Chuck Asay by Chuck Asay
- June 27, 2009
- From Beginning
- Previous feature
- Show Calendar
- Next feature
- Current
Editorials A-Z Navigation
Nick Anderson by Nick Anderson
Tony Auth by Tony Auth
About Chuck Asay
Chuck Asay sifts the events of the day through his biblical worldview and tries to persuade readers to see things his way...that rights are given by a higher authority than the governments of men, that mankind is not the ultimate arbiter of truth and that our Constitutional Republic is worth protecting. Chuck believes ideas, not politicians rule the world. He tries to protect ideas which he thinks are good and attacks ideas he thinks bring harm.
© 2009 Creators Syndicate - All Rights Reserved.
Comments (36) Jump to Comments Form
Buzzy-One said, 4 months ago
Weak toon by weak minded toonest.
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
I’m just a simple foreigner so forgive my trespass…
But was it not your George W. who first kicked off the bail-outs of the commercial banks in trouble?
(and by previous governments (and not just the USA) deregulating, allowed the markets to get themselves in this little “muddle”)
And if I recall correctly, meddling in Iran’s democratically elected government and placing a stooge (Shah) helped bring about the present revolutionary government in place?
Meddling in Afghanistan hasn’t helped it much (but then again, why learn from the British and Russian’s past involvement in Afghanistan?).
Meddling in Iraq has proved a grievous affair…
…just which country has benefited from the USA’s unilateral “freedom leadership” in the past? Whoever believes the Hollywood/Patriotic claptrap hype that USA stands for freedom needs to wake up from this delusion.
It’s actually called realpolitik. Self-interest. First and foremost. If freedom happens, it is an incidental and fortunate by-product.
Let the Iranians sort out their own freedom. Obama’s position is the correct one, why give the revolutionary government a scapegoat and an enemy to focus on and distract? Already they’re attempting to shift some of the blame onto the British (who haven’t intervened either!).
As for a universal healthcare: so the present system you’re under works for you? Meddlesome corporate CEOs are the answer (where profit is the objective, not your health)?
Not all European countries have the right mix with their National Health Systems but try look to the more successful for hints.
cdward said, 4 months ago
Asay is too foolish to see that a) TARP was Bush, b) the auto industry begged the government for help, c) 75% of the public WANT health care reform that includes a public element and d) that Iran does not belong to the US, and therefore we have no business sticking our noses in their elections.
DrCanuck said, 4 months ago
What could be more obvious than pointing out that the first three panels are American issues and the last is Iranian?
(good grief!)
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
DrCanuck: Touché.
ANandy: I’m crushed.
parkersinthehouse said, 4 months ago
And yet, omQR, it’s heartening to hear your views. Thank God we’re not rattling our sabers and inviting conflict (“bring it on”).
Some of Obama’s ideas are controversial, but to me, it’s a president who proposes remedies to the horrible errors (war, economy, healthcare, education, international repute) of our past who deserves my honor.
harleyquinn
said,
4 months ago
The 1st 3 panels can be and should be handled by the private sector. But we would not want a crisis go to waste to expand the breath and death of the almighty government.
The last Panel really shows the done nothing presidents lack of leadership. The guy was put into power to be the public face of America. But to our enemies he is the guy who goes up to the podium reads from a teleprompter. He tells the world we are a bad country that needs help holding our citizens hands in the private sector and don’t want to medal in yours. He tells them how good he is at controlling his own and you go take care of your own.
I have been screaming that the those Muslims who want to join us in the present and walk with us in the future need to stand up. They are the only ones who can stop this WAR! They put there lives on the line to protest. So what does our President do….Oh I don’t want to medal.
Geez
Kylop said, 4 months ago
ANAndy is correct. There is a lot of foolishness in his post. He says it in the first line “There certainly is a lot of foolishness here….”
