mackaycartoons

Graeme MacKay's Editorial Cartoon Archive

  • Archives
  • DOWNLOADS
  • Expanded Archives
  • Kings & Queens
  • MacKaycartoons Inc.
  • Prime Ministers
  • Special Features
  • The Boutique
  • Who?
  • Young Doug Ford
  • Presidents

rights

Friday June 20, 2025

June 20, 2025 by Graeme MacKay

Ontario seeks to develop the Ring of Fire region while balancing economic growth with Indigenous rights and environmental concerns amid controversy over Bill 5.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday June 20, 2025

Balancing Boom and Respect: Ontario’s Ring of Fire Dilemma

Doug Ford's Bill 17 sidesteps environmental protections and local governance, prioritizing development at the cost of Ontario's sustainability.

June 6, 2025

The development of Ontario’s Ring of Fire region presents a critical opportunity for sustainable economic growth, not only for the province but for Canada as a whole. Rich in crucial minerals like nickel and gold, this area has the potential to significantly bolster our economy, particularly in the face of external pressures such as those posed by a hostile administration in the White House. However, realizing this potential requires balancing development with respect for Indigenous rights and environmental sustainability.

At the centre of this debate is Bill 5, the “Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act,” which aims to expedite the approval process for large infrastructure projects, including those in the Ring of Fire. While the bill is designed to reduce project approval times from 15 years to just two, it has been met with significant opposition. Critics argue that it undermines treaty rights and environmental protections by creating “special economic zones” that prioritize rapid development over due process.

News: Doug Ford accuses First Nations of ‘coming hat in hand’ for government money, despite treating them ‘like gold’

Premier Doug Ford's Bill 5, aimed at expediting mining in Ontario's Ring of Fire, faces backlash for lacking Indigenous consultation, echoing past missteps.

May 29 2025

Premier Doug Ford’s recent comments about Indigenous communities coming “hat in hand” for government support have added fuel to the fire. While his intent may have been to highlight opportunities for self-sufficiency and economic partnership, the language used was perceived as insensitive and disrespectful. Such remarks risk evoking historical stereotypes that overlook the systemic challenges faced by Indigenous communities and can undermine the trust needed for meaningful collaboration.

There is a general consensus among many stakeholders that advancing sustainable development in the Ring of Fire is essential. However, this must be pursued with a commitment to thorough and genuine consultation with Indigenous communities. Their voices and rights are pivotal in any development plans, as they have a direct stake in the land and its resources.

Opposition to development is inevitable, and there will always be dissenting voices. These positions should be respectfully considered and addressed, ensuring that the government truly represents the will of the majority while honouring its commitments to Indigenous peoples. This is not just a matter of legal obligation but a moral one, integral to the fabric of our national identity and values.

News: Doug Ford accused of ‘racist’ comments ahead of meeting with First Nations chiefs

April 23, 2006

The broader societal debate reflects a tension between economic aspirations and the need to uphold environmental and Indigenous rights. It is crucial for political leaders, like Premier Ford, to navigate these discussions with sensitivity and respect. The language used in political discourse can either bridge divides or deepen them, and it is the responsibility of our leaders to foster unity and understanding.

As we contemplate the development of the Ring of Fire under Bill 5, let us strive for a future where economic growth does not come at the expense of our principles or the well-being of Indigenous communities. It is possible to achieve a balance that respects both the land and its people, ensuring that the benefits of development are shared equitably and sustainably. This requires thoughtful leadership, open dialogue, and a commitment to reconciliation—a path that acknowledges our past and looks forward to a prosperous and inclusive future.


Premier Doug’s Inappropriate Dance

The Ring of Fire region in Ontario presents a significant opportunity for economic growth due to its rich mineral deposits. Bill 5 aims to speed up development, but it has ignited controversy over potential impacts on Indigenous rights and the environment. Premier Doug Ford’s comments about Indigenous communities seeking “handouts” have been criticized, highlighting the need for respectful dialogue. While many see development as essential, it must be pursued with careful consideration of Indigenous perspectives and environmental protections. By fostering open communication, Ontario can find a path that benefits all stakeholders and respects the land’s heritage.

Ontario’s Ring of Fire holds immense economic potential with its rich mineral resources. Bill 5 aims to fast-track development, but it’s sparked debate over Indigenous rights and environmental concerns.

