A Recent Favorite:

Uh Oh, Nothing Here Yet

Why don't you go browse some Comics or Editorials and pick a few to favorite?

Recent Comments

  1. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Nick Anderson 27 days ago


    The whole process of incorporation has one purpose: to put a wall of separation between the humans behind the company, and the actions and concerns of the company itself. This is why the people who won a corporation aren’t personally responsible for its debt. Now they want it to be considered identical to them… but only when it suits them; they still don’t want to be responsible for its debt. Sorry, but that doesn’t make any sense.

    There has never been a problem with signing contracts with a corporation, because that is one of the express functions that corporations were created to do. It is not a function of being human; any entity with money can engage in contracts. You are correct, however, that what a company can’t do, a union should not be able to do, but “company” and “corporation” are not identical terms, and whether a union resembles a corporation or not depends on the union. Those which are structured as corporations, with the full protection for the individuals involved against liability for the union’s actions, should be treated like corporations — that protection against liability is what should be distinguishing companies which can be treated as extensions of the humans behind them and companies which shouldn’t be. A union which does not protect its individual members against liability for the actions of the union should be treated as a group of individuals, just as a company which has not incorporated (and therefore which still offers no liability protection for the individuals behind it) should still be treated as a group of individuals. But there really ought to be some legal consistency behind the question of whether they are separating the entity from the individuals who make it, or they aren’t.

  2. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Signe Wilkinson 2 months ago

    All the evidence shows that it isn’t necessary, since in-person voter fraud is virtually nonexistent. However, I certainly see no problem with this method. If it makes you feel better, go ahead and propose it to your state’s Secretary of State (or other supervisor of elections, depending on where you live).

  3. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Tom Toles 4 months ago

    ConserveGov: How come European countries spend vastly less per capita on health care than we do, and get dramatically better results?

  4. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Mike Luckovich 4 months ago

    Mephistopheles, since you say you don’t want to prevent any citizen from voting and are only concerned with asking for proof of ID, I trust you are taking action to oppose the closing of early voting in poor neighborhoods while keeping it open in wealthy ones (which is happening in Ohio), and the closing of restrooms in polling places in Florida where people are already having to wait 12 hours to vote because so many polling places (always in poor neighborhoods or student areas) have been shut down. Not to mention the recent case — I think it was Michigan? Not sure I remember — which shut down the public transportation routes from poor neighborhoods to their new polling places, to ensure that only people with the money to own a car would get to vote. If your real concern is merely using ID to ensure true citizens are the only voters, I’d expect you to be standing up and opposing all these things — are you?

  5. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Mike Luckovich 4 months ago

    And what is your excuse for closing all the restrooms in the Miami polling places — after already creating such artificial scarcity that people have to wait ten to twelve hours in line before they can vote? That has nothing to do with proving who anyone is.

  6. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Ben Sargent 4 months ago

    And big business wasn’t against that — in fact, the insurance industry wanted it, because it forced more customers into their hands, while getting government to pay them for it. The Roberts Court doesn’t always do the will of the Republican Party, but it does always do the will of corporate money, which is often — but NOT always — the same thing.

  7. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Jim Morin 4 months ago

    Most of both parties are owned by the corporations. It’s easier to bring in a candidate who won’t be so owned through the Democratic Party than the Republican Party, not because the former is a better bunch of people (they aren’t particularly), but because they’re less tightly organized, so it’s easier to get in someone who doesn’t fit the usual mold there. That’s all.

  8. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Jim Morin 4 months ago

    The problem is that it’s very hard to find those, and when found, even harder to get them elected. It takes money to get elected, and if it isn’t coming from the corporations because they know they won’t get a return on it, it has to come from somewhere. Alan Grayson, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren have pulled it off — but one’s in a tiny state which takes less money to get elected in the first place; one managed to talk her opponent into refusing corporate money and evening the score, and the third has the best full-time staff of fundraisers going looking for money from the small contributors, the ones who don’t look for any return except good government, that’s ever been put together. Yes, they’ve proven it’s possible, but it’s an uphill climb.

  9. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Jack Ohman 4 months ago

    Doesn’t matter what party you like. Once this kind of money enters the scene, neither party will listen to anyone without it anymore.

  10. PocketNaomi GoComics Pro Member commented on Tom Toles 11 months ago

    They’re “caused BY climate change” because the endless dry heat in those areas make the material likelier to burn. It’s false that 90% are arson; the accurate explanation is that 90% are human-triggered. mostly by accident (which is what makes it not arson — arson has to be deliberate). But those accidents could happen in a damp forest and fizzle out. They’re causing the huge fires with endless damage because and only because the hotter air is making the trees and plants dryer and more easily caught on fire.