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
harleyquinn: I must first admit that perhaps my command of the English language leads me to struggle to understand your written words, but let’s see how I fare…
“Can be and should be handled by the private sector”
Alas, the private sector has shown it needs regulation in order to function with due diligence. Deregulation helped sow the seeds of the current disaster (and not only in the USA I must add). Profit and greed ensures market efficiency but at great social cost. If these industries go bust,as any libertarian would simply shrug and say, “so be it, for that is how laissez-faire functions”, then by all means the government should stay out of it and allow the tens of thousands of jobs to go.
That is the way of the free market. However, I think holding steadfast to your ideology is making you blind to reality.
Can you really afford and withstand a new depression?
I was a small letter libertarian who still believed in health & safety regulation as I did not trust the free market to have the morals to uphold social mores. Now I’d hesitate to mention libertarianism at all.
Re 4th panel:
If that is what you determine your president should be, the last public face of America did a rather poor job. That’s an understatement.
The current public face of America, according to your definition, has boosted your country’s international standing and credibility immensely. I cannot understate this. There is new found respect for the USA, possibly back to the levels of the last world war.
If his message is “you go take care of your own”, trust me, the world applauds and welcomes this approach. Whew, at long, bloody last.
Your support for external intervention simply feeds the existing revolutionary government’s need for a bogeyman on which to blame their ills. By staying out of it, it becomes an internal crisis which the Iranian regime has to acknowledge and deal with. There cannot be a scapegoat.
I also wonder how you perceive the world by seemingly lumping “those Muslims” in Iran with “this WAR”.
Which war is that? Which Muslims?
Do you view all Muslims in the world as the one and same, with similar views? It is an interesting opening you’ve shown and provided in your world view. Rather narrow, though.
fennec said, 4 months ago
omQ R, I doubt that HQ will understand the implication of your first line.
I enjoyed both your posts and hope to hear your voice here more often. Rationality is to be prized.
oldlegodad
said,
4 months ago
omQ R sounds almost are good as me on a good day. Right ,fennec?
cdward said, 4 months ago
omQ R, welcome! I enjoyed reading your well-reasoned and respectful posts.
harleyquinn
said,
4 months ago
omq
Government good, private sector bad and only wants to rape the public at large. Government can save us all.
do me a favor read “Atlas Shrugged.”
4th Panel I guess you are saying we should stick our head back into the sand pre 9/11 and just let those who might help stop this WAR die!
Funny way to look at the world.
fennec said, 4 months ago
HQ, many of us read Atlas Shrugged and also The Fountainhead forty or more years ago. We have outgrown that phase…also close to 40 years ago.
GNWachs
said,
4 months ago
“DrCanuck:
What could be more obvious than pointing out that the first three panels are American issues and the last is Iranian?”
This may not happen very often but for once we agree.
GNWachs
said,
4 months ago
omq r: Deregulation helped sow the seeds of the current disaster (and not only in the USA I must add).
But what we got instead was the worse of all possible worlds. First Clinton and literally this week Barney Frank tell the banks to lower the requirements to make home loans. Previously this resulted in couples earning $60,000 gross buying $750,000 homes and then of course going bankrupt. We didn’t want racism and red lining to stop the poor from owning homes they couldn’t afford. It looks like we will follow the same path again.
Those were regulations that actually caused the problem but somehow are conveniently forgotten in the quest for big government.
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
Thanks, fennec, cdward & oldlegodad ;-)
HQ: I read Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead some 25 years ago while still a teen, thanks. Objectivism did in fact influence me a great deal. However, I had many issues with what Ayn Rand advocated and got over her.
Again I ask, what “WAR” is this you’re going on about and how would Iranians help? Please assist me in understanding your way at looking at this world since mine is apparently amusing.
“Government good, private sector bad and only wants to rape the public at large. Government can save us all.”
Putting words in my mouth?
