1. denacron says:

    aint it the truth though….

  2. Greg Allen says:

    The cartoon needs a conservative who keeps pounding the hell out of Obama while janking the steering wheel away from him – all the while whining and carping about him being a bad driver from Kenya.

  3. Greg Allen says:

    This false parity is just another Right Wing Talking Point masquerading as independence.

  4. Write “Democrats” on both walls and you’ll have some accuracy.

  5. Someone Else says:

    First move after the Republicans take power: move sex back to airport bathrooms where it belongs.

  6. Grandpa says:

    Notice it’s the dumb blond telling him to reverse backward to the Republicans. Seems appropriate.

  7. deowll says:

    At least five EU style nanny state fan posts in a row.

    Their problem is that nanny state economics stink like CA and NY and most Americans actually think they would like to be allowed to make at least some of their own choices rather than having all choices made by the ruling elites.

    Of course some Americans want to actually have the opportunity to get rich and in nanny states the underclass is pretty much locked in place.

  8. Thomas says:

    #2
    The cartoon needs to illustrate that Obama is 15 years old with his learner’s permit yelling “Even though we are out of gas, we can fix it by driving more”.

  9. DavidtheDuke says:

    I’ve noticed Democrats call other democrats republicans in democrat colors, and vice versa for democrats. I guess it’s because people want their side to 100% agree with everything. Not saying I got an answer for that though.

  10. bobbo, Pedro's donkey came and shiat! says:

    Trouble is, “we” are not trying reverse. Reverse would be good solid financial reform by going back to the regs in place 20 years ago.

    NOBODY NEEDS SOPHISTICATED HIGH FINANCE. That only profits wall street skimmers and adds NO JOBS and no wealth to the world’s economys. In short, its a form of theft.

    But idiots posting above will call it free enterprise and freedom.

    Too stupid not to bray for the destruction of their own middle class.

    Stoopid Hoomans.

  11. admfubar says:

    ‘clowns to the left of me, joker to the right… here i am stuck in middle with you…’

  12. Cursor_ says:

    #10 keep going back another 20 years to your number.

    And I’d like to see the taxes there as well.

    Cursor_

  13. ± says:

    I notice that most of the comments are from R or D voters who got us in this mess. Voters who blame the politicians should be deported.

    “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” —– Albert Einstein

  14. ® says:

    Tom Toles is terrific.

  15. bobbo, Pedro's donkey came and shiat! says:

    Can anyone like to anything more stupid than this comment ((Alfie on religion does not count)): “Voters who blame the politicians….”

    I guess more minus than plus thinks its the lobbyists who are responsible?

    Real stupid human.

  16. Steve S says:

    Bobbo,
    Its the brain dead voters who repeatedly vote for a candidate based on the letter “D” or “R” following the name. Its the lobbyists. Its the corruption. It is all of this. Honestly at this point I dont believe any of the current political structure is salvageable. There is a point with anything when you have to decide if it is better to cut your losses and just start over. I think we have reached that point.

  17. bobbo, Pedro's donkey came and shiat! says:

    Steve–I appreciate the depression and despair but isn’t the independent or unaffiliated registration the largest percentage in most states? Given parties do have different philosophies and platforms, it makes sense that straight ticket voting would be, even should be, a common rational decision.

    the fly is as you say: both parties are corrupt and serve themselves==or is that even true when the electorate is roughly equally split?

    Can democracy actually work in a divided electorate? I’ve never thought of that exact question before. Interesting. On first consideration, I’d say no, and USA is a good example of that.

    I do think our government would work better if it followed its design: divided power and checks and balances between the people, the states, and the Feds. Its two party politics that is clearly not working and was not safeguarded against in the Constitution. Then add in the loverly Sup Ct allowing corps to buy elections as they choose.

    No way it could work.

    I have posted 2-3 things that could “actually be done” and none are likely as only theoretically doable.

    I think the only “real” solution will be for conditions to get much worse until the people rise up and vote in a real reform candidate. Its a very painful process but that is what a divided electorate causes.

    Yes, societies are always easier to govern when everyone agrees. Heh, heh.

