Tom Toles by Tom Toles

Tom Toles

Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Gary McSpook

    Gary McSpook said, over 3 years ago

    Wow, nice to read something uplifting about our President. Too many nasty trolls out there, screaming hate and spewing half-truths and out-and-out lies.
    Thanks, Reflex-76, for the positive energy.

  2. zoidknight

    zoidknight said, over 3 years ago

    So you did not read the bill either did you?

  3. zoidknight

    zoidknight said, over 3 years ago

    @Gary McSpook

    Yes and most of those trolls are liberals and democrats, who like their Congress, did not read the bill.

  4. d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C's Release

    d_legendary1 Demands Dr.C's Release said, over 3 years ago


    Did you?

  5. echoraven

    echoraven said, over 3 years ago

    Hopefully and as far as Obama being the best president… a wee bit of wishful thinking. While the rich have benefited greatly from his presidency and those on the dole, the working poor and middle class have lost ground, the people that have to bear the brunt of his policies.

  6. dairyman23

    dairyman23 said, over 3 years ago


    Obama has nothing to do with corporations cutting wages and benefits and jobs. It’s just greedy CEOs.

  7. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, over 3 years ago

    Here’s very predictable result of Obamacare (unless you’re just dumb like Pelosi and Reid)—

    Total employment rose by 293,000 during April, but part-time jobs increased by 441,000. As a result, full-time jobs declined by 148,000.

    Yay! Despite the trillions of government spending by the Spendocrats, the economy is actually WORSE than 4 years ago. Good job!

  8. Wabbit

    Wabbit GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    The people who have pre-existing conditions and those that can’t afford insurance tend to feel different about it.

    The insurance offered will be lower than what the insurance monopoly is now

  9. Kris Jackson

    Kris Jackson said, over 3 years ago

    I’ve lived in Europe. There, nearly everyone is covered for nearly everything and they pay for it through their taxes … and they pay 7 or 8% of their income for it, unlike the 17% we pay here. They continuously marvel at the fact that people are fighting tooth and nail to not have health care in this country. They are puzzled that so many want to go back to the profit-centered model of the insurance companies controlling everything.
    Yes, it would be better if we had a public option, and we will at some point. But for the moment, Obamacare is a good step.

  10. Hawthorne

    Hawthorne said, over 3 years ago

    The GOP didn’t need to read it. It was a thinly disguised remake of Romney’s Massachusetts health care.

    In terms of affordability, it is no better than what we have. I looked into it earlier this year, when it was found that my cancer had recurred. With two ‘pre-existing conditions’, coverage would have cost me my entire SS income. Since that’s all I have, it was … impractical, shall we say.

    When it is fully implemented, there is again going to be a huge gap between what people can actually afford, and what the government says they can afford. They’ll voucher out the indigent, no doubt, but the rest of us have been thrown under the bus. Again.

    Obama wanted single payer coverage, which is certainly the economical way to go. Which means that would be the best thing for the country, as well as for the people. But the Right wouldn’t hear of it.

    So Romney’s turd is Obama’s fault. Massachusetts is far from representative of the entire country. RomneyCare isn’t what we needed.

  11. Hawthorne

    Hawthorne said, over 3 years ago


    Only because Congress has stonewalled every useful proposal he has made.

    The GOP has stated publicly and severally that it’s only goal is to see that Obama fails. That they are accomplishing very handily.

  12. seybernetx

    seybernetx GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Which raises an obvious question: If ObamaCare will be so great, why did they set it up to not take effect until after Obama’s re-election?

  13. Hawthorne

    Hawthorne said, over 3 years ago


    “Obama has nothing to do with corporations cutting wages and benefits and jobs. It’s just greedy CEOs.”

    Who have not been restrained from sending those jobs overseas by any administration since Reagan.

    Why do so many people think that Obama should have been able to turn forty years of bad administration around in four years? Or even eight years? This has not happened under Obama’s watch. No doubt it is continuing in a small way, but the fact is, there are not a lot of jobs left to be sent offshore. That has pretty much happened, and it seems the GOP has no interest in allowing those jobs to come back.

    The trouble is, it really does appear to be a game the public is not permitted to play in. The Dems seem marginally more interested in seeing the country and the economy on a more stable footing, but in the long term, I don’t think they are working for the people either.

    We really do need to reform the nomination process, all across the board, for all elected positions. As long as we are willing to elect Big Party candidates, we’ll never see anything improve. We need candidates who represent the working people, not corporate industry.

  14. Hawthorne

    Hawthorne said, over 3 years ago


    You didn’t notice that the policies which produced that result have been in place for twenty years at least?

    You can hardly blame Obama retroactively for the actions of the administrations which preceded him.

  15. Hawthorne

    Hawthorne said, over 3 years ago


    Not really. That’s what they’ve been selling, but I’ve seen it, seen the rates, and if you are over forty and actually need medical care, good luck with affording it. They can’t refuse to cover you under RomneyCare if you have pre-existing conditions, but they can price the coverage out of your reach, believe me. For young working people it may be marginally better, but it’s hard to see that as a ‘fix’ of any kind.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (4).