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.
Yep, with a matter of one second into the New Year, your taxes will go up $4,000. If a new farm bill isn’t drafted a gallon of milk will go up to $6-8 a gallon. All under Obama’s watch. The buck stops with him. Might as well, he’s taking every buck you make. So much for looking out for the middle-class…
Don’t understand the first two comments! TheTimes newspaper in the UK (slightly right of centre in its philoshophy) had an article of Friday suggesting that both American political parties were willing to go over the ‘fiscal cliff’ as they both believed that the american public would place more of the blame on the other party. Clearly the threat of the ‘fiscal cliff’ was not working as intended, as it was supposed to be so extreme that it should force both parties to reach a compromise. It would appear that the politicians themselves are more concerned with their own careers than looking after the population they were elected to represent. Hence I propose an alternative solution (a political cliff if you like); if a compromise budget is not acheived by deadline day then a) None of the politicians currently in office are permitted to run for President in the next 10 years; b) There is a re-election of every member of the House of Representives one month later (1st of Feb), with none of the current representatives allowed to stand. With their careers all at risk the politicians might start negotiating with the intent of actually acheiving a compromise! yours Mike
Go away, this spot reserved for those who find the first two comments most profound. . Much more to come and sense is not appreciated, in fact it will be ridiculed.
All the latest pols show that some 60% of Americans will blame the Republicans in the House of Representatives for going over the fiscal cliff. Some 25% will blame President Obama for the problem. And the rest will blame both political parties, or have no particular opinion.
As 69% is far better than the majority that re-elected President Obama, then I would say that your post is at best misleading, and at worst a down right lie.
If this number of people remember in 2014, the Republican Party may very well cease to exist!!
I don’t think pianoguy was commenting on what the American sheeple believe, but on what he believes. To reiterate, Romney promised to slash everyone’s taxes and the price of gasoline and also balance the budget using Romneymath, a branch of mathematics so profound no PhD mathematician or economist can understand any of it.
But the voters elected Obama, so we won’t get any of that miraculous Romneymath. So blame Obama or the voters for the fact that we won’t have taxes abolished for everyone and still balance the budget and have 50.9¢ a gallon gasoline.
We will never know, since O got that extra 1% vote. But we are living with $4 million Hawaii vacations while America burns. Liberals love spending other people’s money.
I heard that Obama just issued an executive order ending the pay freeze for federal workers. Biden wil make $231, 900 this year. Congress and federal workers get a pay raise.
YOU have FAILED to see the MAIN point in my post. The buck AND blame ends with the PRESIDENT!!! He’s just as at fault if not MORE for the fiscal cliff!
Good comment Mike31. There have been other idea suggested- no pay for legislators unless a budget is passed, term limits, and more. Sadly, too many Americans vote with the attitude throw those OTHER guys out while moving to keep their own legislators who are rewarded for their “seniority” with choice committee seats. It is my opinion that it will get worse as the Citizen’s United ruling permits people with financial interests to involve themselves in local elections including, in many places, judge seats. Conservative donors are already planning how to elect people they can trust to support their financial and social agendas in local elections which tend to be less expensive and draw less attention than national elections. Fifty states with republicans in charge of the governor’s office, state senate and representative offices, and mayoral positions would be a powerful tool for these conservative “job creators”. In states where judges are elected, their efforts could be further rewarded with legal rulings against Democrat, and perhaps even democratic, positions. While I know the Dems would do the same if they could, the fact is, they cannot raise as much “local” money as conservatives have historically shown themselves able to do. Citizen’s United is a bad ruling but I don’t think the parties will find it in their interest to move against it. It will be an interesting election. Thank you for an international perspective, Have a safe and happy New Year’s Eve. Respectfully, C.
In the 2010 elections the conservative group calling themselves the Tax Enough Already or T.E.A. Party won many seats in the House of Representatives. Why? Because most Americans understand that the outrageous spending habits of both parties in power was out of control and needed to stop. It was NOT about raising taxes on the wealthy – although you can do that without much effect on the debt and this group doesn’t really care – it was about the fact that no one in DC was concerned about a budget or balance or debt. NO ONE.
