerry Conway, John Buscema et al: Fantastic Four Epic Collection: Annihilus Revealed (1972-1974)

#fantastic four #roy thomas #gerry conway #john buscema #russ andru #ramona fradon #rich buckler #marvel #comics #thundra #epic collection #1970s

[comicbookbrain]

Rose and Thorn, 1971 - Art by Russ Andru & Mike Esposito

Panel from 1971 issue of Lois Lane, backup featuring Rose and Thorn.

#Rose and Thorn #Ross ANdru #mike esposito

[yespat49]

Anne de Kiev, princesse russe, reine de France

Mauricette Vial-Andru, ancienne enseignante de Français et d’Histoire, écrit d’excellents livres pour la jeunesse, romans historiques et d’aventures, vies de saints, tous permettant un bel apostolat auprès des enfants et adolescents. Aux éditions Saint Jude, elle signe les ouvrages de remarquables collections dont les noms sont significatifs : « Vive le Christ Roi », consacrée au Mexique, et «…

View On WordPress

[sgtrock]

The Rock Review: Our Army At War #81

Millenium Edition: Our Army At War #81, first published April 1959

“The Rock of Easy Company”

This reprint of the first appearance of Sgt. Rock established many things about his character in only six pages: his background as a steelworker from Pennsylvania, his ability to remain calm under pressure, his dedication to his men, and even the prototype for his most famous nemesis, the Iron Major (presented here as the ‘Iron Kapitan’).

Although Kanigher had made a couple prototypes of the Rock character before for G.I. Combat, this was the version of the character that stuck and became Sgt Rock in OAAW #83. Rock became a mainstay at Our Army At War and the title was renamed for him in 1977.

Other noteworthy features in this issue were “Umbrella Pilot” and “No Pocket for Easy”.

Credits:

“The Rock of Easy Company”: story by Bob Haney, pencils by Ross Andru, inks by Mike Esposito

“Fighting Footsteps”: story by Bob Haney, art by Russ Heath

“The Liberators”: story and art by unknown

“Umbrella Pilot”: story by Bob Haney, pencils by Ross Andru, inks by Mike Esposito 

“No Pocket For Easy”: story by Robert Kanigher, art by Jack Abel

“The Unsafe Safe”: story by Robert Kanigher, art by Joe Kubert

Cover illustration by Jerry Grandenetti

#the rock review #Sgt. Rock #Our Army at War #bob kanigher #bob haney #Ross Andru #mike esposito #russ heath #jack abel #joe kubert #jerry grandenetti

[alwaysgreatchild]

Fighting Footsteps (OUR ARMY AT WAR #81) Russ Heath (THE ROCK OF EASY SERGEANT ROCK PROTOTYPE PART OF LEAD UP TO FIRST DEFINITIVE SERGEANT ROCK STORY FEATURES A CHARACTER NAMED SERGEANT ROCK AS A 4TH GRADE INSTRUCTOR SERGEANT 4TH GRADE RANK THREE STRIPES CHEVRONS WHO IS REFERRED TO AS THE ROCK OF EASY EDITOR ALSO PROMISES MORE STORIES OF SERGEANT ROCK ROCK LIKE SERGEANT ROSS ANDRU & MIKE ESPOSITO ART)

[gogeekgirl]

BEHAVING MADLY - When MAD Wasn't The Only Funny Magazine Around

BEHAVING MADLY - When MAD Wasn't The Only Funny Magazine Around @IDWPublising @MADMagazine #MAD #BehavingMadly

BEHAVING MADLY – When MAD Wasn’t The Only Funny Magazine Around When MAD was turned into a magazine, every publisher and his uncle came up with his own version using many of the same artists and writers as well as other top-ranking comic book creators. In Behaving Madly you will find rare, never before reprinted material by such industry greats as Bill Elder, Jack Davis, John Severin, Joe…