Doug Ford’s comments about Indigenous communities seeking “handouts” have been criticized as lacking sensitivity. While the goal is self-sufficiency, it’s crucial to engage in respectful and meaningful dialogue with Indigenous groups who have a deep connection to the land.

He wisely took the unexpected step of apologizing alongside Indigenous leaders in a press conference after the meeting. Unfortunately for Dougie, his mea culpa came too late for my deadline.

Most agree that development is important, but it must be done thoughtfully. We need to balance economic growth with respecting Indigenous rights and environmental protections. By fostering open and honest communication, we can find a path forward that benefits everyone and honours our commitments to Indigenous communities.

If you haven’t yet, please subscribe to my Substack newsletter, where I share weekly editorial cartoons every Saturday morning. Substack is a crucial platform for me amidst the uncertainties of being a staff cartoonist, especially given recent layoffs and newspaper closures affecting our field. Check out my making-of animated editorial cartoon for June 20, 2025, below!

YouTube: https://youtu.be/Dg_EiVeT_9s

– The Graeme Gallery

Read on Substack

Posted in: Ontario Tagged: 2025-12, Bill 5, consultation, controversy, development, dialogue, Doug Ford, economic growth, environment, indigenous, minerals, Ontario, rights, Ring of Fire, sustainability, trust

Saturday April 19, 2025

April 19, 2025 by Graeme MacKay

Pierre Poilievre's plan to invoke the notwithstanding clause threatens Canadian democratic norms and sets a dangerous precedent for federal governance.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday April 19, 2025

Poilievre’s Notwithstanding Gamble: A Risky Precedent for Canada

The concerns regarding Pierre Poilievre's casual use of the Notwithstanding clause include the potential undermining of the balance of power, diminishing the importance of Charter rights, the risk of misuse and abuse, and setting a dangerous precedent for future governments.

May 4, 2024

In a political landscape increasingly characterized by divisive rhetoric and the erosion of democratic norms, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s pledge to invoke the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a troubling signal. His proposal to use this powerful constitutional tool to impose consecutive life sentences for multiple murderers may tap into populist sentiments, but it sets a dangerous precedent that should disqualify him and his party from gaining the reins of power.

December 14, 2022

The notwithstanding clause, or Section 33 of the Charter, allows federal and provincial governments to override certain Charter rights temporarily. Traditionally, its use has been confined to provincial matters, such as Quebec’s secularism laws, where it has already sparked controversy. No Canadian Prime Minister has ever used this clause at the federal level, and for good reason. It represents an extraordinary measure intended for exceptional circumstances, not a tool for advancing populist agendas.

December 6, 2022

Poilievre’s willingness to be the first Prime Minister to wield this clause reflects a concerning alignment with tactics seen south of the border under Donald Trump. Trump’s efforts to undermine the judiciary and politicize the courts have led to a weakening of the checks and balances that are foundational to American democracy. Canadians should be wary of similar trends taking root here.

News: Poilievre’s pledge to use notwithstanding clause a ‘dangerous sign’: legal expert

Critics, including legal experts and political leaders, have voiced strong opposition to Poilievre’s plan. They warn that normalizing the use of the notwithstanding clause for routine legislative purposes could erode the Charter’s protections and lead to further politicization of fundamental rights. This slippery slope could extend beyond criminal justice, potentially threatening academic freedom, reproductive rights, and other areas where individual liberties might clash with political agendas.

Pierre Poilievre faces challenges adapting his strategy against the fresh leadership of Mark Carney, as Canada's political dynamics shift from opposition to unity.

March 15, 2025

Public sentiment, as reflected in reader comments and broader discourse, reveals deep apprehension about Poilievre’s intentions. The use of the notwithstanding clause is seen not only as an overreach but also as an indication of Poilievre’s authoritarian tendencies—a “trumpy” approach that prioritizes personal opinion over established legal norms. Such a path risks alienating those who value the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.

News: Poilievre says he’ll use notwithstanding clause to ensure multiple-murderers die in prison

While both Trump and Poilievre use populist slogans and insults to galvanize supporters, Poilievre has thus far avoided Trump’s more extreme policies, opting to focus his populist messaging on economic concerns.