ANandy: HQ brought up Muslims in his post but I fail to see anything defensive in it.
stebon said, 4 months ago
Mr. ASAY is right on–liberals have no idea what is coming in terms of double digit inflation, double digit interest rates, and double digit unemployment. But that’s OK, because Obamanation will find some double talk way of blaming the free market and the private sector and , of course, the Bush administration, for the economic disaster to come. That is the way liberals are–it is never their fault and they always have the answers, or so they claim.
“Government is not the solution; it IS THE PROBLEM!”
–a truer word was never spoken.
People, look at what liberalism has done to the once best educational system in the world–from perennial top 3 to 45th in the world since Mr. Apologizer #1(aka: Jimmy Carter) established the Federal Department of Education (we would have been 46th, but one previously ranked nation did not participate in the latest ranking.)
Just look at California–the 7th largest GDP in the world and , now– due to liberal nanny state insanity–is facing imminent bankruptcy.
When was the last time any government entitiy actually showed a profit–or even, broke even. Anybody?
How about government run postal and package service?
How about government run Medicare and Medicaid?
How about government run retirement?
All three above are bankrupt or soon will be–yeah, government can “solve” everything; according to liberalism, anyway. Never Fear Obama Is Here!
harleyquinn
said,
4 months ago
“When was the last time any government entitiy actually showed a profit–or even, broke even. Anybody?”
See that is what those who put the Big O into power do not understand. The Government is not to make profits! For one thing Profits are what the evil private sector does while keeping this country a flout. Plus to turn a profit they only tax us more and keep our money! Now that would not be FAIR now would it? I work harder and they reap the rewards.
How about a better way.. FAIR TAX!
harleyquinn
said,
4 months ago
Again I ask, what “WAR” is this you’re going on about and how would Iranians help? Please assist me in understanding your way at looking at this world since mine is apparently amusing.
The WAR that was going on pre 9/11. The one we were fighting till Obama renamed it an over seas man made thing. The one we fought only once under Clinton and that was only because they were afraid of Y2K. Then it was back to being a police officer who only came in after the fact to collect evidence. Which of course led up to 9/11
But that is OK the World loves us again and sees us as week as ever. Obama told them so.
nz4m60
said,
4 months ago
Asay, This is lame and trite. What happened to you?
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
HQ: Huh?
Must be a pretty important war if it is CAPITALISED.
Like WW I or WW II
I’m in awe. Sorry, I’m in AWE.
(where’re the blokes in white coats?)
NoFearPup
said,
4 months ago
Obama is an Heavy-Meddle Artist.
David
said,
4 months ago
What gets meddled with really depends on who is in charge. That’s an easy one to figure out.
Follow the money.
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
GNwach: Sorry, somehow missed your post(!)
“Those were regulations that actually caused the problem but somehow are conveniently forgotten in the quest for big government.”
No, you’re taking one aspect of the lack of oversight and running away with it claiming PC was at fault. Nonsense. While some loans given to certain at risk groups may have been politically motivated in order to give disadvantaged communities housing, the over-whelming majority were given through greed.
But I will agree with you if you’re saying that those that say deregulation was solely at fault are wrong.
Negligence and incompetence within the regulators and existing regulation certainly allowed the rot to creep in, too.
The market was awash with money from the new fast developing countries (not unlike the early 70s with Arab petro dollars flooding the then markets prompting silly lending to developing countries who could not repay them, leading to massive defaults and hyper inflation in many), new innovative financial products by predatory new lenders in the now very much deregulated markets (worldwide, I must add) were not overseen properly by the institutions created to protect it. It helped create a housing bubble in quite a few countries, not only the USA. Failure to address this bubble had nothing to do with PC. Only lack of oversight and predatory lending with fat commissions and bonuses paid up front. International markets were only glad to accept nicely re-wrapped derivative packages and sell it further on, collecting their immediate commission and bonus straight away and so on. If you thought the US market was deregulated, you should examine London’s financial markets.
