Candorville by Darrin Bell

Candorville

Comments (13) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. chireef

    chireef GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    the answer to that is … yes…

  2. Ray Thomas

    Ray Thomas said, about 1 year ago

    Buttheaded 5-4.

  3. Tax Man

    Tax Man said, about 1 year ago

    The truth is that the Supreme Court did NOT make it harder for minorities to vote. It is time to move forward. Everyone should provide identification when they vote.

  4. notsooldguy

    notsooldguy said, about 1 year ago

    The way understand it, the Supreme Court’s decisions were about fairness. They decided it was unfair to deny same sex couples the same rights as heterosexual couples and they decided it was unfair to single out the old Jim Crow states for special scrutiny, i.e, that ALL states should be under the same scrutiny.

    In essence, they were saying that the voting rights act, as currently written, was flawed from a strictly “legal” standpoint and that Congress needed to REWRITE it. The downside to this strategy is that our current Congress doesn’t have the courage or ability to write or rewrite anything.

  5. msowards

    msowards said, about 1 year ago

    The margin is 5 – 4. That shows we’re at a turning point. We either fall back on good ole boy GOP ways or move forward with open minds.

  6. Thriller87

    Thriller87 said, about 1 year ago

    @notsooldguy

    So true

  7. Thriller87

    Thriller87 said, about 1 year ago

    @msowards

    I lean more towards the first one sadly.

  8. LameRandomName

    LameRandomName said, about 1 year ago

    Excuse me…
    Saying that the SC decision on the VRA made it harder for minorities to vote is flat out FALSE.
    But hey…
    Glad to see that you applaud the DOMA decision that affirms STATES RIGHTS instead of making some comment about how it will only lead to gays owning slaves.

  9. LameRandomName

    LameRandomName said, about 1 year ago

    @notsooldguy

    All the VRA decision really did was to allow States to pass voting laws without asking the general government (Washington) IN ADVANCE.

    It does NOT make it legal to violate the VRA.

  10. LameRandomName

    LameRandomName said, about 1 year ago

    BTW, some general advice for ALL of you, because it looks like you need it.

    1) Never let anyone tell you that they are CONSERVATIVE without asking them precisely what it is they are trying to conserve.

    2) Never let anyone tell you they are PROGRESSIVE without asking them precisely what they are progressing towards.

    3) If you hold ANY belief that you cannot quickly and concisely explain IMMEDIATELY, you should ask yourself just why the heck you believe it in the first place.

    Enough with this “Yankee’s vs Red Sox” nonsense.

  11. hippogriff

    hippogriff said, about 1 year ago

    LameRandomName: No, they can still say, “naughty, naughty” after the election and the Republicans have gerrymandered a permanently blocking oligarchy in the House, and the Democrats will agree that’s OK.

  12. LameRandomName

    LameRandomName said, about 1 year ago

    @hippogriff

    OK, first…
    Complaining about the other “team” gerrymandering without simultaneously acknowledging that your team does the exact same thing is not only hypocritical, it’s dishonest.

    Secondly, NEITHER team has a permanently blocking majority in EITHER house. That complaint is actually silly. Yes, the GOP has a majority in the house and they are using it to block legislation that the people who elected them don’t want; which is exactly what they are SUPPOSED to be doing.

    Finally, the general government can do a lot more than say “naughty, naughty”. The entire VRA is still intact. The ONLY thing that’s changed is the pre-approval nonsense that bureaucrats with an agenda can easily abuse.

  13. K M

    K M GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    Depends upon whether you’re talking about the Voting Rights Act decision or the decisions on homosexual marriage; respectively.

  14. Refresh Comments.