November 9 2024

Poilievre’s tough-on-crime rhetoric may resonate with certain voter bases, but the implications of his proposals extend far beyond immediate policy goals. They strike at the heart of Canada’s democratic values and the delicate balance of power that protects citizens’ rights. As we approach the upcoming election, it is crucial for Canadians to consider the long-term consequences of granting power to a leader willing to circumvent the Charter for political gain.

In a time when global democratic institutions face unprecedented challenges, Canada must stand firm in upholding its principles. Poilievre’s promise to invoke the notwithstanding clause is a stark reminder of the stakes at play. It is a promise that, if fulfilled, could fundamentally alter the landscape of Canadian governance. For this reason, it stands as yet another compelling argument.


“Notwithstanding Clause” no doubt instantly triggers eye glazing in vast swaths of Canadians, a nation where many voters remain unaware of its implications until they feel the impact firsthand. Pierre Poilievre, echoing Trump, is using populist outrage to justify potentially overriding judicial independence with the notwithstanding clause, signalling a troubling shift towards authoritarianism. What might have been seen as fear-mongering before an election becomes irrelevant once a movement takes power. When these accusations no longer trigger instinctive reactions, they solidify into harsh realities. Just look south for proof of this. Timbit Trump’s promise to enforce life sentences by bypassing court decisions raises concerns about future threats to constitutional rights, drawing unsettling parallels with recent U.S. politics. Today, Poilievre targets criminal sentencing, but despite denying admiration for Trump, he emulates many strategies from the Trump playbook, suggesting he might next challenge academic freedom, women’s rights, or other constitutional protections. This commitment to undermining judicial independence to consolidate power is the pivotal issue of this election, as it echoes the U.S. pattern of filling the judiciary with like-minded judges and defying court rulings, reflecting a desire to centralize authority. Sure, just what democracy ordered: another leader eager to override court decisions with his own, thanks to the trusty notwithstanding clause. Vote for this at your peril.

Check out my making-of animated editorial cartoon for April 19, 2025, below! If you haven’t yet, please subscribe to my Substack newsletter, where I share weekly editorial cartoons every Saturday morning. Substack is a crucial platform for me amidst the uncertainties of being a staff cartoonist, especially given recent layoffs and newspaper closures affecting our field. As long as I hold my position, subscriptions will remain free. Thank you for your support! This “note” helps craft my weekly posts and showcases animated versions of my cartoons. Enjoy!

YouTube: Easter Bunny Rejection  https://youtu.be/jDyQEaocYGc

– The Graeme Gallery

Read on Substack

Posted in: Canada Tagged: 2025-08, authoritarian, Canada, Charter, clause, Democracy, Donald Trump, Easter, easter bunny, election, federal, freedoms, governance, Independence, Judiciary, justice, Lady Justice, Notwithstanding, overreach, Pierre Poilievre, populist, precedent, rights, Substack

Saturday August 24, 2024

August 24, 2024 by Graeme MacKay
The recent DNC's interpretation of "freedom" underscores the growing divide in contemporary politics, where notions of individual rights and community welfare clash, revealing how personal definitions of freedom can either empower or restrict others within an increasingly polarized society.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator,  Saturday August 24, 2024

Two Forms of Freedom in a Polarized World

Here’s the Pinterest ink to the animated version of this editorial cartoon.

The 2024 presidential race has transformed into a powerful narrative of poetic justice as Donald Trump potentially faces Kamala Harris, a Black woman, symbolizing a rejection of his divisive legacy and the embrace of a more inclusive future, highlighted by Barack Obama’s lofty critiques and Michelle Obama’s sharper, more pointed attacks.

Thursday August 21, 2024

Following the recent Democratic National Convention in 2024, where the theme of “freedom” was emphasized, we are reminded of the complex nature of freedom in an increasingly polarized world. This concept, while celebrated in various forms, has taken on two distinct meanings that resonate deeply in both the United States and Canada. These emerging interpretations of freedom highlight the tension between individual rights and communal responsibilities, prompting us to reflect on what freedom means in a contemporary context.

