Comments (24) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   tpenna said, about 1 month ago

   Cheese ‘n rice, ANandy! There’s no politics involved in this one. This is an area where most conservatives, moderates, and liberals (if not necessarily libertarians) can come together in agreement. But you don’t want that, do you? Rather, you prefer to taunt from the sidelines like the immature child that you are. Grow up.

2. 

   Craig Linder said, about 1 month ago

   ANandy, a one trick pony. Easily dismissed, easily ignored. Which is more than s/he deserves.

3. 

   Craig Linder said, about 1 month ago

   On topic. I bicycle to work, and both drivers and cyclists are insane when it comes to cell phone use and texting. I’ve seen both groups do it, to their peril and mine. It should be outlawed with very steep penalties for any violation.

4. 

   DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

   For Jase who seldom looks back to previous days:

   Jase: You DID make tired stereotypic generalizations about Canadians, which is why I’m on your case. But, if you care to, I’ll give you a chance to redeem yourself. To review the bidding, you said:
   “I see (Canada and Europe) as expecting the US to constantly take the leadership in world issues.”

   I asked for an example of this; you couldn’t think of a single one.

   So, give me some examples or retract that statement

5. 

   ray32648 said, about 1 month ago

   Doing ANYTHING but DRIVING while driving ups that guy’s productivity.

6. 

   treered said, about 1 month ago

   let’s all chip in and set up anandy on twitter…..

7. 

   senorbullwinkle said, about 1 month ago

   Republicans have nothing to worry about when it comes to texting and driving, their illiterate. But driving is another story, they always turn right from the left hand lane, and are more like to have their right blinker on all the time.They refuse to follow the laws, saying, “It ain’t in the Constitution”.

8. 

   crunkbot said, about 1 month ago

   ANandy:

   Well, I feel great! Have for months, now.

   Do you have any positive relationships in your life? Have you always been a miserable, withered husk or is that a recent development?

9. 

   longtimecomicsfan said, about 1 month ago

   Um, let’s see…hope and change, hope and change.

   Oh yeah, now I remember -

   The stock market has stopped plummeting, and is back within striking distance of pre-recession levels. The market, having shook off all the panic selling, is getting back to trading on asset value.

   Home values have also stopped shrinking for the most part, and Americans have recovered a lot of ground in their 401Ks.

   The war in Iraq is winding down, and our military leaders are discussing options for Afghanistan without having to get fired for wanting more troops.

   Extraordinary renditions and secret CIA prisons have been shut down, and the terrorist recruitment poster at Gitmo is drawing to a close.

   Our international relationships are better than they’ve been in years (8, to be exact).

   And, the best part is, that only two years after Michael Moore’s “Sicko,” national health care is front and center on the public stage.

   Of course, everything’s not rosy - the right wing is having hissy fits every time the President of the United States succeeds at anything and yelling “failure” louder than ever. (Of course, they yelled “he’s trying to do too much” at first, but that didn’t stick, either.)

   Oh, and lest I forget - the right is up in arms about “Csars” in Washington. This is actually good news, because it means that a lot of SMART people have been appointed to areas in which they have expertise, unlike the previous “Heck of a job, Brownie” administration.

10. 

    wminfield said, about 1 month ago

    ^Obama has done all that? Back to the comic,I hope you don’t drive with those rose colored glasses because they might cloud your vision of what is going on in the road. That would be as dangerous as texting while driving.

11. 

    crunkbot said, about 1 month ago

    ^ Pretty much… what points of his do you dispute?

12. 

    NoFearPup said, about 1 month ago

    Bozotus drives the same way to the emergency room.

13. 

    big G 3469 said, about 1 month ago

    Aninny & ShakedownMutt LEAVE THE PREZ ALONE! THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HIM!!! DWI!!!

14. 

    Jase99 said, about 1 month ago

    No, Canuck. I will not retract my statement. What had the Europeans accomplished in Bosnia before the US got involved? Where was the peace agreement hammered out? Which nation is usually the mediator in the Israeli/Palestinian peace process? Aside from politicians condemning the mass killings in Darfur, who has done what about it? Even if the world doesn’t explicitly or consciously expect the US to take a leadership position, who will take on that role if the US doesn’t? Look at Rwanda. The US decided not to get involved. The UN played it’s usual powerless role, squabbling with the US over the price of transporting its “peacekeepers.” While the French did bring in troops, they seemed to have a habit of not reaching certain areas until after the pro-Anglo Tutsi were killed or expelled.

    I don’t know how many non-Americans use the term Leader of the Free World to describe the US President, but I do think it’s time that title be passed on – preferably to the UN if it could get it’s act together. The US has it’s own issues to solve.

15. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    Jase, you have made my point for me quite admirably. NO ONE but Americans describes the president as the leader of the Free World. NO ONE looks to America to “take the leadership” in world issues but Americans. Both are self-appointed roles, both are demonstrations of the hubris of American hegemony, and both are generally unacceptable to the rest of world. Unless it serves the purpose of a few dictators who need propping up with American guns. What you see as the self-proclaimed “sherrif” of the world, the rest of the world sees as the toughest gunslinger on the block. “Pass the title”? By all means. And quickly.

16. 

    NoFearPup said, about 1 month ago

    Jase99 - I remind you that Dr.Canuck is probably just a lonely whacko in a hut somewhere, fantasizing,,,

17. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    PoopyPuppy: you know dern well that I’m a tenured and published professor at a major university.

    But we know nothing of you. Do you have a job? An independent source of income? Still live with your parents? C’mon, reveal a little; everyone else does. Pretty please. You know you’re my favourite lunatic.

