Register for a FREE GoComics account and get this plus any other comic strip delivered to your Personalized Comic Page, Daily. With a free account you will be able to build a Comic Page filled with the Comics you want to see each day.
With the largest collection of Comics and Editorial Cartoons online there is plenty to choose from. Upgrade to a Comic Genius account (Only $.99/Month) and have unlimited archive access to decades of comics.
Register for a FREE GoComics account and get this or any other comic strip daily emailed daily. Comics and Editorial Cartoons are updated everyday so there is always something new.
With a free account you will receive one comic from your Personalized Comic Page daily. Upgrade to a Comic Genius account (Only $.99/Month) and get all of your comics emailed daily plus receive unlimited archive access to decades of comics.
It doesn’t have to be climate change. We clearcut and poach the last of everything for profit; we pollute wantonly that which feeds us, even as we fight those (liberals) who demand cleaner air and water; we insist on keeping with our consumptive ways as if our “way of life” of overfishing, overpaving, overbreeding, etc can just go on and on. Righties sneer at current stimulus money to weatherize homes and business, as they call themselves conservative…
That’s what the cartoon represents to me. The trees are all gone, but we insist on harvesting the last bit of wood.
there are more trees being planted than cut and have been for some time….mistakes were made and are being corrected but not by the government, the Sierra club or green peace. they are being corrected by the forest INDUSTRY
It is not so easy in practice. It is possible in theory if a country “imported” a monarch from elsewhere, like the Eastern European countries did when they were formed in the 19th century. For example, George I of Greece was a scion of a Danish noble house.
I don’t think such imported monarchs would be able to claim their family’s lands, though - they were probably second or third sons. Otherwise you could have a mess like Greece claiming the territory of Denmark. There was iirc such a case between England and France in the middle ages, and I think people learned their lessons from there.
Mag, you’re probably right. The forest industry probably is more environmentally concerned than profit concerned. The environmentalists are the ones with the logging trucks, etc. Right.
Please remember that a crop of trees is not a forest. A watershed is public water, not a drainage ditch for deforested runoff. Oh, never mind. Go back to corporate sleep.
99.999999% of this planet is maximized for human consumption and profit, church. Why must you mine and grind up the last .0000000001% of the natural world that exists?
Environmentalists gave you unpaved spaces, air that’s not filled with acid rain, water that’s not filled with lead, arsenic and every poison that honorable corporations want to stir into your water supply to save money. Rivers that no longer catch fire. Non-farmed trout. Continued salmon harvests.
Environmentalists also gave you public beaches (in some areas), carved out of the hands of the moneyed robber barons who wanted to keep everyone else away from the shores that all of us own. They gave you state parks, national parks and places where your parents and grandparents took photos to remember forever: Old Faithful, the Grand Canyon, etc.
If non environmentalists had their way, these places would. not. exist. They would be mined, privately owned, destroyed and the profit gone now.
Industrialists gave us the railroads and the foundations of some huge philanthropies. They took the resources for these mighty endeavors from the FREE natural resources that they turned into money. But the railroads have had a tremendously positive impact on the advance of commerce in our nation, no?
Politicians gave us the laws and incentives to take advantage of the FREE natural resources we simply took from the native americans who were using it a lot differently than we. We wanted land. It was free for the taking. If those on it fought back, they were killed. Politicians have had a tremendous impact on the advance of the American Way, no?
Environmentalists get a bad rap from you, though. We are against all of it. That’s all you got to say.
EZDEB: Can you list a source for your information that 99.999999% of the planet is maximized for human consumption and profit? And while your at it, please supply the names of the individuals that would have privately owned, mined and destroyed the Grand Canyon and Old Faithful.
I have nothing against a sane environmental policy. I enjoy nature. But environazis would rather save a two-inch minnow than feed the people (and many of them are against people in general).
Admit it. If you look around you, you see things made of wood (environmentalists are against the lumber industry), plastics (made of evil oil), metals (they’re against exploiting the earth) and cars (the source of all evil). If it were up to them, we would all be living in hemp tents.
And please dispense with insults like “Simpleton. Judger. Hater.” It makes you look juvenile. And I’m sure it was you who posted – just today on Bennett– that you liked the thread because it didn’t have any name calling in it. I found that odd when I read it, because you call people names all the time. Try to practice what you preach.
church, ahem. You constantly command people to produce evidence that is already abundantly available on the internet.
Actually, I will amend my statement. Some parts of the world are vast and undeveloped. They are thus because it is commercially disadvantageous to develop them. The Sahara dunes, the mesas of Patagonia, vast lava lands, etc. So I will amend my assertion to read 99.99999999% of the land we give a sh*t about.
There, I feel better.
I’m not insulting you when I call you (actually, others much more than you) a judger, a hater and a simpleton. I would be insulting them if I called them, oh I don’t know, demoncrats, godless necropheliacs, mindless minions, gramma killers, etc.