So they got elected and got demonized because they did what the people that sent them there asked them to do and that was to stop the government from functioning as it had been. They raised the right issues and the debt and deficit became important again. So important that the President appointed a “super committee” to resolve the issue. The result? Failure and sequestration. What?
Here is a reminder that I am sure you all think about constantly.
The Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA) established a 12 member Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (or “super committee”) charged with reducing the deficit by an additional $1.2 – $1.5 trillion over ten years. The 2013 cuts apply to “discretionary” spending and are divided between reductions to defense ($500 billion) and non-defense ($700 billion).
Sequestration can only be avoided if Congress passes legislation that undoes the legal requirement in the BCA and that President Obama will sign before January 2, 2013.
Well, the problem is that a lot of economists think that the combination of tax increase on the non-wealthy and a cut in government spending could send the economy into recession again. I’m no expert, I don’t know if they are right or wrong, but it seems to be a legitimate concern.
Mix a snifter of Bill Mauldin, a dash of Jeff McNelly and a very large dollop of common sense, and you begin to get an idea of Lisa Benson’s considerable talent.
Clay Bennett by Clay Bennett
Steve Benson by Steve Benson
Comments (34) (Please sign in to comment)
PianoGuy24
said, 5 months ago
Yep, with a matter of one second into the New Year, your taxes will go up $4,000. If a new farm bill isn’t drafted a gallon of milk will go up to $6-8 a gallon. All under Obama’s watch. The buck stops with him. Might as well, he’s taking every buck you make. So much for looking out for the middle-class…
Cinci Steve said, 5 months ago
@PianoGuy24
It’s all about “revenge”.
Mike31g said, 5 months ago
Don’t understand the first two comments!
TheTimes newspaper in the UK (slightly right of centre in its philoshophy) had an article of Friday suggesting that both American political parties were willing to go over the ‘fiscal cliff’ as they both believed that the american public would place more of the blame on the other party.
Clearly the threat of the ‘fiscal cliff’ was not working as intended, as it was supposed to be so extreme that it should force both parties to reach a compromise. It would appear that the politicians themselves are more concerned with their own careers than looking after the population they were elected to represent. Hence I propose an alternative solution (a political cliff if you like); if a compromise budget is not acheived by deadline day then a) None of the politicians currently in office are permitted to run for President in the next 10 years; b) There is a re-election of every member of the House of Representives one month later (1st of Feb), with none of the current representatives allowed to stand.
With their careers all at risk the politicians might start negotiating with the intent of actually acheiving a compromise!
yours
Mike
Stipple said, 5 months ago
@Mike31g
Go away, this spot reserved for those who find the first two comments most profound.
.
Much more to come and sense is not appreciated, in fact it will be ridiculed.
Robert Landers said, 5 months ago
@PianoGuy24
All the latest pols show that some 60% of Americans will blame the Republicans in the House of Representatives for going over the
fiscal cliff. Some 25% will blame President Obama for the problem. And the rest will blame both political parties, or have no particular opinion.
As 69% is far better than the majority that re-elected President Obama, then I would say that your post is at best misleading, and at worst a down right lie.
If this number of people remember in 2014, the Republican Party may very well cease to exist!!
Michael wme said, 5 months ago
@Robert Landers
I don’t think pianoguy was commenting on what the American sheeple believe, but on what he believes. To reiterate, Romney promised to slash everyone’s taxes and the price of gasoline and also balance the budget using Romneymath, a branch of mathematics so profound no PhD mathematician or economist can understand any of it.
But the voters elected Obama, so we won’t get any of that miraculous Romneymath. So blame Obama or the voters for the fact that we won’t have taxes abolished for everyone and still balance the budget and have 50.9¢ a gallon gasoline.