Analysis: How Democrats at DNC are seizing on ‘freedom’ theme after years of GOP monopoly

The first interpretation of freedom is rooted in a strong sense of individualism, often promoting a mindset that prioritizes personal autonomy over collective well-being. This perspective is characterized by a notion of “I have the freedom to trample on your freedoms.” We witnessed this during Canada’s “Freedom Convoy,” where protestors framed their resistance to public health measures as a fight for personal liberties. This sentiment echoes the rhetoric of U.S. politicians like Kamala Harris, who often champions individual rights and personal autonomy, particularly concerning reproductive rights and civil liberties. However, this focus on personal freedoms can sometimes overlook the collective implications of those freedoms, particularly in times of crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Tuesday, November 15, 2022

In Canada, Pierre Poilievre has similarly tapped into this individualistic narrative, promoting the idea of personal freedoms and economic liberties. His appeal to voters often hinges on a populist message that positions him as a champion of the everyday individual against government overreach. Poilievre’s rhetoric during the Freedom Convoy protests highlighted a disdain for restrictions perceived as infringing on personal rights, reflecting a belief that individual choice should take precedence over collective health measures.

In contrast, the second interpretation of freedom emphasizes the interconnectedness of individual rights and societal responsibilities. This vision posits that true freedom cannot exist in isolation; it must be contextualized within a framework of community welfare. Here, the key question is: “What freedoms threaten the public good?”

This perspective has gained traction in progressive movements across both Canada and the U.S., particularly as we confront issues of systemic inequality and social justice. Advocates for this view argue that some personal freedoms, when exercised without regard for others, can undermine societal cohesion. For instance, the right to free speech, while essential, can become problematic when it is used to propagate hate or discrimination.

Kamala Harris, in her role as Vice President, often emphasizes a holistic approach to freedom, advocating for policies that aim to uplift marginalized communities and ensure equitable access to opportunities. Her stance illustrates a commitment to a vision of freedom that recognizes the importance of social justice and collective well-being.

June 29, 2022

On the Canadian front, Pierre Poilievre has often found himself at odds with this collective perspective, promoting a more libertarian approach that prioritizes economic freedoms. However, as he navigates his leadership within the Conservative Party, he is increasingly challenged to balance individual rights with the realities of social issues such as housing affordability and climate change. The question remains: can a focus on individual economic freedoms coexist with the pressing need for communal solutions?

Opinion: Canada’s conservatives care about freedom—except in health care

Examining these competing visions of freedom necessitates an exploration of the cultural contexts that shape them. In American society, individualism has long been celebrated as a hallmark of personal identity, emphasizing self-reliance and autonomy. This cultural narrative often leads to a belief that individual rights should supersede collective interests. However, this emphasis on personal freedom can sometimes devolve into selfishness, especially when it results in neglecting communal responsibilities and values.

September 13, 2012

In contrast, Canadians typically lean toward a more collectivist philosophy, valuing the good of the community over strict individualism. While this approach is often criticized as overly socialist or even “communist,” it fundamentally seeks to foster a society where individual freedoms are harmonized with the rights of others. Canadians tend to prioritize social safety nets and public services as essential components of freedom, believing that true liberty flourishes within a framework of mutual support and responsibility.

Ultimately, the question of freedom has become deeply personal, shaped by individual experiences, beliefs, and values. Some embrace a form of freedom that champions personal choice and autonomy, while others advocate for a vision that acknowledges the necessity of limitations for the greater good. This divergence reflects a broader societal struggle to balance individual rights with communal obligations, and it highlights the challenges we face in navigating an increasingly polarized world.

As we continue to grapple with these contrasting interpretations of freedom, it is vital to foster a dialogue that recognizes the complexity of these issues. Figures like Kamala Harris and Pierre Poilievre embody the current cultural and political divides, reminding us that our definitions of freedom are not only shaped by individual beliefs but also by the collective needs of our societies. Only through understanding and empathy can we find common ground and work toward a vision of freedom that honours both individual rights and the collective good. (AI)

 

Posted in: USA Tagged: 2024-15, animated, Democratic, DNC, DNC2024, Donald Trump, freedom, GOP, Kamala Harris, liberty, Pierre Poilievre, Republican, rights, USA

Saturday May 4, 2024

May 4, 2024 by Graeme MacKay

The concerns regarding Pierre Poilievre's casual use of the Notwithstanding clause include the potential undermining of the balance of power, diminishing the importance of Charter rights, the risk of misuse and abuse, and setting a dangerous precedent for future governments.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday May 4, 2024

The Notwithstanding Clause Should Not Be a Regular Strategy of Governing

Both Bonnie Crombie and Pierre Poilievre's opposition to the carbon tax raises questions about their alternative plans for addressing climate change, leaving voters to wonder: if not a carbon tax, then what specific measures do they propose to tackle this urgent issue, if any at all?