18. 

    longtimecomicsfan said, about 1 month ago

    As a matter of fact, the President has done all that.

    Bank bailouts, which are now being repaid, directly supported large banks, and prevented the collapse of the backbone of the international banking system, which would have been devastating.

    Stimulus funds, like “Cash for clunkers” have helped stabilize the stock markets by driving out the panic selling.

    Bank stabilization has also helped restore credit markets, which why home values have stopped plummeting.

    The secret CIA prisons where directly shut down by the President, and he is also shutting down Gitmo.

    Our President has returned us to the table with world leaders on climate change, energy, and economics.

    And the health care debate comes straight from the Oval Office.

    Not bad for 8 month’s work.

19. 

    deadheadzan said, about 1 month ago

    longtime, I certainly agree with you. I’m still really hoping for a public option in the health care bill and I’m looking for the creation of many, many new jobs.

20. 

    wminfield said, about 1 month ago

    Whenever a Republican complains about the bank bailouts or the stimulus the Democrats are always quick to point out that it was Bush who did that. How can they credit Obama now. It can’t be both ways. Banks are still very tight with their money, and not lending freely to get the economy moving, but they managed to get their bonuses.

    The stock market stabilized after the election & innauguration took some uncertainty out of the market. If anything the uncertainties of Obama possibly getting elected drove the market artificially low. Job losses keep climbing.

    Only a tiny % of the stimulus has been spent so it is hard to point to it as a fix for the economy. Most of the stimulus money will be spent near the 2010 elections, so we will have to see how much actually stimulates anything but politicians that need to get re elected. Cash for clunkers was a bandaid that did nothing for the economy (other than a small spike in sales and prolonging of auto industry troubles) because of free money given out to people who didn’t necessarily need it. See Sept Auto sales.

    Foreclosures have slowed and builders inventory of houses have been reduced. That has also had a big impact on home values leveling off or rising in some markets.

    Gitmo is not being shut down as far as we know now, and they don’t know what they are going to do with the detainees. It is tough to give the president credit when he hasn’t done anything but give the issue lip service. The CIA is being demoralized and diminished for political benefit of the admistration with the AG playing “bad cop” (to keep the extreme left happy) on the issue of prosecuting while the president plays “good cop”.

    I am not sure how our international relationships are that much better off, realistically. Constant bashing and apologizing for the US past is not really gaining much for us.

    If Health Care is in the forefront because of Michael Moore that is ridiculous. Health Care is in the forefront because we have a leftist president with a Democratic super majority and control of Congress. He feels the need to attack all of his agenda items before the 2010 elections with no regard for whether it will bankrupt the country or the middle class and poor. Michael Moore is a crackpot who got all of his wealth taking advantage of capitalism, then making a movie to denegrade capitalism.

    Many of the Czars have questionable pasts and associations and have not been vetted. They are there to circumvent the constitution to get his agenda items passed through as quickly as possible.

    I don’t believe that you can just blanketly give him credit for everything and anything that is remotely or potentially positive under the sun in 8 months as many would do. A lot of this would have turned around even if McCain had been elected. I was not a fan of Bush and I don’t blame everything on him or try to give him too much credit either. Congress needs to take more blame and credit for much of what happens in politics anyway, than most people give them.

21. 

    Jase99 said, about 1 month ago

    No, wminfield, the Bush Administration /started/ the bailouts. They gave the banks $700 billion with no strings attached. The banks pocketed it, handed out executive bonuses, and stuck their hand out for more. The Obama Administration administered bailouts with strings attached. His administration’s bank bailout was in the form of loans that had to be paid back and required the banks to follow certain rules until they paid the money back in full. There’s a big difference. I think Cash for Clunkers was more about getting inefficient cars off the road than it was stimulating the economy.

    Canuck, I recall seeing the term used on the BBC news website a couple of times during US Presidential election cycles. So when is the UN going to be ready to accept the title? Or the EU, or Canada, or who ever? /Someone/ has to fill the power vacuum. The sooner it happens the better we’ll both feel.

    Shakey, Canuck isn’t the one I’d consider a crack pot. He and I may disagree on a few things, but he does usually put some thought into his comments.

    BTW, I don’t think any of us here on these fora know much about each other than what we claim to be. I can say I’m a wealthy muscle bound blond god or an unemployed IT tech recently made homeless “borrowing” wireless internet access from the cafe across the street.

22. 

    DrCanuck said, about 1 month ago

    Jase, I really think that the UN would step forward to “fill the vacuum” once the US steps back and takes its place as a member of the community of nations rather than the self-styled leader. The UN has contributed to the lack of a world war for 60 years, and was rather successful in collaboratively stopping Korea and Saddam in Kuwait. It was Bush acting unilaterally and playing cowboy that diminished its stature. But that’s an empirical question; I could be wrong.

    The BBC said POTUS was the leader of the Free World? Well, Britain has a history of following the US (see Blair). Don’t think you’d see it too many other places.

    (And I’m a 6’2”, 230 pound Ironman Triathlete, in case anyone was wondering.)

23. 

    omQ R said, about 1 month ago

    ^ I have seen “leader of the free world” in the British press but usually in italics or quotes. It’s sarcasm.

    (and re tmi above: I wasn’t wondering but thanks all the same! :-| )

24. 

    senorbullwinkle said, about 1 month ago

    QUIXOTE, Now dont get mad, I’m just asking. I dont get your name, am I suppose to ? Is it personal, or something I just dont know about ? It looks like a math equation.
    If it’s a secret, forget I asked. Remember, I’m on your side, so dont beat me up too bad, please.

    I wonder if i’m the only one, or are there others who dont understand your name ?