Recent Comments

1. about 10 years ago on Tom Toles

   Why do we need guns? Why do we need to carry guns?Look at our own western history. What happened in the West, in mining towns, cattle towns, etc? Gun violence got so bad that first, they were banned in towns, and second, the local sheriff had to resort to state and federal marshals in order to keep peace, hunt down criminals, etc. Is this what we want to happen again? If you don’t believe me, just go read some history.

2. over 11 years ago on Ted Rall

   Well that’s nice… you don’t remember how Bush got elected his first term…? Remember Nader…? Remember the Left voting for Nader…? Remember the Republican excuse for buying the Supreme Court…? If Nader had said, “I don’t have a chance to win, you guys did your job nominating me, now go vote for someone who does have a chance and isn’t a total idiot.”, then GORE would have won, no question, Republican sleaze and corruption notwithstanding. I lay every death in the Mid-East on Nader’s doorstep. Tell me with a straight face that Gore would have been just as bad as Bush. Gore would have been another Obama, a reasonably decent man attempting to fix a basically unfixable system. Obama tried, at least to some extent. He cares, just a little bit. Bush didn’t care. Romney doesn’t care. You work with what you can get, not with what you want, because you won’t get what you want, period.

3. over 11 years ago on Ted Rall

   Yesyesyes he’s compromised, etcetcetc. Enough, already. Who’s he running against now…? um, let’s see… a power-mad religious fanatic who just picked another power-mad religious (just different religion) fanatic. And you’re recycling old news? What do you think the body count will be if R&R are elected? The count here in this country? We have 2 1/2 months to convince people a) not to vote for R&R, b) not to throw away a vote for, yes, Obama, on some far left candidate who stands no chance.

4. almost 12 years ago on Pat Oliphant

   You’re missing the point. The bottom line is money. So the question is: who is making a profit from guns and ammunition? Answer: 1) armament makers. Ok, but what do armament makers use to make guns?2) Steel3) ExplosiveCan steel be regulated, i.e., not sold to armament makers? Yes, perhaps. What goes into explosive? 4) Ultimately, it’s OIL which underlies the chemicals making explosives.Therefore, it’s not only armament makers who are profiting here, but steel and oil companies. Can oil companies be regulated so that they don’t produce explosives or chemicals that make explosives?

   NO, of course not. They control the Republican party, and much of the Democrats. What can be done, then?Um… I have no ideas here. Elect honest officials…? Right, sure.

5. almost 12 years ago on Ted Rall

   All true… but really, you don’t think Romney will be just as bloodthirsty?? Who are the most interested and loud about starting and continuing wars, Republicans or Democrats? Just go look at the news. If you must criticize Obama on this, at least try to be a little more even-handed about it, ok?

6. almost 12 years ago on Ted Rall

   Yes, Obama has lied and betrayed us in many ways. But not in this:http://www.towleroad.com/2012/06/the-republican-party-of-texas-really-hates-gay-people.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+towleroad%2Ffeed+%28Towleroad+Daily++%23gay+news%29

   Realpolitic or not, Obama is not a Republican.

7. about 12 years ago on Ted Rall

   First, socialism does work, as Fourcrows points out. We have friends in Denmark, and NO ONE wants to emigrate to our wonderful enlightened capitalistic paradise. Read about Danes and happiness if you doubt me. Second, any one who believes Obama is a socialist doesn’t understand socialism, and does just that: believe. They don’t think. “Belief” is not “thought”.

8. over 12 years ago on Ted Rall

   The problems with the logic underlying jgcp’s comment aren’t black and white. But there are several assumptions that are incorrect:1) security above freedom: how far do we go in order to have “security”; how many freedoms must we abridge? Not an easy issue, but I think it’s pretty clear that we’ve gone too far at this point. Life IS uncertain.2) “unknown” is not “immoral”. A tactic might be new, unused, etc., but not immoral. Guerrilla tactics were not considered particularly immoral in the 1700s; they just weren’t taught in military schools, probably because they were considered ineffective. Look at WWI, the last major usage of the old school tactics… were poison gas and trench warfare moral? Not by the Geneva Convention today. 3) and the common mistake of the conservative: it was better in the good old days. See above.