March 22, 2024

The federal Conservatives’ proposal to utilize the notwithstanding clause to override Charter-protected rights and freedoms has sparked a heated debate. While Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre initially focused on criminal justice matters, the Official Opposition did not rule out its application to other policy areas. This article serves as a warning to Poilievre, urging him to reconsider using the notwithstanding clause as a regular strategy of governing. The potential consequences of such an approach, along with the context of recent discussions, must be carefully considered.

Opinion: Poilievre flirts with far right while media looks away

Earlier this week, Poilievre avoided clarifying how often he intended to use the notwithstanding clause when questioned by the media. His spokesperson later stated that their attention was focused on ensuring the imprisonment of the most dangerous criminals, such as mass murderers and child predators, to protect the safety of Canadians. However, the use of the notwithstanding clause has been increasingly invoked by provincial governments to restrict labor rights, freedom of expression, and religion. This raises concerns about the purpose and legitimacy of the clause, as well as its potential misuse.

December 1, 2022

Poilievre specifically mentioned his intention to override a Supreme Court ruling that struck down a law allowing for life sentences with no chance of parole. He referred to the case of Alexandre Bissonnette, who committed a heinous act by killing six Muslim worshippers in a Quebec City mosque in 2017. The Supreme Court ruled that sentencing mass killers, including terrorists, to whole-life sentences constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Poilievre criticized this ruling, arguing that Bissonnette should remain behind bars for life. However, legal experts have pointed out that Poilievre’s comments misrepresent Bissonnette’s sentence, as the 25-year mark only represents the earliest eligibility for parole. They emphasize that the Charter was designed to protect the rights of unpopular minorities and prevent the government from engaging in cruel and unusual punishment.

News: Love the idea or hate it, experts say federal use of notwithstanding clause would be a bombshell 

September 11, 2018

Using the notwithstanding clause as a regular strategy of governing poses significant risks. It undermines the balance of power and judicial independence, as well as diminishes the importance of Charter-protected rights and freedoms. Regular reliance on the clause erodes public confidence and trust in the government’s commitment to upholding fundamental rights. Furthermore, it sets a dangerous precedent by allowing the government to override rights without sufficient justification. The notwithstanding clause was intended to be a limited and exceptional measure, and using it as a routine tool undermines the integrity of our democratic system.

The artist at work drawing this cartoon from a remote location: student housing in Ottawa

Pierre Poilievre must heed this warning and carefully consider the potential consequences of using the notwithstanding clause as a regular strategy of governing. The context surrounding recent discussions, including the case of Alexandre Bissonnette, highlights the importance of protecting individual rights and maintaining the balance of power within our democratic system. Rather than diluting the purpose of the notwithstanding clause, Poilievre should seek alternative approaches that uphold the principles of justice, equality, and respect for Charter-protected rights. Our democracy’s strength lies in the preservation of checks and balances and the protection of individual rights for all Canadians. (AI)

 

Posted in: Canada Tagged: 2024-08, Canada, climate change, freedom, notwithstanding clause, Pierre Poilievre, rights, whack-a-mole

Friday February 9, 2024

February 9, 2024 by Graeme MacKay

Pierre Poilievre's backing of Alberta's controversial transgender policies seems more about playing to social conservatives than considering the potential harm to vulnerable youth.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday February 9, 2024

Pierre Poilievre’s Defence of Alberta’s Transgender Policies: A Dangerous Culture War at the Expense of Marginalized Youth

Alberta's Urgent Issues Overshadowed by Premier Smith's Controversial Policies

February 3, 2024

In recent days, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has found himself at the centre of a contentious debate surrounding Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s controversial transgender policies. Poilievre’s vocal support for Smith’s measures raises concerns about the Conservative Party’s priorities and its willingness to engage in a culture war that may have detrimental effects on a small, marginalized group – transgender youth.

Poilievre’s defence of Smith’s policies revolves around the idea that parents should have more say over their children’s lives, particularly when it comes to sensitive matters like gender identity. While advocating for parental involvement is not inherently problematic, Poilievre seems to be echoing Smith’s stance without critically examining the potential harm these policies could inflict on transgender youth.