I will stop saying “idiots” after noting idiotic rightie ideology based on absolutely nothing but hate. But if it’s hate that is posted, I will call you a hater. If you judge others without looking at yourself, I will call you a judger. If you constantly assert the simplistic proposition that you speak truth and others are blind, without regard to the contents of the posts, I will call you a simpleton.
You don’t like it, preacher? Come up with better words. Boy, I bet when you call somone a name, you just assume you are honest, forthright and believe in calling a spade a spade, right? Yawn.
Church: Several mining companies have gone after the Yellowstone country. Uranium mining WAS on the south rim of Grand Canyon, and current efforts are underway to restart mining operations there. Oil and gas development threatens nearly all western lands and waters, as “new” methods of exploration reap destruction.
Railroads received huge amounts of land to develop rail systems and run them in perpetuity. They sold off the surface, kept the mineral estate, and are now pulling up track, and becoming oil and “energy” companies. We should take back that mineral estate for the taxpayers, like well, you and me.
The lands not developed are simply so because no resources have been economically reachable, at the moment. Almost all federal land is already leased for oil development, much of it has only been marginally developed by the companies holding the leases. That includes the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, as they seek instead to develop the ANWR for the simple purpose of gaining access to other refuge lands further south, as well as withdrawn lands.(Which Reagan and Watt reduced to near nothing.) ANWR is a matter of changing law for access, not about the small amount of oil there.
Nixon signed NEPA, the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. Odd, that HE should be regarded as indeed, an “environmental President”, while Reagan, Bush 41(to a lessor degree) and Bush 43 (with a vengence) sought actively to destroy all he accomplished.
We desperately need to rebuild a sound environmental policy to repair the devastation Bush and Cheney left in their wake, and it must be based on sound management, and science, not profit margins for corporations …
Corosive Frog, try Philip II (Felipe II) of Spain (1527 - 1598), who, I presume, is the person in question here. Then Europe was not neatly divided up into countries as it is today (OK, «neatly» is a bit of an exaggeration), but into a bewildering plethora of principalities and territories, each with its own laws and customs. Thus the confusion of titles. Unlike his father, however, poor Philip never was elected Holy Roman Emperor, so he couldn’t insure that title….
Signe Wilkinson by Signe Wilkinson
Don Wright by Don Wright
Comments (14) Jump to Comments Form
oldlegodad
said,
about 1 month ago
I’ll bet a nickel to a doughnut that there really is a disposed “pretender” King Philippe. Europe is crawling with them
Gado is sharp as usual. Climate change or hoax, we do too much damage to ourselves.
ezdeb said, about 1 month ago
It doesn’t have to be climate change. We clearcut and poach the last of everything for profit; we pollute wantonly that which feeds us, even as we fight those (liberals) who demand cleaner air and water; we insist on keeping with our consumptive ways as if our “way of life” of overfishing, overpaving, overbreeding, etc can just go on and on. Righties sneer at current stimulus money to weatherize homes and business, as they call themselves conservative…
That’s what the cartoon represents to me. The trees are all gone, but we insist on harvesting the last bit of wood.
Magnaut
said,
about 1 month ago
there are more trees being planted than cut and have been for some time….mistakes were made and are being corrected but not by the government, the Sierra club or green peace. they are being corrected by the forest INDUSTRY
Sooky Rottweiler's ... said, about 1 month ago
can the sovereign of Holland be duke of a place in Belgium?
oldlegodad
said,
about 1 month ago
Ms Frog, Of course…its Europe!
4uk4ata said, about 1 month ago
It is not so easy in practice. It is possible in theory if a country “imported” a monarch from elsewhere, like the Eastern European countries did when they were formed in the 19th century. For example, George I of Greece was a scion of a Danish noble house.
I don’t think such imported monarchs would be able to claim their family’s lands, though - they were probably second or third sons. Otherwise you could have a mess like Greece claiming the territory of Denmark. There was iirc such a case between England and France in the middle ages, and I think people learned their lessons from there.
ezdeb said, about 1 month ago
Mag, you’re probably right. The forest industry probably is more environmentally concerned than profit concerned. The environmentalists are the ones with the logging trucks, etc. Right.
Please remember that a crop of trees is not a forest. A watershed is public water, not a drainage ditch for deforested runoff. Oh, never mind. Go back to corporate sleep.
churchillwasright said, about 1 month ago
If it isn’t grown, it’s mined. Look around you. Environmentalists are against all of it.
ezdeb said, about 1 month ago
99.999999% of this planet is maximized for human consumption and profit, church. Why must you mine and grind up the last .0000000001% of the natural world that exists?
Environmentalists gave you unpaved spaces, air that’s not filled with acid rain, water that’s not filled with lead, arsenic and every poison that honorable corporations want to stir into your water supply to save money. Rivers that no longer catch fire. Non-farmed trout. Continued salmon harvests.
