Ben Sargent by Ben Sargent

Ben Sargent

Comments (15) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. richardblade

    richardblade said, about 4 years ago

    How do you tell a ” Tea-Party Candidate ” from a mainstream candidate ? These ‘whack-jobs ’ cannot tell a liberal-progressive from a Socialist or a Communist and persist in comparing the two–they are all loud, militantly vocal, and talk gibberish–they couldn’t tell you what the Constitution is all about or what the Founding Fathers really stood for or what they said at the time and why they said it– they are poor pathetic strong-willed, and willful people who are selfish, self-centered, and live on the fringes of mainstream society and express extremst views, not centrist and middle-of-the road ideas…………

  2. Simon_Jester

    Simon_Jester said, about 4 years ago

    A Tea Partier is someone claims to want the Government out of people’s lives…and who cheered Terry Schiavo’s Law, and the Patriot Act

    A Tea Partier is someone who wants lower taxes and smaller government…and who is outraged that the Federal Government can’t do it’s JOB in policiing our borders and cleaning up oil spills

  3. mnsmkd

    mnsmkd said, about 4 years ago

    ^Thanks for the definition.

  4. pirate227

    pirate227 said, about 4 years ago

    “You can fix ignorant but, you can’t fix stupid.”

  5. ray32648

    ray32648 said, about 4 years ago

    ^^^ Don’t forget providing them public transportation to their rally sites, Simon.

  6. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, about 4 years ago

    The capitol is South in Olympia.

  7. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 GoComics PRO Member said, about 4 years ago

    Simon Jester, you have established the definition of “tea partier”.

  8. Spaghettus1

    Spaghettus1 said, about 4 years ago

    ^That’s flat scary, MK.

    I think we need to do something ASAP, while we still have some power. The voices of wealth are already much louder than the voices of reason and the people.

    Ban all political ads, anyone?

  9. churchillwasright

    churchillwasright said, about 4 years ago

    Democracy Now? You mean the progressive group funded with millions and millions of George Soros money?

  10. believecommonsense

    believecommonsense said, about 4 years ago

    actually, I’ve read the “soft money” mega PACs and 527’s funds are being collected 9 to 1 in favor of GOP. And actually, church, i’ve read (sorry, no links) that Soros isn’t doing that much this year, nowhere near what he did in 2004 which he openly admits was an intent to prevent Bush from winning re-election.

    Seems to me that the bulk of the tea party movement (and it’s a movement, not a party) is a result of understandable anger and disgust, but it seems it’s being deceptively steered by others into positions it probably wouldn’t support if the ramifications were understood. The tea party “elite” won’t support cuts in defense spending, but I bet the majority of folks would support cuts. I don’t know, just a thought. I’m feeling contemplative.

  11. Rockngolfer

    Rockngolfer said, about 4 years ago

    I was pondering if a Limited Liability Company is a person, too. Corporations are people for tje purpose of political giving, how about an LLC?

  12. Spaghettus1

    Spaghettus1 said, about 4 years ago

    bcs, it really looks like the moneyed interests backed Obama when they saw the writing on the wall, but now will return to the ones who are completely theirs.

    Rock, the LLC is between Corp and a sole proprietor, and the latter _is_ a person by definition. I’m not sure, but it would be odd if it was different for the “middle” choice.

  13. believecommonsense

    believecommonsense said, about 4 years ago

    ^ yes, in 2008, Obama got some healthcare insurance and Wall St/business money so they could back the winner. Now, they are reversing course.

    Health insurers sure got their money’s worth too. Killed the public option and forced the mandatory insurance purchase provision. Now, they’re backing GOP to reverse all the parts they didn’t like, such as preventing exclusion for pre-existing conditions, ban on retroactive policy rescissions, and mandating coverage for preventive screenings. The insurers do want to keep the mandatory health insurance provision, of course.

    The insurers are spending tons of moolah to get what they don’t like reversed and keep what they want. All paid for by health insurance premiums of course

  14. C. A. Brobst

    C. A. Brobst GoComics PRO Member said, about 4 years ago

    “Just keep going west.”

  15. comyics

    comyics said, about 4 years ago

    How many greeding ones do you find protesting robbery from greedy politcs?

  16. Refresh Comments.