Member since November 03, 2009
Bio Investor, martial artist, gun rights enthusiast. And the scourge of neo-cons everywhere.
This user has no shared collections.
View More Collections
commented on Ted Rall
about 6 years ago
I agree with Churchill entirely, nice surprise. That was the most pretentious and irritating editorial I have ever had the displeasure to skim. It has no place on a Ted Rall comic, especially this particular one where Ted is making fun of a moderate except maybe ironically. Ted would mess that guy up. Please do show me all these radical leftists I keep hearing about. Ted is about the only one who exists in America.
And he is right btw. We know that DUBYA is a mass murderer already. What would proof of a few thousand more people do?
I do wish Ted would let up on criticizing Jon Stewart. Tigger is right. Jon isn’t perfect but he has harsh words for idiots on both sides of the aisle. Ted and Jon are on the same side (or should be).
I have only seen legitimate criticism of Obama from the “left.” Then we are talked down to, told we are “irresponsible” and “impatient” when we point out that reasonably Obama could have sometimes with little effort, have accomplished more. The best examples are the wars and DADT. Obama has decided inexplicably to continue discharging military personel under the policy. He has chosen to continue both wars. Nobody and no conditions made him make those poor decisions.
I really do love the “reduce torture” protest sign. Drives the point home well.
Lavocat is dead on here. (nothing new there) Rall is making fun of the Dems argument for themselves. He is saying that both have Republican policies so what is the incentive to vote anyway? And probably a bit about widespread apathy and inattentiveness too. I’ll be voting regardless. Someone has to bother to vote for a real candidate (“3rd party” but I think of them as “first”, as in better) instead of wasting my vote on one of the Republican candidates.
vhammon, I was only referring to ChukLitl, so I apologize for not being specific. I share his sentiments, but he keeps corralling all wealthy people into an evil category. I’ll take a look at the book you mentioned. It sounds interesting.
I meant to show with “I suppose” that I am not beholden to the powerful. I actually support the ideas I wrote.
Predictable. You reiterate my point for me. Simplistic.
All the people on Wall Street were the bad guys, then the federal government, now all Muslims. On to the next boogeyman.
Don’t put words into my mouth; I am a true capitalist. I never said I was in favor of saving failed explotative corporations. They were supposed to fail and never should have been allowed to grow so big. Capitalism is about fair competition.
Just because I won’t stay silent when good people are lumped in with avaricious criminals must mean I am as bad as the worst of them.
I suppose I will have to prove otherwise. Seize BP and nationalize it. Heavily tax the fossil fuel industry. Federal money for solar panels all over the country. Reclaim our tax money from banking executive bonuses. Actually regulate big agriculture so they stop poisoning and killing us. End all “deepwater” drilling until the industry proves it can clean up a spill effectively and plug an oil geyser. Try punishing companies who hire illegal aliens.
How simplistic and typical.
Billionaires have what you cannot imagine and what you long for. It is comforting and easy to lump them all together.
Plenty of them are criminals who get away with theft. Lop their heads off I say.
Plenty of them did indeed earn their riches. Not with blood and sweat but with their minds and capital. They provide jobs and housing. Some even pay well and reward good work. Someone like the Oracle of Omaha buys failing companies saving their employees. He speaks and the markets of the world tremble and shift.
Without investors, many neighborhoods would indefinitely be blighted by vacant houses and crime.
So you can’t earn a billion dollars on a wage or salary. You do it by taking risks and providing more than just your labor for others.
At least, that’s the right way to do it.
My problem with Blackwater is that they took such a great name and ruined it.
The only things most corporations have proven to be efficient at are killing civilians, spilling oil, stealing retirement money, and piling outlandish bonuses on their otherwise incompetent executives.
American manufacturing is dead. It is time to give up and move on already. Stop trying to reverse the irreversible.
A slain Bernanke would appease the angry credit gods…
Sirrom, they changed their name and therefore are no longer anything like Blackwater. Get it together.
The “leaders” who claim to be proponents of the free market are the same ones who fight hardest for subsidies paid with your taxes.
I surrender, Lib1. The people with all the money could not possibly be responsible for problems. It is the poor people and always has been for the six thousand years of earth.
Of course you are right. I only meant it doesn’t on the big issues Lavocat and the nation at large care about. Your point is the reason that people disapprove of Congress, but approve of their own representatives in startling numbers.
Lavocat, unfortunately, even with the completely fabricated “anti-incumbent fervor” this year almost all incumbents have won their primaries. But it really doesn’t matter much. New politicians are indistinguishable from the old.
Libertarian1, it took you until this comic to realize from “your own little protected cocoon” that Rall has problems with Obama economic policy.
Here, I’ll try to explain this simply for you. The single issue Rall has cartooned about most since Obama’s inauguration has been the economy.
Libertarians are f*cking jokes. They take joy in attacking their government for any reason, getting a good general reception because of the inexplicable moviestar popularity of Reagan. But they have NO viable alternatives. Maybe best of all, they want to run the government they hate so much. The people, we are told, know better than the government. But wait! The government is run by the very same people. It must be some kind of paradox or something…well I’m sure the people have the answer.
W. may have been the worst possible president, but he DID expand executive power that Obama is failing to take advantage of. The precedent, dear Sirrom, is that the president does not need Congress for much of anything.
Libertarian1, you are as insufferably pretentious as ever.
Fritz, you picking up on that 2011 election slip made my day, bud. Also, ‘regressive’ is a term that really should be put to wider use. Obama=disappointment; W=abomination. Perfectly said.
I can only wonder in awe what a twisted mind it must take for Tigger to spew such nonsensical rubbish.
Churchill is namecalling. I know I should be surprised. Why aren’t I?
Copyright © 2016. Universal Uclick, All rights reserved.