View On WordPress

#Al Jaffe #Basil Wolverton #Behaving Madly #Bill Elder #Bob Powell #Don Heck #Howard Nostrand #Jack Davis #Jack Kirby #Joe Kubert #Joe Maneely #Joe Sinnott #John Severin #Lee Elias #MAD #Ric Estrada #Ross Andru #Russ Heath #Steve Ditko

[comiccrusaders]

“Behaving Madly” - When MAD Wasn't The Only Funny Magazine Around

“Behaving Madly” – When MAD Wasn’t The Only Funny Magazine Around

When MAD was turned into a magazine, every publisher and his uncle came up with his own version using many of the same artists and writers as well as other top-ranking comic book creators. In Behaving Madly you will find rare, never before reprinted material by such industry greats as Bill Elder, Jack Davis, John Severin, Joe Maneely, Ross Andru, Joe Kubert, Russ Heath, Bob Powell, Howard…

View On WordPress

#behavingmadly #craig yoe #Humor #IDW #magazine #spoof

[maxwellyjordan]

Tuesday round-up

Yesterday the Supreme Court released one of its most eagerly anticipated decisions of the term, holding in Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia and R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that federal employment discrimination law protects gay and transgender employees. Amy Howe analyzes the opinion for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court. At Reuters, Lawrence Hurley reports that “[t]he landmark 6-3 ruling represented the biggest moment for LGBT rights in the United States since the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage nationwide in 2015.” Tucker Higgins reports for CNBC that “[w]hile workers in about half the country were protected by local laws that prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity, there was no federal law that explicitly barred LGBT workers from being fired on that basis.” At The Washington Free Beacon, Kevin Daley reports that “Justice Neil Gorsuch, one of President Donald Trump’s appointees, delivered the opinion.” Steven Mazie at The Economist reports that “Justice [Brett] Kavanaugh wrote a dissent admonishing the majority for legislating from the bench”; “[f]or the more vituperative Justice Samuel Alito (joined in dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas), the ‘radical’ result in Bostock is based on ‘preposterous’ reasoning.”

Jess Bravin and Brent Kendall report for The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) that “[t]he case extends a quarter-century of momentous advances for gay-rights advocates at the Supreme Court, even as the court has grown more conservative with the 2018 retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, author of the court’s previous LGBT rights rulings.” For USA Today, Richard Wolf reports that “for now – thanks in no small part to Gorsuch and Kavanaugh – the court may be conservative, but it is far from united.” At NPR, Nina Totenberg reports that “[a]t the end of his 33-page opinion, … Gorsuch invoked several potential caveats[:] He noted, for instance, that some employers might have valid religious objections to hiring gay or trans workers,” and he “point[ed] to the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act as a ‘super statute’ that may offer a potential lifeline to employers who object, on religious grounds, to hiring gay and trans individuals.” Additional coverage comes from Ronn Blitzer and Bill Mears at Fox News, Howard Fischer for Capitol News Services (via Tucson.com), and Mark Walsh at Education Week, who reports that “debates over restrooms, locker rooms, and athletics had marked the oral arguments in the Title VII cases, and Justice Alito spent several sections of his lengthy dissent on those topics.” [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel on an amicus brief in support of respondent Stephens in Harris.]

