Pat Oliphant by Pat Oliphant

Pat Oliphant

Comments (21) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. AlexanderTheGoodEnough

    AlexanderTheGoodEnough said, about 1 year ago

    You know, I have some rather mixed feelings about the idea of Queen (King?) Hillary as President. But unlike Obama, as President she’d no doubt kick Tea Bagger butt and give those sorry wacko birds something to actually complain about.

  2. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 year ago

    In January 2007, Hillary was considered inevitable. Best not to count your votes before the votes are counted. Voters may be even less interested in establishment candidates (from both parties) this time around.

  3. tiredofit

    tiredofit said, about 1 year ago

    I’m sorry, but what has she done to indicate that she has grabbed the crown? The media is pushing it, not her.

  4. emptc12

    emptc12 said, about 1 year ago

    I would like to see a listing that shows to what extent politics has become a form of “family business.” Let the list show (lest it become encyclopedic in length) all politicians with family members that have hold, or have held, office above the level of state representative, going back for two generations or more.
    .
    Obviously, a social class of professional politicians has steadily developed, starting nearly from the beginning of our country. We tend to sneer at monarchies in other countries, but isn’t our political class becoming a form of hereditary royalty? Is it a bad thing? Does this contribute to our present problems? Should something be done about it? I suspect this family hand-off of political offices occurs most frequently at state and county levels.
    .
    The father-to-son situation was bad enough, then it started to become father-to-son-to-grandson. Now, it’s becoming husband-to-wife? It just seems Not Right. Is there anything in early national political writings that speaks to this?

  5. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, about 1 year ago

    She says she has not made up her mind. She will run, she has no choice, the establishment and the media demands it. Media ratings and content are what is important.

  6. ronald rini

    ronald rini said, about 1 year ago

    sorry do not see why anyone would want a liar and someone as incompetent as her. sorry must be the emperor new clothes thing

  7. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, about 1 year ago

    @Tigger

    The huge anchor of which you speak is more likely to sink the Republicans, if they continue to obsess on the non-issues.

  8. emptc12

    emptc12 said, about 1 year ago

    @Tigger

    I knew that, obviously. The Harrison’s were grandfather-grandson. The Roosevelts were distant cousins. Let’s not have any more.
    .
    Our candidate pool is big enough now that it shouldn’t happen, shouldn’t be allowed to happen. And a wife following her husband in presidential office — I consider that ridiculous, and it doesn’t matter who it is.
    .
    And I’d respect Jeb Bush if he did not run. All in all, these sorts of situations seem to me like political incest, bad for the country in the long run.

  9. ARodney

    ARodney said, about 1 year ago

    Yes, it’s Chris Christie who is already campaigning for 2016, not Hillary. I fully expect her to, but heck, it’s three years away. (More of an Elizabeth Warren fan, myself.)

  10. echoraven

    echoraven said, about 1 year ago

    @Uncle Joe

    I dunno… With people like Melowese Richardson who voted 6 times for Obama (in 1 election) Hillary is a cinch to win!
    Source: http://now.msn.com/melowese-richardson-ohio-poll-worker-might-have-voted-for-obama-six-times

  11. AlexanderTheGoodEnough

    AlexanderTheGoodEnough said, about 1 year ago

    Some folks here seem to like the idea of Elizabeth Warren for President. Nope. Won’t happen. She’s sane, mostly.

  12. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, about 1 year ago

    @ypoons7666

    ^^ The attack on the consulate is not a non-issue. The Republican interpretation and so-called coverup should be a non-issue because it is pure political spin.

  13. Gypsy8

    Gypsy8 said, about 1 year ago

    @ypoons7666

    “….I sincerely hope we do not ever see another President Clinton…..”
    .
    You would instead prefer a Bush or a McCain, or a Dole, or a Romney?
    .
    How would you compare Clinton’s qualifications up against those of Cruz, Rubio, or Rand Paul? In comparison, Clinton’s qualifications are exemplary. Her so-called bagage is largely Republican created.
    .
    So far as America’s International reputation is concerned, it is far higher now than any time in recent memory. You would have to go back to Bill Clinton to get a similar standing.

  14. AgentSmith101

    AgentSmith101 said, about 1 year ago

    I’m a moderate. If you want to see Republican moderates turn to the dark side faster than Superman folds on laundry day then run Hillary as your candidate. I can only hope that Tigger is right and she’ll stay out of the fray. . . forever. No more dynasties!

  15. emptc12

    emptc12 said, about 1 year ago

    @ypoons7666

    I agree with idealistic portion of your post that a great person should be elected president. I don’t think that happens very often. Mostly we get just the election-winner. To a large extent, the advisors surrounding a president lead to his success or failure. But no matter how accomplished in business, philosophy, or ethics these intellectual fire-cracker advisors (ivy-league graduates, even Nobel-prize winners), they tend to fizzle in the face of real-life world events.
    .
    A great man is needed, sure. And what is the definition on a “great man”? A leader encounters events and makes good as well as poor decisions in regard to them; and if his good decisions outnumber the bad he or she might be considered “great.” Sometimes it’s inspiration or just luck. Resultant bloodshed might or might not matter. But the idea of a Great Man making lonely, great decisions is a false literary construct. There’s usually a group effort with all branches of government. Even Julius and Octavius with their enormous powers needed political cooperation.
    .
    Great Men don’t burst forward, with auras about their heads. If they step slowly forward, how would we recognize them? Our media have the capabilities to show people down to their pores and pimples. Things contenders ever did, said, or wrote is exposed to calculated analysis. And then the PR spin churns mud in the water, CW or CCW.
    .
    We who elect them have to judge their potential, elect them, then allow events to test them. (These are tests and they will count toward your final grade.) A small percentage distinguish themselves positively. They should accomplish at least the smallest possible amount of harm.
    .
    Examples I would suggest in the Twentieth Century are Churchill and Roosevelt. Many would disagree with those. And then, who? There are many European and Asian leaders to qualify. Then , we get into controversy: Stalin and Mao and … Hitler? There are actually many to insist those people were great.
    .
    Unfortunately, violent world wars and revolutions brought these people forward. What are the comparable issues today that will define greatness in leadership? Energy, health care, climate change? Not seemingly as bad and bloody as political revolutions, but potentially of greater concern. In the long run, just as many people could die as the result of wrong decisions. It seems at present we are less worried about society as a whole, and more for individual comforts; and the ability for consumer product industries to supply entertainment items. These comforts are temporary, and soon real life-and-death issues will appear again. These things come in waves (subtle pun intended).
    .
    I don’t think we recognize the degree of greatness leaders had until they’ve left office. Sorry, when they first appear there are no color-coded labels on their foreheads. It’s a risky chore each time to give them a chance, and to support them unselfishly and without petulance in thoughtful requests. Then possibly after years have passed, we make first evaluations as to their relative greatness. Not too soon, or the judgment is subject to self-interest. It takes a while for the smog of time to clear from political events. History judges.
    .
    Thanks for your time. It’s one thing we can seldom make more of, and to ask it of a person is a serious thing.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (6).