Register for a FREE GoComics account and get this plus any other comic strip delivered to your Personalized
Comic Page, Daily. With a free account you will be able to build a Comic Page filled with the Comics you
want to see each day.
With the largest collection of Comics and Editorial Cartoons online there is plenty to choose from. Upgrade
to a GoComics Pro account (Only $.99/Month) and have unlimited archive access to decades of comics.
You noticed, did you? Interesting, I thought the PP would be to small to get attention outside Germany. Yes, they are a fresh wind, but even without them there are five parties to choose from, so a lively discussion of all topics is always assured. And since we don’t have filibusters and riders and byzantine procedures we actually GETTHINGSDONE, unlike the U.S. Congress who mostly seems to be a platform for grandstanding and making money…
What? Are you accusing our Congressmen of going into congress with a few thousand in assets and then winding up with a few million? That’s absurd! Our congressmen are good, honest citizens serving the populace! They wouldn’t take advantage of their position for monetary reasons!
No offence, but since WW2 have they at all really fought for “freedom”? Unless some country has actually been attacking the US to occupy it then the answer is no. However you obviously should honor your troops (unless its a dictatorship we talk about :p) considering they do the things they do, so you dont have to.
You need to read the article, not just the headlines: “But the consortium, looking at a broader group of rejected ballots than those covered in the court decisions, 175,010 in all, found that Mr. Gore might have won if the courts had ordered a full statewide recount of all the rejected ballots. This also assumes that county canvassing boards would have reached the same conclusions about the disputed ballots that the consortium’s independent observers did. The findings indicate that Mr. Gore might have eked out a victory if he had pursued in court a course like the one he publicly advocated when he called on the state to “count all the votes.”" There is considerably evidence that Katherine Harris disqualified many voters disproportionately in counties that were expected to go Democrat. She was an apparatchik of Governor Jeb Bush. Do you really think that she was totally objective? In any case, what the Supreme Court did was bypass the LEGAL approach, which would be to recount the votes or re-run the election, something for which we had no precedent at the presidential level, but was well established in the US at other levels, and DECIDE the election. This was, by any sane standard, judicial activism of an unheard-of degree. Especially when you look at the Court and see how many of them should have recused themselves for being attached to the Bush family. If Bush would have won anyway, why not count the votes? I think that question answers itself, don’t you?
The question of the vote, Constitutionally, never reached the point that would call for a vote by the House of Representatives. It was a problem of vote counting in Broward County, FLA. Can you spell “hanging chads”?
The crackdown of “legal” pot growers is that they are in violation of federal law which supercedes state law.
Joel Pett is a three-time finalist for Pulitzer Prize for cartooning. He won the award in 2000. He joined Lexington Herald-Leader in 1984 and USAToday as contributing cartoonist in 2002.
Henry Payne by Henry Payne
Ted Rall by Ted Rall
Comments (54) (Please sign in to comment)
dtroutma
said, 12 months ago
Something to think about on Memorial Day, and what we, and they, fought for.
jmattadams
said, 12 months ago
Just because you can doesn’t mean you should. Did we learn our lesson?
win said, 12 months ago
@dtroutma
huzzah!
win said, 12 months ago
than that it makes a difference
MortyForTyrant said, 12 months ago
@Grainbelt
You noticed, did you? Interesting, I thought the PP would be to small to get attention outside Germany. Yes, they are a fresh wind, but even without them there are five parties to choose from, so a lively discussion of all topics is always assured. And since we don’t have filibusters and riders and byzantine procedures we actually GET THINGS DONE, unlike the U.S. Congress who mostly seems to be a platform for grandstanding and making money…
mikefive said, 12 months ago
@MortyForTyrant
What? Are you accusing our Congressmen of going into congress with a few thousand in assets and then winding up with a few million? That’s absurd! Our congressmen are good, honest citizens serving the populace! They wouldn’t take advantage of their position for monetary reasons!
Tue Elung-Jensen said, 12 months ago
@dtroutma
No offence, but since WW2 have they at all really fought for “freedom”? Unless some country has actually been attacking the US to occupy it then the answer is no. However you obviously should honor your troops (unless its a dictatorship we talk about :p) considering they do the things they do, so you dont have to.
onguard said, 12 months ago
@
You were Wrong then and you are Wrong now………………..http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/recount/
fredgold said, 12 months ago
@jmattadams
In that case, maybe you shouldn’t vote, you blithering dolt!
motivemagus said, 12 months ago
@onguard
You need to read the article, not just the headlines:
“But the consortium, looking at a broader group of rejected ballots than those covered in the court decisions, 175,010 in all, found that Mr. Gore might have won if the courts had ordered a full statewide recount of all the rejected ballots. This also assumes that county canvassing boards would have reached the same conclusions about the disputed ballots that the consortium’s independent observers did. The findings indicate that Mr. Gore might have eked out a victory if he had pursued in court a course like the one he publicly advocated when he called on the state to “count all the votes.”"
There is considerably evidence that Katherine Harris disqualified many voters disproportionately in counties that were expected to go Democrat. She was an apparatchik of Governor Jeb Bush. Do you really think that she was totally objective?
In any case, what the Supreme Court did was bypass the LEGAL approach, which would be to recount the votes or re-run the election, something for which we had no precedent at the presidential level, but was well established in the US at other levels, and DECIDE the election. This was, by any sane standard, judicial activism of an unheard-of degree. Especially when you look at the Court and see how many of them should have recused themselves for being attached to the Bush family.
If Bush would have won anyway, why not count the votes? I think that question answers itself, don’t you?
jack75287 said, 12 months ago
Yes we can vote for hope and change and remove Barack Obama.
icky mudd said, 12 months ago
@Grainbelt
rodger that.
icky mudd said, 12 months ago
@jack75287
Gary Johnson Libertarian for Prez.
mikefive said, 12 months ago
@
The question of the vote, Constitutionally, never reached the point that would call for a vote by the House of Representatives. It was a problem of vote counting in Broward County, FLA. Can you spell “hanging chads”?
The crackdown of “legal” pot growers is that they are in violation of federal law which supercedes state law.
Rockngolfer said, 12 months ago
It is going to be more a matter of whether people who just moved, just divorced or who need $54 for a drivers license can qualify.