Lisa Keen at Keen News Service calls this “perhaps the most stunning U.S. Supreme Court victory in history for LGBT people.” At the Constitutional Law Prof Blog, Ruthan Robson notes that “all of the opinions raise the First Amendment free exercise of religion specter.” At Stanford Law School’s Legal Aggregate blog, Jane Schacter finds it “notable … that the opinion reaches a historic progressive result through methodologies typically associated with more conservative approaches to the law.” In an op-ed for The Hill, John Bursch argues that “[i]t cannot be that Title VII meant one thing for over 50 years and now means something completely different.” The editorial board of The Wall Street Journal writes that “[i]f Justice Gorsuch can use textualism to rewrite a statute to comport with changing public mores, then it is meaningless[:] Textualism becomes merely one more tool of those who believe in a ‘living Constitution’ that means whatever any Justice says it means.” Damon Root writes at Reason that “[i]t might come as a surprise to find Gorsuch and [Justice Antonin] Scalia playing such big roles in a Supreme Court decision that is being celebrated as a landmark liberal victory[, b]ut that misses the point of textualism.” Steve Sanders observes at Medium that “the majority opinion is not a manifesto for LGBT rights or social equality”; “[i]nstead, the opinion is an exercise in pure, academic textual analysis.” At PrawfsBlawg, Gerard Magliocca suggests that “the stakes for the ERA are now higher[:] If Congress ever decides to repeal the expired ratification deadline and declare the ERA part of the Constitution, that amendment could well read as prohibiting discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or transgender status.” Additional commentary comes from Hera Arsen at Ogletree Deakins, William Gould in a Q&A at Legal Aggregate, Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg, Ryan Everson in an op-ed for The Washington Examiner and Shirley Lin at the Human Rights at Home blog.

The court also held 7-2 in U.S. Forest Service v. Cowpasture River Preservation Association that the Forest Service had the authority to grant a right of way for a natural gas pipeline through lands traversed by the Appalachian Trail. Robert Barnes reports for The Washington Post (subscription required) that the decision “removed a major obstacle to the construction of the Atlantic Coast Pipeline, a long-delayed and multibillion-dollar project meant to carry natural gas through some of the most mountainous scenery in central Virginia.” Mariam Morshedi analyzes the decision at Subscript Law. [Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys contribute to this blog in various capacities, is counsel on an amicus brief in support of the respondents in this case.]

In a summary decision in Andrus v. Texas, the justices held 6-3 that Texas death-row inmate Terence Andrus had established that his defense counsel’s performance was deficient, and they sent the case back for the lower court to determine whether the counsel’s inadequacy prejudiced Andrus. Amy Howe analyzes the opinion in Andrus for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court. At Crime & Consequences, Kent Scheidegger complains that “[t]he per curiam opinion reads like a typical capital defense brief.”

Yesterday the court issued orders from last week’s conference. The justices added two cases to their merits docket: Albence v. Chavez, which asks which provision of immigration law governs the detention of a noncitizen whose removal order has been reinstated and who is seeking withholding of removal, and Henry Schein v. Archer and White Sales Inc., in which the court will decide whether a provision in an arbitration agreement that carves out some claims trumps a clear delegation to an arbitrator of questions of arbitrability. The court also requested the views of the solicitor general in Texas v. California, in which Texas is asking the justices to decide whether California’s ban on government-funded travel to states that it regards as having laws or policies that discriminate against gays, lesbians and transgender people violates the Constitution. Amy Howe covers the order list for this blog, in a post that first appeared at Howe on the Court. For Capitol Media Services (via Tucson.com), Howard Fischer reports that the court also “quashed a last-ditch effort by the Arizona Libertarian Party to void a state statute that as designed – and succeeded – at keeping its candidates off the ballot.” At CPR Speaks, Russ Bleemer and Heather Cameron look at the cert grant in Henry Schein.

The justices declined to review a group of Second Amendment cases they had considered at several conferences, along with another group of cases involving the doctrine of qualified immunity, which shields officials from liability for constitutional violations that do not violate clearly established law. For this blog, and also at Howe on the Court, Amy Howe covers the cert denials in the Second Amendment cases. At Bloomberg, Greg Stohr reports that the court “turned away 10 appeals that sought to broaden constitutional firearm protections, rejecting calls for rights to own a semi-automatic assault rifle and carry a handgun in public[:] The rebuffs are a blow to the gun-rights movement, which has been trying for a decade to get the court to take up a major new Second Amendment case.” At Route Fifty, Bill Lucia reports that several of the “pending gun  cases before the court involved challenges over ‘public carry’ restrictions.”

