Scott Stantis by Scott Stantis

Scott Stantis

Comments (20) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. wolfhoundblues1

    wolfhoundblues1 said, over 1 year ago

    The “official” unemployment numbers are low because the admin has redefined the word to mean temporarly unemployed.

    If you are unemployed for longer than 99 weeks or have ever owned your own business, you are not counted.

  2. Kip W

    Kip W said, over 1 year ago

    That redefining was done years ago. Shockingly, it did not originate with Obama.

  3. zeimetr

    zeimetr said, over 1 year ago

    It might have helped had Congress enacted some of the President’s proposals such as infrastructure construction instead of the Reps killing it. Thus, Stantis’s take on unemployment is a bit unbalanced.

  4. Ted Lind

    Ted Lind GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    It is really interesting we spend all of our time investigating Bengaze and the IRS and pummeling Obama care while our roads, bridges, water systems and everything else is falling apart. Roads are filled with potholes after the winter because the roads are falling apart but none of our elected officials seem concerned. I won’t even mention second rate schools, and a very expensive medical care system and a broken mental health system.

  5. wmconelly

    wmconelly said, over 1 year ago

    It’s Obama’s fault? How’s about our hot, can’t-wait-to-help, creative Congress backs a jobs bill? A jobs bill that doesn’t include going off on another war.
    Infrastructure, education, healthcare, internet upgrades, there’s a lot that COULD be done if they’d BORROW THE MONEY to do it and rig a PAY BACK SYSTEM into the project. Hello? What do you say, RepubliCons? If I can borrow money to buy a house, or a car — items that will improve my and my neighborhood’s living standard — how come YOU can’t do the same?
    Benghazi, right?

  6. cjr53

    cjr53 said, over 1 year ago


    And, oddly enough, congress doesn’t even need to borrow money, just re-direct a portion of the useless, un-needed and un-wanted military spending.

  7. joaquinxx

    joaquinxx said, over 1 year ago

    Got to get those job providers moving. Oops, they’re all at the bank.

  8. Northern Redman

    Northern Redman said, over 1 year ago


    “It might have helped had Congress enacted some of the President’s proposals such as infrastructure construction”

    They did. Remember the $800 billion + stimulus package? Wasn’t it supposed to fund all those “shovel ready jobs”? Instead it was used to prop up local governments and fund failing “green” energy ventures.

    Want to try again?

  9. zippy06

    zippy06 said, over 1 year ago

    When you people talk about Congress inaction.
    Do you really mean lying Harry Reid would get out of the way and let some of the House bills come up for a vote?
    Last year 35 bills sat on his desk. He even said he would not let anything come up for a vote as long as Repubs. run the House.

  10. zippy06

    zippy06 said, over 1 year ago

    Oh, we are still in the billgore Depression. Since 2000 and counting….

  11. denis1112

    denis1112 said, over 1 year ago


    It might help if Harry Reid would let some of the over 100 jobs bills passed by Congress onto the floor of the Senate.Reid and Obama can’t do that because some Democrats might vote for them.Leaving Obama little choice but to veto them or sign them.But we can’t have that.It doesn’t further the propaganda that the Republicans are obstructing.Really easy to pull off when all the LWNJ news nerds are in the DNC’s pocket.

  12. exoticdoc2

    exoticdoc2 said, over 1 year ago

    They have that in common. Lots of people wish the Obamanation would go away, as well. Such a train wreck of a “president.”

  13. Captain Colorado

    Captain Colorado said, over 1 year ago

    Why are the socialist liberals are so quick to blame Bush for every problem America faces while their guy has been at the steering wheel for two terms, driving this country into the ground?

  14. Jase99

    Jase99 GoComics PRO Member said, over 1 year ago

    Maybe if the US government gave even more tax breaks and subsidies to companies and corporations, they’ll stop exporting jobs over seas and start rehiring in the US. It hasn’t worked since Congress started giving them more and more during the Bush Administration, but maybe this time it will. If not, we’ll just keep giving them more and more. It’s not socialism when the money goes to corporations.

  15. MangeyMoose

    MangeyMoose said, over 1 year ago

    It is your private sector, the “job-creators” who shipped millions of middle-class jobs overseas to increase their profits. When they invest, it is either in overseas ventures, or syphoning off money from the market with their battery of ultra-fast computers doing the purchasing. The economy did rise after Reagan took office. He made his deal with Goldman Sachs and the others before he took office, then began the era of de-regulation, and Wall Street reaped record returns. I remember those years as “leveraged buyouts” and “Hostile takeovers”. Many people were laid off then. Executive salaries began to soar. Taxes for the wealthy were reduced, while many tax-write-offs for the middle-class were repealed.

    I am not happy with some of what Obama does, but the fact is, he did inherit an empty treasury, a huge debt, wars, millions of unemployed, and millions of under-employed, and an unregulated Wall Street champing at the bit! My only real complaint with the president is that the aforementioned should have been his focus, not ramming a healthcare bill, which wasn’t even read by the legislature, down our throats, and using the IRS to enforce compliance.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (5).