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
May I add the following: I fear that knee jerk reactions to the current deregulated markets may fetter it too much.
It is not so much the lack of regulation, as wise regulation.
I’m also observing calls, nay, demands from some governments to their banks to start lending again. Aha, yes, and so they should since they’ve been bailed out with our taxes which are in their coffers and they should start relending, to small businesses, to new home owners with decent deposits and the ability to repay their loans. But ..hmmm…yes. Need one say more.
Right_On said, 4 months ago
I think Barney Frank would disagree with you, omQ.
Lend “to new home owners with decent deposits and the ability to repay their loans”
That’s not the way our welfare state operates.
TrickyPickle said, 4 months ago
As in all things, the truth is somewhere in between. A country cannot operate with too much regulation. Nor can it survive with too little. In the end omQ R said it best I think: “It is not so much the lack of regulation, as wise regulation.”
NoFearPup
said,
4 months ago
Yes, I agree with wise, transparent regulation…or just forget it. After all, that’s what lawyers are for.
fennec said, 4 months ago
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/opinion/29iht-edrohatyn.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=global
The above link is an op-ed by Felix Rohatyn on capitalism, what went wrong and what he thinks needs to be done.
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
Cheers fennec, great read.
I particularly liked:
“I am a capitalist, and believe that market capitalism is the best economic system ever invented. But it must be fair, it must be regulated, and it must be ethical.”
EDIT:
Which is why I always said when I was younger that I was a libertarian with a small letter. I didn’t believe capitalists (not capitalism) could be fair and ethical. My mistrust of government was on the basis of civil liberty transgressions, not that I didn’t trust it to run essential services nor that it shouldn’t have a role in maintaining or ensuring services for society. As I didn’t trust capitalists to do the right thing by society, I thought government should have this role. Bearing in mind our duties & obligations towards it, too. Benefits should be a 2-way street. Which made me unpopular with Libertarians who have a knee-jerk reaction to all things governmental and believe it anathema.
In the end, a mixed economy is what we need. That makes me a liberal centrist? Although I like progressive better…
Meh.
fennec said, 4 months ago
I never went through the libertarian phase–my first exposure to Ayn Rand turned me off completely on that kind of philosophy–but I have found liberal democracy as described by Rawls to be attractive. The criticism many have of it is that it is not practical (eg., how can you ever have a “veil of ignorance”?), but the pluralism implicit in his philosophy and the basic requirement for fairness appealed to me. I wonder if Rohatyn isn’t somewhat of the same school of thought?
omQ R
said,
4 months ago
fennec: I was a mere teen (13 14?) when I first read Ayn Rand. There was a certain attraction to her ideas, given the place & period I was in. But it did make me question a few things around me, politically and even religion, so I’ll give her that, made me think. By the time I entered uni I began rejecting most of her ideas especially when I experienced my faculty’s student body’s mainly right-wing stance as regards economics.
You have me at a disadvantage as I do not know Rawls nor Rohatyn. Something for me to look into on my next quiet graveyard shift. ;-)
fennec said, 4 months ago
Might I suggest “Justice as Fairness: a restatement” (much lighter going than his original) and “The Law of Peoples”. It took me a couple of times through to begin to get both of them, but then I’m a scientist, not a philosopher. Also I found “Rawls: A theory of Justice and its critics” by Kukathas and Pettit helpful.
NoFearPup
said,
4 months ago
No one “believes” in Capitalism! It is merely a tool and an idea that describes how markets work in specific models. I believe, or rather -it is my opinion_- that a representative Republic is the best way to govern a people… Obama is trying to blend the two when they should be kept as seperate as possible. The one thing that makes America exceptional ( besides having a root commitment to Christian precepts in it’s founding years) is the ability of citizens to better themselves by hard work, without interference from overlords or cabals who make the rules. The world is bigger than socialism and capitalism.
fennec said, 4 months ago
^And to believe in the tooth fairy…