As long as things are bad, you’ll always have a job, Ted.
Wow, this from Rall. Even the far left is beginning to recognize that there is a problem, Houston.
What far left?
Hm? Has Libertarian1 seriously never noticed Rall (or other leftists) criticizing Obama before?
This is a criticism of Obama? Obama tanked the economy? Obama has consistently blocked stimulus legislation? Right! Oh, and he needed a teleprompter to totally devastate the entire republican caucaus on live TV, didn’t he?
Some people must smoke some strange stuff.
The stimulus did not work? Things would have been a lot worse without the stimulus. Ask the businesses where all those people working on our roads are spending their paychecks. When our economy got wrecked, it really got wrecked. As long as our corporate leaders keep sending jobs off-shore, we won’t recover and no matter how many jobs the stimulus packages creates, the people will still lose and the tops 2% will keep getting richer.
This cartoon is incredibly, unconscionably LAME, and unworthy of Ted Rall. It reflects the mindless, insipid “thinking” of the Tea Party, not the biting reality-based satire we’ve come to expect. I am bitterly disappointed and depressed at having to wake up to something so vapid and shallow. I have the same bad taste in my mouth that I get from some of the right-wing cartoonists on this site or in the New York Post. Did Ted drink Kool Aid today instead of coffee?
Don’t worry, he’ll be back in touch with us all after Election Day, 2011.
Back in Reagan’s day this was called a market adjustment and it was ‘good.’ My how times have changed.
The more things change the more they remain the same. It will always be so with the Money Party in charge. Vote third party, preferably Green.
See Jade, blaming past administrations is de rigueur around here. Why were you so upset about a mention of Clinton?
“The stimulus did not work.”
“See Jade, blaming past administrations is de rigueur around here. Why were you so upset about a mention of Clinton?”
See above what sirromsirrom wrote. That is why I started my comment with “wow”. Sirom was shocked to see this coming from an ultra liberal, as was I.
Now you see why the Democratic candidates are running away as fast as possible. Obama’s first 20 months have been a disaster.
As for the comic, it’s not a criticism of Obama necessarily, it’s a criticism of criticism. Consider the far-reaching attempts at calling him “liberal elite,” “Muslim,” and out of touch with the average American (particularly interesting when the guy was raised on food stamps).
That being said, even if it was a criticism of Obama, what would be the big deal? That’s one thing I see different between the left and the right. The left will point out criticisms of their leaders, the right merely attacks others. You don’t see criticism of GOP on Fox News. They may claim someone isn’t “far right enough” (read: not a crazy religious zealot with absolutely no ability to compromise), but lefties will allow for a difference of opinion among their members. It’s possible to be pro-Life and a Democrat, for example. According to the righties, it’s not possible to be pro-Choice and a Republican.
Sirrom, I think you missed the irony.
One could take almost anything ironically, and after years of exposure to Ted’s way of seeing the world, I am certainly trying to find a shred of that irony here, but the cartoon looks so much like one from the NY Post that it requires mental gymnastics to arrive at that elusive level of subtlety.
You’re not really paying attention, are you?
“it requires mental gymnastics to arrive at that elusive level of subtlety.”
Lavocat: “Don’t worry, he’ll be back in touch with us all after Election Day, 2011.”
I strongly advise all you Repubs, Tea-Partiers, and other regressives to follow Lavocat’s example and vote against the Dems in the 2011 elections.
^ Too subtle, they won’t get it.
Disordered grammar = disordered mind.
Stop dissing Howie. ;-)
“to tell the Real Truth about Obama and that is he’s Worse than ‘W’”
I sincerely doubt that Rall feels anything of the sort. To Rall, Obama is a profound disappointment, but W was an abomination.
If Obama had a free hand, I have no doubt he could clean up the world. (As long as there were a term limit, like in the Roman Republic.) His thinking is as correct as I could realistically hope for in a public figure. But considering the intractable opposition, I don’t really see how any human being without supernatural powers could have accomplished more. Ted unfortunately seems to have fallen prey to the common misconception that the President can make things happen without getting the necessary votes in Congress.
I’m not voting against the Democrats. I’m voting against the incumbents, whoever they may turn out to be.
The Dems had their chance and they blew it. Time for someone else to give it a try.
What we need is something other than two monolithic and hidebound parties whoring for money. What we got is disaster.
I guess eight years of horrific Republican rule simply was not enough to bring the empire to its knees. Perhaps we need to revisit those horrible days.
Americans will never learn.
And I’m a very left-wing progressive. But I am done with the Dems.
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?
