Cubs New Mascot... Terrible

Yesterday the Cubs introduced their first mascot ever.  Meet "Clark" (pictured above), and as you can imagine, Cubs fans aren't happy about it.  I can understand why.  Not just because they've been around for 100 years and never had a mascot.  It's dreadful and creepy.

Aside from the obvious poor drawing skills in "Clark" (he looks like he was drawn by a Hanna Barbera flunkie), might I be the only one who has a problem with that fact it's a child without pants?  I know an arguement can be made for Donald Duck, which is pretty fucking weird in it's own right, but it's different.  Donald debuted in 1934.  So did the rise of Stalin, Hitler, and an overwhelming popularity of lawn jockeys.  Just because it was popular back than doesn't make it okay today.

I know some might argue the Phillie Phanitic lacks pants, but the Phillie Phantic is a bird (at least alleged), not an assumed child.  He's beloved by all; so I'm okay with him.

Am I out of my mind?  Let me know.  Leave a comment or email me at gimmeasign@gmail.com.  Follow me on Twitter for more mindless babble...