The focus on parental consent for preferred names and pronouns in schools, as well as restrictions on medical interventions such as puberty blockers and hormone therapy, appears to be more about currying favour with a social conservative base than safeguarding the well-being of transgender individuals. By aligning himself with Smith’s controversial policies, Poilievre is punching down on a vulnerable and marginalized group, using them as pawns in a larger culture war.

News: Pierre Poilievre defends Alberta Premier Smith on transgender policies

May 26, 2023

One of the most alarming aspects of Smith’s proposals is the ban on “top” and “bottom” surgeries for minors aged 17 and under. This goes against established standards of care and seems to prioritize a rigid ideological stance over the well-being of transgender youth who may benefit from these medical interventions. Poilievre’s failure to critically assess these measures raises questions about his commitment to evidence-based policy and the rights of transgender individuals.

Additionally, Smith’s attempt to exclude trans women and girls from women’s sports under the guise of safety and fairness is a thinly veiled discriminatory measure. Poilievre’s endorsement of such policies further emphasizes the Conservative Party’s alignment with socially conservative groups rather than standing up for the rights of all Canadians.

News: Conservatives tell MPs not to comment on Alberta transgender policies, prioritize parental rights, internal e-mail shows  

June 24, 2021

The condemnation of Smith’s policies by LGBTQ groups, trans advocates, and medical associations highlights the potential harm they could inflict on transgender youth. The Canadian Pediatric Society emphasizes the importance of gender-affirming medical interventions for some adolescents, citing lower odds of suicidal ideation associated with access to puberty blockers.

In contrast, Poilievre’s defense of these policies without addressing the concerns raised by experts and advocacy groups appears to be a calculated move to exploit a divisive issue for political gain. This approach not only disregards the well-being of transgender youth but also perpetuates a harmful narrative that can contribute to the stigmatization and marginalization of an already vulnerable community.

Pierre Poilievre’s support for Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s transgender policies raises serious questions about the Conservative Party’s priorities and commitment to inclusivity. By aligning with divisive measures that target a small and marginalized group, Poilievre appears to be prioritizing political posturing over the well-being and rights of transgender youth, perpetuating a dangerous culture war at their expense. (AI)

 

Posted in: Canada Tagged: 2024-03, Alberta, Canada, Conservative, crosswalk, Danielle Smith, gender, LGBT, Pierre Poilievre, redneck, rights, transgender, Youth
1 2 … 5 Next »

Please note…

This website contains satirical commentaries of current events going back several decades. Some readers may not share this sense of humour nor the opinions expressed by the artist. To understand editorial cartoons it is important to understand their effectiveness as a counterweight to power. It is presumed readers approach satire with a broad minded foundation and healthy knowledge of objective facts of the subjects depicted.

  • The Hamilton Spectator
  • The Toronto Star
  • The Globe & Mail
  • The National Post
  • Graeme on T̶w̶i̶t̶t̶e̶r̶ ̶(̶X̶)̶
  • Graeme on F̶a̶c̶e̶b̶o̶o̶k̶
  • Graeme on T̶h̶r̶e̶a̶d̶s̶
  • Graeme on Instagram
  • Graeme on Substack
  • Graeme on Bluesky
  • Graeme on Pinterest
  • Graeme on YouTube
New and updated for 2025
  • HOME
  • MacKaycartoons Inc.
  • The Boutique
  • The Hamilton Spectator
  • The Association of Canadian Cartoonists
  • The Association of American Editorial Cartoonists
  • You Might be From Hamilton if…
  • Young Doug Ford
  • MacKay’s Most Viral Cartoon
  • Intellectual Property Thief Donkeys
  • Wes Tyrell
  • Martin Rowson
  • Guy Bado’s Blog
  • National Newswatch
...Check it out and please subscribe!

Your one-stop-MacKay-shop…

T-shirts, hoodies, clocks, duvet covers, mugs, stickers, notebooks, smart phone cases and scarfs

2023 Coronation Design

Brand New Designs!

Follow Graeme's board My Own Cartoon Favourites on Pinterest.

MacKay’s Virtual Gallery

Archives

Copyright © 2016 mackaycartoons.net

Powered by Wordpess and Alpha.

Social media & sharing icons powered by UltimatelySocial
 

Loading Comments...