At NPR, Nina Totenberg reports that “[t]wo Supreme Court justices have repeatedly urged the court to reexamine qualified immunity doctrine: Sonia Sotomayor, arguably the court’s most liberal justice, and Thomas, arguably its most conservative.” At Education Week’s School Law Blog, Mark Walsh reports that in one of the nine qualified immunity cases the court declined to hear, “Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a lone dissent from the denial of review, saying, ‘I continue to have strong doubts about our Section 1983 qualified immunity doctrine.’” Brent Kendall and Jess Bravin report for The Wall Street Journal (subscription required) that “[t]he court’s move will keep it on the sidelines of a brewing national debate over the leeway law enforcement enjoys to treat suspects and others without regard to their constitutional rights.” Commentary comes from Howard Wasserman at PrawfsBlawg, who wonders “if the recent events and the introduction of legislation prompted the Justices to wait.” At trialdex, Ed Hagen argues that “[t]he Court properly denied cert in these cases,” because “if § 1983/Bivens qualified immunity is a doctrine that should be revisited, that is a job for Congress, not the Supreme Court.”

Ariane de Vogue reports at CNN that the court “left in place a lower court opinion upholding one of California’s so-called sanctuary laws that limits cooperation between law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, a measure that the Trump administration says is meant to ‘undermine’ federal immigration enforcement.” Amy Howe’s coverage of the sanctuary state case for this blog is here; it first appeared at Howe on the Court. Kevin Johnson offers his take on the petition at the ImmigrationProf Blog.

Briefly:

For The Wall Street Journal, Sadie Gurman reports that “[t]he Justice Department has set new dates to begin executing federal death row inmates while the prisoners’ appeals are pending before the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Jordan Rubin reports at Bloomberg Law that “Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s suggestion last term that Texas could avoid religious freedom issues during executions by barring ministers of all faiths is back at the high court, due to an appeal ahead of a planned Tuesday execution.”

At Sentencing Law and Policy, Douglas Berman laments that “the current Supreme Court has largely decided [to] become particularly quiet on sentencing matters.”

In an op-ed at The Hill, Deborah LaFetra and Elizabeth Slattery are discouraged by the court’s decision not to review a case challenging Wisconsin’s mandatory bar membership and dues requirements, and they urge the justices to ensure in a future case “that attorneys nationwide enjoy protection against compelled subsidization of speech.”

In an op-ed at the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Daniel Cotter highlights last week’s Supreme Court news.

At the Brennan Center for Justice, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy worries that “the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Bridgegate case,” Kelly v. United States, in which the justices reversed federal fraud convictions stemming from the Bridgegate controversy in New Jersey because the scheme did not aim to obtain money or property, “will ultimately make it harder, if not impossible, to use federal fraud statutes against fraudulent officials.”

We rely on our readers to send us links for our round-up. If you have or know of a recent (published in the last two or three days) article, post, podcast or op-ed relating to the Supreme Court that you’d like us to consider for inclusion in the round-up, please send it to roundup [at] scotusblog.com. Thank you!

The post Tuesday round-up appeared first on SCOTUSblog.

from Law https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/06/tuesday-round-up-535/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

#law #justice

[barbosaasouza]

The Ridiculous History of the Spider-Mobile

There is a long history of badass superhero vehicles, including the Batmobile, the Fantasticar, and, of course, Wonder Womans Invisible Jet. However, not included on that list - nor any list related to badassery - is Spider-Mans Spider-Mobile. Those unfamiliar with the Spider-Mobile can be forgiven for asking questions like, Why would Spider-Man even need a car? and Wouldnt that just make it harder for him to get around? After several decades of publishing history, the Spider-Mobile has yet to really justify its existence. Most people who live in New York City dont own a car, and they dont have the benefit of web-slinging abilities. Still, Gerry Conway and Russ Andru created the wall-crawling roadster in 1974s Amazing Spider-Man #130, amid more serious tales like The Death of Gwen Stacy. Conway and Andru cant be entirely blamed, however, as there were some interesting real-world reasons behind the creation of the volatile vehicle. The Ridiculous History of the Spider-Mobile published first on https://superworldrom.tumblr.com/

