Adam@Home by Rob Harrell

Adam@Home

Comments (24) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Saskfan

    Saskfan said, about 2 years ago

    Volunteers can be fired, but if you need someone, and there’s no one to take the person’s place, it’s hard to fire the person.

  2. Alexikakos

    Alexikakos said, about 2 years ago

    Miss? Come to think of it, where is Laura’s wedding ring.

  3. Jenn

    Jenn said, about 2 years ago

    The desk-nut is likely a pet-hoarder at home. Unfortunately, she’s got a name-tag and a job at a shelter to make it seem like a legitimate way of life. Which makes her the neighbor from hell, and the scariest woman on the block. (Yeesh!)

  4. pcolli

    pcolli said, about 2 years ago

    @Alexikakos

    Wedding rings aren’t compulsory – just a hangover from the days when property was marked.

  5. Plods with Beer ( did I mention beer? )

    Plods with Beer ( did I mention beer? ) said, about 2 years ago

    Maybe a few weeks on poop patrol would get some of the animals adopted.

  6. cdward

    cdward said, about 2 years ago

    @Alexikakos

    My guess is, they just forgot to draw it. We know she’s married. And while pcolli is right that rings aren’t compulsory, most husbands and wives do wear them.

  7. Mark

    Mark said, about 2 years ago

    I do not like the cone of shame.

  8. Doctor11

    Doctor11 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    @pcolli

    That’s not true, and how rude of you to say that since the wedding ring is a sign of an eternal marriage.

  9. Doctor11

    Doctor11 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    She needs to fire that mean woman and hire a new assistant.

  10. Felix The Cat

    Felix The Cat said, about 2 years ago

    Maybe, uh, she should be, uh, fired? Oh, wait; never mind. She is a government employee in a public sector union. She can never be fired, ever.

  11. Tom Flapwell

    Tom Flapwell said, about 2 years ago

    @pcolli

    Might I point out that both spouses wear rings, so by your logic, they would be each other’s property. Nothing sexist if that’s what you thought.

  12. ssejhill

    ssejhill said, about 2 years ago

    Dog cone? How about a muzzle.

  13. Amanda Greeley

    Amanda Greeley said, about 2 years ago

    @Tom Flapwell

    Both spouses wearing a ring is a new thing. Back 75+ years and more only the wife use to wear a ring to mark that she was married and her husband not her father was responsible for her.

  14. pcolli

    pcolli said, about 2 years ago

    @Doctor11

    There is no such law.

  15. pcolli

    pcolli said, about 2 years ago

    @Tom Flapwell

    The wearing of wedding rings by men is a recent custom and is purely voluntary, as it is for women. The same goes for the tradidional change of name on the female’s part. There is no legal requirement to do either.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (9).