Matt Bors by Matt Bors

Matt Bors

Comments (12) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Yeah, the oxymoron known as corporate democracy.

  2. BrassOrchid

    BrassOrchid GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    We can call it New York!

  3. ARodney

    ARodney said, over 3 years ago

    Montana tried it in the 1920s. Didn’t work out so well. That’s why (until the conservative activists on the supreme court threw them out, because states’ rights no longer apply) they had the strongest anti-bribery / corruption / campaign finance laws in the U.S.

  4. The Wolf In Your Midst

    The Wolf In Your Midst said, over 3 years ago

    None of these other things you mention are Constitutionally-protected rights, so your argument is meaningless. This is the rationale I see trotted out against any sort of licensing or insurance requirements for firearms, so why not apply it to voting too?
    Also, some people actually do live on such a razor’s edge that even taking the few hours it requires to take a bus or walk to a city office and wait in lines would represent a significant difficulty. Now, perhaps people who are stuck in this situation don’t matter to you, but they still do matter.

  5. sclark55

    sclark55 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Would the left feel better if Scalia had called minorities what they call them, voting blocks for their power bases?

  6. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago


    ^ Wow, a real live Scalia admirer. I didn’t know there were any.
    Yeah, the left and the center and real conservatives would feel better if Scalia would retire and just give speeches at Republican fund raisers and maybe work for one of the Koch Brothers’ foundations. Maybe Jim DeMint or Grover Norquist would give him a job.
    They’d feel even better if he took his lapdog with him.

  7. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 3 years ago

    I think the blowback on Scalia is that he has started commenting about subjects that have not yet come up before the court. Whether he has already made up his mind before any testimony or not, it appears that way. Also, this particular issue has to do with determining if the Voting Rights Act’s provisions of Judiciary reviewing changes in voting laws to determine whether said changes may disenfranchise a specific voting bloc.

    If this review is as I understand it, this will turn out to be a decision of whether conditions are different enough from the deep-segregation days of the fifties and sixties that those provisions are no longer needed. The question is whether we have gotten so homogeneous as a society that one group may not need the special protections that were determined to be needed in the past.

    To me, this is exactly the thing that Scalia’s past statements and decisions would suggest that the Court should not even be deliberating. First off, it’s not a constitutional issue (again, I do not hold a degree in constitutional law, but this doesn’t stop any of the other posters from giving informed opinions here). If I’m right, this is a decision for Congress to decide if the law needs changing. Second, it comes pretty close to legislating from the bench. Activist judges, and all that.

    Then again, it appears that the other branches of government are not doing their jobs as sworn to do; why should the judicial branch be left out?

  8. BrassOrchid

    BrassOrchid GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Cities are corporations. There is currently some discussion as to whether the Electoral College, which offsets the voting superiority of these corporations by negating the effects of population density, should be discontinued. Then the corporations would truly run the country, as has been asserted for so long. I wonder if I can get an Oh Henry! bar from the convenience store.

  9. ScullyUFO

    ScullyUFO said, over 3 years ago

    I observe that poor people also do not get on a plane, rent a car, buy a car, buy a house, and get credit, etc. You sound like you’ve never been poor.

  10. BrassOrchid

    BrassOrchid GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago


    Poor people also require ID to open a bank account for automatic deposits of assistance or to obtain food stamps, bus passes, library cards and all sorts of other social benefits, such as cough syrup or decongestants. Shouldn’t they have free IDs to expedite their ability to obtain aid and assistance where required? And forget about getting your tax credits without proper identification!

  11. Tom

    Tom said, over 3 years ago

    So tired of the voter ID argument. Every registered voter ALREADY HAS A VOTER ID. It’s called your voter registration card. You should have to present it when you vote. Duh!

  12. Ellen Gwynne

    Ellen Gwynne said, over 3 years ago

    So why not let people register to vote there? Repubs consistently prevent it!!

  13. Refresh Comments.