Environmentalists also gave you public beaches (in some areas), carved out of the hands of the moneyed robber barons who wanted to keep everyone else away from the shores that all of us own. They gave you state parks, national parks and places where your parents and grandparents took photos to remember forever: Old Faithful, the Grand Canyon, etc.
If non environmentalists had their way, these places would. not. exist. They would be mined, privately owned, destroyed and the profit gone now.
Industrialists gave us the railroads and the foundations of some huge philanthropies. They took the resources for these mighty endeavors from the FREE natural resources that they turned into money. But the railroads have had a tremendously positive impact on the advance of commerce in our nation, no?
Politicians gave us the laws and incentives to take advantage of the FREE natural resources we simply took from the native americans who were using it a lot differently than we. We wanted land. It was free for the taking. If those on it fought back, they were killed. Politicians have had a tremendous impact on the advance of the American Way, no?
Environmentalists get a bad rap from you, though. We are against all of it. That’s all you got to say.
Simpleton. Judger. Hater.
churchillwasright said, about 1 month ago
EZDEB: Can you list a source for your information that 99.999999% of the planet is maximized for human consumption and profit? And while your at it, please supply the names of the individuals that would have privately owned, mined and destroyed the Grand Canyon and Old Faithful.
I have nothing against a sane environmental policy. I enjoy nature. But environazis would rather save a two-inch minnow than feed the people (and many of them are against people in general).
Admit it. If you look around you, you see things made of wood (environmentalists are against the lumber industry), plastics (made of evil oil), metals (they’re against exploiting the earth) and cars (the source of all evil). If it were up to them, we would all be living in hemp tents.
And please dispense with insults like “Simpleton. Judger. Hater.” It makes you look juvenile. And I’m sure it was you who posted – just today on Bennett– that you liked the thread because it didn’t have any name calling in it. I found that odd when I read it, because you call people names all the time. Try to practice what you preach.
ezdeb said, about 1 month ago
church, ahem. You constantly command people to produce evidence that is already abundantly available on the internet.
Actually, I will amend my statement. Some parts of the world are vast and undeveloped. They are thus because it is commercially disadvantageous to develop them. The Sahara dunes, the mesas of Patagonia, vast lava lands, etc. So I will amend my assertion to read 99.99999999% of the land we give a sh*t about.
There, I feel better.
I’m not insulting you when I call you (actually, others much more than you) a judger, a hater and a simpleton. I would be insulting them if I called them, oh I don’t know, demoncrats, godless necropheliacs, mindless minions, gramma killers, etc.
I will stop saying “idiots” after noting idiotic rightie ideology based on absolutely nothing but hate. But if it’s hate that is posted, I will call you a hater. If you judge others without looking at yourself, I will call you a judger. If you constantly assert the simplistic proposition that you speak truth and others are blind, without regard to the contents of the posts, I will call you a simpleton.
You don’t like it, preacher? Come up with better words. Boy, I bet when you call somone a name, you just assume you are honest, forthright and believe in calling a spade a spade, right? Yawn.
dtroutma said, about 1 month ago
Church: Several mining companies have gone after the Yellowstone country. Uranium mining WAS on the south rim of Grand Canyon, and current efforts are underway to restart mining operations there. Oil and gas development threatens nearly all western lands and waters, as “new” methods of exploration reap destruction.
Railroads received huge amounts of land to develop rail systems and run them in perpetuity. They sold off the surface, kept the mineral estate, and are now pulling up track, and becoming oil and “energy” companies. We should take back that mineral estate for the taxpayers, like well, you and me.
The lands not developed are simply so because no resources have been economically reachable, at the moment. Almost all federal land is already leased for oil development, much of it has only been marginally developed by the companies holding the leases. That includes the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska, as they seek instead to develop the ANWR for the simple purpose of gaining access to other refuge lands further south, as well as withdrawn lands.(Which Reagan and Watt reduced to near nothing.) ANWR is a matter of changing law for access, not about the small amount of oil there.
Nixon signed NEPA, the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. Odd, that HE should be regarded as indeed, an “environmental President”, while Reagan, Bush 41(to a lessor degree) and Bush 43 (with a vengence) sought actively to destroy all he accomplished.
We desperately need to rebuild a sound environmental policy to repair the devastation Bush and Cheney left in their wake, and it must be based on sound management, and science, not profit margins for corporations …
comYics
said,
about 1 month ago
Nice environmentalist cartoon, cutting down so many trees soon cuts down the world. Right on Gado!
M Henri Day said, about 1 month ago
Corosive Frog, try Philip II (Felipe II) of Spain (1527 - 1598), who, I presume, is the person in question here. Then Europe was not neatly divided up into countries as it is today (OK, «neatly» is a bit of an exaggeration), but into a bewildering plethora of principalities and territories, each with its own laws and customs. Thus the confusion of titles. Unlike his father, however, poor Philip never was elected Holy Roman Emperor, so he couldn’t insure that title….
Henri