[comicbookbrain]

Rose and Thorn Page 6 - Russ Andru and Mike Esposito artwork

Lois Lane #108, Feb 1971 DC Comics

#rose and thorn

[reseau-actu]

Alors que les médias dominants, RSF et AFP en tête annoncent vouloir combattre les fausses nouvelles via des structures normatives qui étoufferont toute voie contestataire, les instances de l’Union Européenne ne pouvaient pas être laissées en queue de peloton.

Médecine préventive

Les électeurs sont crédules, faisons de la médecine préventive. Le mauvais résultat du Brexit ne doit pas se renouveler. Des tentatives de manipulation des résultats électoraux auraient été décelées dans 18 pays de l’UE, bigre ! Comme si la définition d’une période électorale ne serait pas influencer et manipuler l’opinion dans un sens favorable à ses intérêts électoraux. À moins qu’il ne s’agisse que d’une fraction des manipulations, celles hostiles à l’Union Européenne et ses valeurs libérales libertaires, les autres manipulations étant considérées légitimes ?

Après la loi allemande, la loi française puis celle de l’UE

La loi allemande que nous avons longuement analysée le 10 avril 2018 prévoit de lourdes amendes pour les réseaux sociaux fautifs et la suppression obligatoire de comptes. La loi française en discussion semble aller dans le même sens avec un accent porté sur les périodes électorales et une tonalité anti russe marquée.

Dans un discours remarqué d’avril 2017 devant le Parlement européen de Strasbourg, le commissaire européen estonien Andrus Ansip, vice-président de la Commission et chargé du marché unique du numérique, avait mis dans le même sac fausses nouvelles, discours de haine, populismes, hostilité aux migrants et extrémisme. Il indiquait par là que l’Europe doit se munir d’outils efficaces pour régler des situations où la liberté d’expression est abusée pour promouvoir un extrémisme violent ou la discrimination contre certains groupes de la société. 

On ne saurait être plus clair : ce ne sont pas les seules fausses nouvelles qui sont visées et doivent être régulées mais également les mauvaises opinions qui par définition sont de fausses opinions, extrêmes ou violentes.

Code de la désinformation ou code de conduite pour mineurs

Le commissaire (un nom tout à fait adapté) Ansip fera adopter un code de bonne conduite par des « experts internationaux ». Faute de temps pour adopter une véritable loi européenne qui prendrait deux ou trois ans pour être votée et mise en œuvre, la Commission organisera un « forum » avec des représentants de la société civile (Soros et ses épigones?), des médias (Messieurs Pigasse, Niel, Drahi, Dassault, Pinault ou leurs représentants?), des publicitaires (Havas, Publicis?). Ce forum dégagera un code de la désinformation, avec un réseau de vérificateurs indépendants. Allez, on parie? Les Décodeurs du Monde de Niel/Pigasse et Désintox de Libération de Drahi?

La plate-forme sur la désinformation, dont les contours sont encore flous, permettra d’offrir au public, honnête mais naïf, des vraies informations, des vraies statistiques, et des vraies données vérifiées par de vrais journalistes.ÀÀ l’époque de la défunte ORTF, certains dénonçaient une information officielle, aseptisée, hors du champ du réel. La Commission réinvente une ORTPE, une sorte d’Office de la Radio Télévision et Presse Européenne. Avec sans doute le même succès, mais un martinet européen prêt à servir.