RationalEmpiricist “the whole world is crazy and ignorant except for you and me. And sometimes I worry about you”.
It must be so nice living in your own little protected cocoon not ever having to be in touch with the real world.
I was well aware that I might be called a starry-eyed idealist when I said “clean up the world” rather than “clean up the country.” But the real problems we face are much larger than any single country can cope with. Obama is somewhat better at dealing with those than with “domestic” issues anyway.
“Democrats had their chance and they blew it.”
Obama inherited an incipient Great Depression, two intractable wars and a Rebublican mindset that believes in blocking everything Dems try to do and savaging Obama on a personal and political level.
If your philosophy is to vote against incumbents because they don’t live up to your ideals, you will always be voting no. Why not roll up your sleeves and get involved politically?
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.
Incumbency does make a difference because seniority brings additional clout for the politician and goodies for the district.
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.
^ Government should stay out of our lives. If you want to smoke pot, that is your choice. if you want to get an abortion that is your choice. If you want to give a speech on any subject that is your choice. If you want to write or publish that is your choice. If two people wish to get married that is their choice. if you want to send your children to a private school that is your choice. etc etc. Make government smaller and keep it out of our lives as much as possible.
The money I earn belongs to me not to the government. Having the government reduce taxes is not a GIFT to me. It is my money. The analogy often given is if a robber leaves you carfare that is not his gift to you.
If you really want to learn about libertarianism I personally have over 500 books on the subject. Our economists have won Nobel Prizes explaining our plan of action. Read don’t make up what you think is out there.
Works great for those who already have a leg up.
So work 18 hours a day like I did and get your own leg up.
Actually, the “average American” HAS a job. Roughly 90% of those who want a job HAVE a job.
Does it ever occur to any of you that some of us eventually get too old to work like we used to?
Since nobody is responding, I’ll continue my thoughts:
Cavemen had a totally libertarian society.
Animals in the wild also have a totally libertarian society. All they do is work, which consists of endlessly searching for food.
But babies can’t work; the infirm can’t work; the very old can’t work. Do we just abandon them to the vultures? No, that’s why we have a social contract. We give up some of the freedoms wild animals “enjoy” for the advantages of living in groups.
Political debate is an endless search for some kind of middle between too much group power over the individual and too little. Neither extreme is desirable or sustainable for very long.
^ You make the assumption that what you personally characterize as the best way for society is what everyone else –must– do.
What if someone rejects your idealized formula? Do you want to put a gun at our heads and say I know what is right and you must do it? That is exactly why our forefathers put all those government restrictions into our constitution.
You want to live by that formula- go ahead. I choose to live differently.
What “formula” is that? I’m talking about the broad sweep of history and civilization. Are you saying you want to live like Grizzly Adams? Should we just leave the weak to die? That fate awaits every one of us sooner or later, I’m afraid. Nature certainly doesn’t care.
I wouldn’t dream of putting a gun to your head – but if you want to live next door to me, I think I have a right to sit down with you and work out some mutually acceptable code of conduct. I won’t tread on you if you won’t tread on me. But if one of our houses catches fire, shouldn’t the other one offer to help?
Did the term “social contract” put you off and raise your hackles? Look it up. The idea comes from Rousseau, not Marx, and was a cornerstone of the Enlightenment principles to which our founders subscribed.
^ “but if you want to live next door to me, I think I have a right to sit down with you and work out some mutually acceptable code of conduct. ”
What happens if I don’t accept your code of conduct? My conduct is leave me alone and I will leave you alone.
If you are poor, ask your family to take care of you. I have my own family to take care of. If I, out of pure generosity, wish to help you, good for me,. But i reject government saying I should pay taxes to help you.
If I buy “fire insurance” than the department will put out the fire. if I choose not to pay that insurance they should stand around and let my house burn down.
Somehow I wouldn’t bring up the French revolution if you are trying to convince an opponent to change to your views.
“That government is best which governs least”
An aphorism sometimes attributed to either Thomas Jefferson or Thomas Paine, “That government is best which governs least”, actually was first found in this essay. Thoreau was paraphrasing the motto of The United States Magazine and Democratic Review: “The best government is that which governs least.”
Sounds to me like you’re an anarchist (or is it “autarchist”?) who’d prefer no government at all.
It’s not worth any effort on my part to convince you of anything. I’m explaining my position for a much larger audience. I expect we’d all stand around sharing some cold ones while your house incinerates.
YES!!!! Wait, the Presidency is a job? I thought it was a form of chronic masturbation, or so that’s how Diogenes compared men in power.