Ms. Ima said, 5 months ago
@Michael wme
We will never know, since O got that extra 1% vote. But we are living with $4 million Hawaii vacations while America burns. Liberals love spending other people’s money.
ansonia
said, 5 months ago
@Mike31g
Nice, well thought comment.
I wish it were possible.
ansonia
said, 5 months ago
I heard that Obama just issued an executive order ending the pay freeze for federal workers. Biden wil make $231, 900 this year. Congress and federal workers get a pay raise.
PianoGuy24
said, 5 months ago
@Mike31g
YOU want US to listen to the UK’s advise on economical and political policies….???
BWAA-HA-HA-HA-HAAA-HAAAAAAAA!!!!!!
PianoGuy24
said, 5 months ago
@Robert Landers
YOU have FAILED to see the MAIN point in my post. The buck AND blame ends with the PRESIDENT!!! He’s just as at fault if not MORE for the fiscal cliff!
Respectful Troll said, 5 months ago
@Mike31g
Good comment Mike31.
There have been other idea suggested- no pay for legislators unless a budget is passed, term limits, and more. Sadly, too many Americans vote with the attitude throw those OTHER guys out while moving to keep their own legislators who are rewarded for their “seniority” with choice committee seats. It is my opinion that it will get worse as the Citizen’s United ruling permits people with financial interests to involve themselves in local elections including, in many places, judge seats. Conservative donors are already planning how to elect people they can trust to support their financial and social agendas in local elections which tend to be less expensive and draw less attention than national elections. Fifty states with republicans in charge of the governor’s office, state senate and representative offices, and mayoral positions would be a powerful tool for these conservative “job creators”. In states where judges are elected, their efforts could be further rewarded with legal rulings against Democrat, and perhaps even democratic, positions.
While I know the Dems would do the same if they could, the fact is, they cannot raise as much “local” money as conservatives have historically shown themselves able to do.
Citizen’s United is a bad ruling but I don’t think the parties will find it in their interest to move against it.
It will be an interesting election.
Thank you for an international perspective,
Have a safe and happy New Year’s Eve.
Respectfully,
C.
Bruce4671 said, 5 months ago
Time is a funny thing.
In the 2010 elections the conservative group calling themselves the Tax Enough Already or T.E.A. Party won many seats in the House of Representatives. Why? Because most Americans understand that the outrageous spending habits of both parties in power was out of control and needed to stop. It was NOT about raising taxes on the wealthy – although you can do that without much effect on the debt and this group doesn’t really care – it was about the fact that no one in DC was concerned about a budget or balance or debt. NO ONE.
So they got elected and got demonized because they did what the people that sent them there asked them to do and that was to stop the government from functioning as it had been. They raised the right issues and the debt and deficit became important again. So important that the President appointed a “super committee” to resolve the issue. The result? Failure and sequestration. What?
Here is a reminder that I am sure you all think about constantly.
The Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA) established a 12 member Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (or “super committee”) charged with reducing the deficit by an additional $1.2 – $1.5 trillion over ten years.
The 2013 cuts apply to “discretionary” spending and are divided between reductions to defense ($500 billion) and non-defense ($700 billion).
Sequestration can only be avoided if Congress passes legislation that undoes the legal requirement in the BCA and that President Obama will sign before January 2, 2013.
http://www.ideamoneywatch.com/main/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=60&Itemid=72
So the republicans are refusing to agree to anything because they want “cuts”. And the Democrats refuse to agree because they want to “tax the rich”.
If they do NOTHING then they both get what they want.
Sequestration takes effect by LAW and the so called “Bush tax cuts” expire.
What is the problem??? Let it happen.
lonecat said, 5 months ago
@Bruce4671
Well, the problem is that a lot of economists think that the combination of tax increase on the non-wealthy and a cut in government spending could send the economy into recession again. I’m no expert, I don’t know if they are right or wrong, but it seems to be a legitimate concern.
mnsmkd said, 5 months ago
@Mike31g
Mike31 is saying wise words….