#andrus ansip

[comicsalternative]

Comics Alternative Interviews: Ger Apeldoorn

Time Codes:

00:00:25 - Introduction

00:02:24 - Setup of interview

00:03:34 - Interview with Ger Apeldoorn

01:06:35 - Wrap up

01:08:17 - Contact us

Just in time for the San Diego Comic-Con -- where he and Craig Yoe will be meeting with fans and signing books -- Ger Apeldoorn is on the show to talk with Derek about his new book, Behaving Madly: Zany, Loco, Cockeyed, Rip-off, Satire Magazines (IDW/Yoe Books). It's a beautifully produced work that highlights the many knockoffs of Bill Gaines's Mad that appeared between 1954 to 1959, attempting to capitalize on the kind of success the Usual Gang of Idiots enjoyed once the title changed to magazine format. These Mad wannabes appeared with such titles as From Here to Insanity, Cockeyed, Bunk!, SNAFU, Lunatickle, Who Goofed?, Thimk, Shook Up, Frenzy, Frantic!, Loco, Zany, and Nuts! You might think -- or thimk -- that these rip-offs would all be cheesy and subpar, but as Ger makes clear, these short-lived satire magazines included work from such comics legends as Jack Davis, Al Jaffee, Steve Ditko, Jack Kirby, Joe Kubert, Howard Nostrand, Bob Powell, Ross Andru, Basil Wolverton, and Russ Heath. Derivative and second-rate? Perhaps. But the selections in Behaving Madly are no laughing matter. Well...actually, they are.

Check out this great promo from Yoe Books!

  Check out this episode!

[geekcavepodcast]

“Behaving Madly” Compiles Selections from Mad Magazine Imitators

Produced by comic strip historians (that’s a job!) Ger Apeldoorn and Craig Yoe, Behaving Madly compiles work from every MAD Magazine imitator from 1955 to 1959; magazines like Snafu, Lunatickle, Cockeyed and Crazy, Man, Crazy to Think, Frantic, Frenzy, Loco, Panic, and Zany.

Behaving Madly features rare, never before reprinted material by industry greats like Bill Elder, Jack Davis, John Severin, Joe Maneely, Ross Andru, Joe Kubert, Russ Heath, Bob Powell, Howard Nostrand, Lee Elias, Basil Wolverton, Joe Sinnott, Don Heck, Ric Estrada, and Al Jaffe, as well as complete stories by Jack Kirby and Steve Ditko.

By the way, if you are going to be at San Diego Comic-Con on July 22nd, head over to the IDW booth and from 1-2 p.m. Ger Apeldoorn and Craig Yoe will be signing copies of Behaving Madly.

View the book trailer here.

#TGCLiz #behaving madly #ger apeldoorn #craig yoe #idw publishing #yoe books #jack kirby #steve ditko #bill elder #jack davis #john severin #mad magazine

[mrrubbersuitman]

#star spangled war stories #enemy ace #joe kubert #russ heath #ross andru #silver age comics #dc comics #geek gifts #man cave #she shed #comics for sale

[alwaysgreatchild]

Clean Sweep (ALL AMERICAN MEN OF WAR #67) Russ Heath (GUNNER & SARGE FIRST APPEARANCE BY ROSS ANDRU & MIKE ESPOSITO)

[comicsbeat]

SDCC '17: IDW debuts BEHAVING MADLY anthology of MAD knock-offs

SDCC ’17: IDW debuts BEHAVING MADLY anthology of MAD knock-offs

IDW continues its archiving of some of the more ephemeral passages of comcis history with  Behaving Madly, an anthology of soe of the Mad iitators that sprng up in the wake of that magazines stunning debut. Edited by Ger Apeldoorn and Craig Yoe, The book includes work by Bill Elder, Jack Davis, John Severin, Joe Maneely, Ross Andru, Joe Kubert, Russ Heath, Bob Powell, Howard Nostrand, Lee…

View On WordPress

#sdcc2017 #behaving madly #craig yoe old comics #Ger Apeldoorn #Mad Magazine #sdcc &039;17