Clay Bennett by Clay Bennett

Clay Bennett

Comments (17) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Crow Nobo, fol de rol de riddle

    Crow Nobo, fol de rol de riddle said, almost 3 years ago

  2. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    Republicans/Fox “news” viewers believe that high unemployment is caused by the existence of a minimum wage.
    They believe the way to improve the economy is to give even more income tax subsidies to the Koch Brothers, the Waltons, Willard the ChickenHawk, Sheldon Adelson, and all large corporations (people).
    They believe that elimination of every part of a safety net for poor people will then give them incentive.
    But, they believe it’s wrong to decrease tax subsidies for the wealthy because the wealthy need ‘incentives’.
    My guess is that Werner Erhard will feed a hungry person before a Fox “news” viewer can identify a Job Creator.

  3. victoria2

    victoria2 said, almost 3 years ago

    GOOD JOBS ARE CRUCIAL TO ELIMINATING POVERTY AND SELF LOATHING.The Socialist element within the Democratic Party is doing everything it can to increase government dependency. Extending benefits sounds caring but without, at the same time, improving the ability of businesses of all sizes to grow and hire workers, we will all turn into government slaves and a a tipping point the benefits will decrease.

  4. Giancarlo Bellumori

    Giancarlo Bellumori GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago


  5. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, almost 3 years ago

    If you are to “defeat” poverty, one must have a robust growing economy. Isn’t that what the politicians say? and yet today we have 92 Million Americans not in the labor force. The same level as in 1978 when Jimmy Carter was president. (he could have blamed it all on Ford or Nixon I suppose)

    But wait, didn’t they add jobs this go around? Well, yes. 74K (not the 200K forecast). BUT there were 347K that left the workforce. So for every job add 5 people stopped working.

    Like Tigger said, this so called “war” has been going on for over 50 years. Should we not be seeing a decrease in the number of families below “poverty” level?
    but we do not see that. Here are some interesting stats:

    It seems to me that neither political party has done much to address the real issues involved. BUT you can not blame one party for holding back progress and not find fault with the other as well. Like Sen Sessions says:

    We must help people move off of welfare, off of unemployment, and into good-paying jobs that can support a family. More tax, spend, borrow and regulate will only produce more joblessness, dependency and debt. Instead, we need more American energy, streamlined taxes and regulations, a leaner and less wasteful government, better trade and immigration enforcement, and a reformed welfare system that helps struggling Americans realize the dream of financial independence."

    Time to address the final frontier………………

  6. cjr53

    cjr53 said, almost 3 years ago

    President Obama does not want to kill grandparents, sweetie, honey pie. There are more millionaires because there are more people, yet only 1% of the population have the majority of America’s wealth. They tend to be Billionaires, not millionaires. My house is valued/appraised at $1,000,605. With my other assets, I’m a millionaire. It ain’t cash sweetie pie.

  7. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago


    Welcome back, Bruce!
    When Clinton was president, there was relative, if not actual prosperity. People had jobs. Welfare was eliminated at the federal level. Poverty was down. Crime was down. And there was a budget surplus!
    AND REPUBLICANS HATED IT! And they vowed never to allow it to happen again, and so far, they’ve been successful.
    Today’s Republicans do not want prosperity for Americans in general, only for the upper classes.
    For all but upper classes, they want no health care, no jobs except subsistence jobs, no education and training, and no safety net. This is in order to give, you know, those people incentives.
    Republicans also want to give tax subsidies to the rich because they need those kinds of incentives.
    And, of course, their hatred of Obama exceeds even their hatred of Clinton.
    I won’t claim that Democrats have done everything right, but they have done some things right, and Republicans have fought against everything even to the point of filibustering every appointment even though they had no objection to the candidate(s).

  8. piobaire

    piobaire said, almost 3 years ago

    Deregulation of business and tax cuts for the wealthy are the conditions which have allowed a small percentage of Americans to accumulate enough money to reach that threshold. That money is coming out of the pockets of the middle class and the working poor. That’s how I explain it.

  9. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, almost 3 years ago


    really…… show me some evidence of what you say.

    How have the current democrat policies IN FORCE:

    reduced the number of people NOT participating in the work force. (92 million and rising, it’s the reason for the lower U3 number)

    OR maybe you can show how those policies have reduced the number of families living in poverty.

    and while the rate fell under Clinton (everyone likes slick willy) it is back to it’s highest level ever under Obama. go figure.
    wait… are poverty rates cyclic too?

    But I agree that the establishment republicans are the exactly the same as establishment democrats.

    As long as you buy into the divide the country will be.

    Let us UNITE and remove all these charlatans from office and put fresh innocent faces in those seats. Men and women that will actually work for their constituents rather than the mega businesses.

  10. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    Evidence? Like Republicans voting for a Bush stimulus, but filibustering Obama’s?
    Like the economy losing jobs at a rate of 750,000 every month when Obama took office? And 400+ filibusters since? No lasting effects?
    Democrat’s policies are mostly NOT in force. They have been filibustered, just like almost all appointments.
    Would Halliburton qualify as a mega business?

  11. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, almost 3 years ago

    War on poverty is not good terminology. An opportunity for everyone to make a go of it would be better. And it wasn’t going so badly until Viet Nam and other wars drained the treasury.

  12. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, almost 3 years ago

    thanks for the support. (2 thumbs up)

  13. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, almost 3 years ago


    So read Churchill’s comment. now think.

    hey, blaming Bush and Republicans is FUN, but it does not change the FACTS.

    50 years into it and poverty is STILL over 15%. WHY? Didn’t we spend enough money on it?

    and while the U3 chart shows a decline in unemployment, Obama and his minions stick with the business as usual approach (despite a promise to not do that) and use that number instead of the U6 (13%) number on unemployment which actually reflects the number of people unable to get work so quit looking and will remain out of the workforce. THAT number is 92 MILLION now and rising.

    Your fearless leader is a liar.

  14. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 3 years ago

    In my area, freeways got repaired and repaved and in some cases widened, all sorely needed. Work continues today.
    Too bad you don’t live in Paul Ryan’s district. Deficit Hawk that he is, he got lots of stimulus money for his district.

  15. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, almost 3 years ago

    another idiot remark.

    how do you justify equating illness with poverty?

    Plus, if you read my comment, there is nothing in it that suggests we stop helping the poor.

    However, what we have been doing has not been successful. So wouldn’t it be prudent to revist the problem and change tactics?

    Or do you wish to remain insane?

  16. Load the rest of the comments (2).