  18. Steve S says:

    Bobbo said,
    “I think the only “real” solution will be for conditions to get much worse until the people rise up and vote in a real reform candidate.”
    I wonder how bad things will have to get before that happens….
    Thanks for the intelligent response, Bobbo.

  19. bobbo, Pedro's donkey came and shiat! says:

    I’m only a casual reader of history but I’ll propose their have been two reform elected Presidents in USA History: Teddy & FD Roosevelt.

    Seems to me that our history has developed a culture of a wall of separation between civilian authority/Pres and our Military. While all things are possible, I more worried about the damage our country will experience before reform fixes it than I am a military take over.

    It is one reason though to never elect military men into office. Why risk it?

  20. bobbo, Pedro's donkey came and shiat! says:

    #18–Steve==sorry, should have added that FDR needed a depression which we narrowly avoided but TR only needed widespread corruption and a widening gap between rich and poor===just as we have now. Sadly, the worst recession this nation has ever experienced is not enough to create a mandate for change ((remember that a simple majority is no longer enough to pass legislation in Congress)). So–it has to get even worse. Maybe with the double dip that coming IF the American electorate can take those 30 minutes and figure out what got us here and vote their own economic self interest for a change. Right now, it looks a 50/50 bet the electorate would vote for the very policies that caused this recession. Thats why we are in this boat.

  21. bobbo, Pedro's donkey came and shiat! says:

    I caught 60 minutes on tape interviewing David Stockman. Informative. Key points: both parties affirm they will not cut any popular social program and won’t cut the military either. We have gotten used to the illusion of wealth by deficit spending. It was one thing when the Pukes constantly vomit up “TAX REDUCTION” as their bumper sticker dogma for the masses, but Stockman pointed out he was dismayed that Obama/Dems have it now too with the continued Tax Reduction for those making less than $250K. What insanity this?

    I have assumed that the Obama Tax the Rich plan was sufficient to bring the budget back into balance (eventually?) but now I’d have to see the figures. It now looks like BOTH PARTIES want to deficit spend us into oblivion.

    Taxaction of the public through currency devaluation is VERY DIFFICULT for the public to understand/appreciate/hate/vote incumbents out of office over. We are doomed.

    With too many idiots confusing taxes with slavery, and grinding society inequality with freedom, and thinking “starve the beast” is anything but a bullet to the head====yes, we are doomed.

    We are going to go past “pain” into something else. A religious conversion perhaps?

    I’ve always known religion would do us in. Magical Thinking: we can spend and nothing bad will happen. Kinda like Global Warming, same thing.

    This religious mode of thinking is the rot at the core of our society/culture. No good can come from superstition/dogma/illusion.

    Yea, Verily.

  22. Thomas says:

    #22
    You would have to go back to the late 1920’s to find a year when the government actually ran a surplus. A surplus is a reduction in the *total* national debt from the previous year. It simply hasn’t happened. The government does not know and/or want to spend less than it makes because there is no consequence to the individuals spending the money to do otherwise. Quite the contrary, they have an *incentive* to spend as much as they can before they leave office.

    We need to raise tax revenue **AND** spend less. That presents two problems. First, no elected official wants to be responsible for cutting programs that affect their areas. Second, no one here believes the government when they say “We know we’ve screwed you in the past, but *this* time this tax increase is only for X”. There is a reason some States have no income taxes. It is because the population wisely did not believe the government when they said “It’s only .000001%. Why is that small amount a problem? We “just” need it for program X.” Thus, there is a fundamental distrust of government spending and taxing and that will only change when there are hard consequences for being anything other than fiscally responsible which means lowering the TOTAL debt.

  23. bobbo, Pedro's donkey came and shiat! says:

    #24–Thomas==assuming you are responding to me, yep. All candidates should submit 4 and 8 year budgets showing what they will be trying to accomplish and how. A yard stick if you will.

  24. steven says:

    Why doesn’t the Federal Reserve ever get any blame from the left or the right?

  25. Somebody says:

    # 13 ± said:

    ”’
    I notice that most of the comments are from R or D voters who got us in this mess. Voters who blame the politicians should be deported.

    “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” —– Albert Einstein
    ”’

    Hey, we switch parties every four years or so, so your quote is invalid.

    Insanity would be voting for a minor party.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5254 access attempts in the last 7 days.