Jerry Holbert by Jerry Holbert

Jerry Holbert

Comments (10) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Rad-ish

    Rad-ish GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    It would just whither and die from lack of use.

  2. wmconelly

    wmconelly said, over 2 years ago

    Do you cartoon scrutinizers realize realize how far LEFT Holbert is here, for a cartoonist tooning in a Murdoch paper? Why, he’s so far LEFT in Murdochville that he’s almost in the MIDDLE for anywhere else. Repeat to yourselves, “only in Massachusetts” a couple of times, a place a fella with eyes can SEE that Romney-Obama Care works just fine…

  3. BobbyLx

    BobbyLx said, over 2 years ago

    Shouldn’t she be pointing at her own head? We, the voters, are the ones who keep electing them over and over again. We have a congress with a 13% approval rating and a 90+% re-election rate. The voters are the ones with the intellegence problem.

  4. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 2 years ago


    " Romney-Obama Care works just fine…"

    How do you tell something is working “just fine” when it’s not working yet?

  5. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 2 years ago

    Thank god I think I destroyed a few to many cells last night drinking.

  6. retpost

    retpost said, over 2 years ago

    Another toon on sceince fiction.

  7. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago


    “How do you tell something is working “just fine” when it’s not working yet?”

    Romneycare has been working well in Massachusetts according to just about everybody involved, even Mitt Romney.

  8. wmconelly

    wmconelly said, about 2 years ago

    @mikefive—Romney Care IS Obama care. Originally conceived by the Republican Heritage Foundation as a response the Clinton’s universal health plan, it has been working in Massachusetts since it was voted in under Governor Romney in 2006. Ain’t gonna hear that on the Glen Fox Murdoch Rush News quite so plainly spoken, but there it is.

    May the truth set you free, or at least lower your health insurance costs.

  9. bubkes39

    bubkes39 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    Can anything grow in a vacuum?

  10. mikefive

    mikefive said, about 2 years ago


    I don’t know why the myth of the Heritage Foundation continues. It’s political balderdash. Neither Romney Care or Obama Care is what was conceived by the Heritage Foundation. The following is from a friend of the court filing by the Heritage Foundation. I doubt they would be willing to commit perjury in a United State Appeals Court as would a political viewpoint site would to the public.

    Excerpts from that brief:

    That which was conceived by the Heritage Foundation and the PPACA are not compatible as is stated in a Brief of Amicus Curiae in The United States Court of Appeal for the Eleventh Circuit, State of Florida, by and through Attorney General Pam Bondi, et al.,
    Plaintiffs-Appellees / Cross Appellants,
    v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al. (APPEAL NOS. 11-11021 & 11-11067)


    Soon after its inception in 1973, Heritage’s domestic policy scholars began analyzing, and educating policymakers and the public about, health policy issues and proposals for health policy reform. In several publications and statements over the last decade, Heritage health policy experts have opposed on purely policy grounds a government-enforced mandate that individuals or families buy health insurance. In its opening brief in this Court, the United States quotes a 21-year-old lecture by a Heritage policy expert supporting a government-enforced mandate. Because the United States has made an issue of Heritage’s policy position and left a potentially misleading impression of its current position, Heritage has a strong interest in explaining to this Court why its health policy experts have concluded that an insurance mandate is unnecessary to expand health coverage significantly and, indeed, is highly undesirable.

    Heritage policy experts never supported an unqualified mandate like that in the PPACA. Their prior support for a qualified mandate was limited to catastrophic coverage (true insurance that is precisely what the PPACA forbids), coupled with tax relief for all families and other reforms that are conspicuously absent from the PPACA. Since then, a growing body of research has provided a strong basis to conclude that any government insurance mandate is not only unnecessary, but is a bad policy option. Moreover, Heritage’s legal scholars have been consistent in explaining that the type of mandate in the PPACA is unconstitutional. In short, The Heritage Foundation opposes the PPACA individual mandate as unwise policy and as unconstitutional legislation.

    It is difficult to understand why the United States would, in a brief putatively discussing the constitutionality of the insurance mandate, quote a 21-year-old policy statement which was abandoned and subsequently called a “serious mistake” by the institutional issuers of that statement.

  11. Refresh Comments.