The ACTUAL difference between liberals and conservatives on this issues is that Weiner was thrown out of office and now has lost all support for his mayoral race, Filner has lost all support, and Spitzer resigned. On the conservative side, John Ensign stayed in office until forced out for financial corruption, David Vitter is still in office, and Mr. Appalachian Trail was elected back into the house. More to the point, the war on women continues apace where it matters, in law and policy. If you want to keep your fantasy that “democrats make republicans look like rank amateurs,” don’t do the math, don’t look at any actual data, as you will only upset yourself.
Neither side has the market cornered on sexual scandal, and if you look at some of the information out there, the Republicans appear to have a slight lead.Wikipedia on Federal level political sexual scandalsThere’s links there to other pages for additional information for state and local scandals. Of course, how much actually goes unreported and do we never hear about?I think the best part of this cartoon is the focus of the “war on women.” The hypocrisy is amazing.
If you’re voting for values, you’ll be hard pressed to find a candidate on either side. Stop voting Republican and Democrat and giving these idiots a job. With only two parties, people tend to vote against a candidate as much a voting for their candidate. Throw a few more parties into the mix with equal funding, and the competition will force each party to only put forth the best candidate, not just the one with the money.
We already have 2 parties doing the biddings of the megarich. Do you honestly believe that Democrats and Republicans are not being controlled by corporations and billionaires? Adding more parties will create a buyers market not for the rich, but for the people as well. Yes the megarich will still buy candidates, but now they will have to divide up themselves instead of only having to worry about 2 sides of the political spectrum. Right now it is too easy for them. Let’s make them work for their control.
RV -Let me tell you why I supported Angus King for senate.During the campaign, both the Democrats and Republicans ran ads against him, not each other. The Democrats said he was to far right and pro business, and the Republicans said he was too far left and anti business. That’s how I knew he was the right choice – the billionaires on both sides put their efforts into defeating him because they weren’t sure who would control him. It didn’t work – he won the senate seat. Now I’m still hearing the same from both sides, which means he must be doing a good job.
Thanks, RV.While I don’t disagree that this could happen, I think that the finance reform would also help prevent it from happening. There is a reason there are 2 independent senators from New England – nobody cares about us up here outside of Massachusetts. The billionaires invested money in the two major parties, not the third party, and it didn’t work – they both won in spite of that money. This is significant because it was the senate – Maine may have a fraction of New York or California’s population, but the senator has the same clout regardless of the state. So while Murdoch or Soros are busy grooming candidates in New York, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, or Texas, they leave Maine, New Hampshire, the Dakotas, Utah, etc. alone. These states with smaller populations are more likely to vote for a candidate they know, who grew up there, and who perhaps served successfully in lower offices. While the House is determined by population, the Senate is not. As I said before, right now the billionaires only have to watch 2 parties, which is why nothing ever gets done. Money controls both of them. Third party candidates become rogue elements, able to vote their conscience or for their constituency instead of a party line. Right now, you are choosing which billionaire interest group to vote for. Allow more parties and people will vote for what best suits them. Yes, some will be funded, but there will be plenty more rogues out there who will win and will have an equal voice against the billionaires. We do not have that option with a 2 party system.
ARodney almost 11 years ago
The ACTUAL difference between liberals and conservatives on this issues is that Weiner was thrown out of office and now has lost all support for his mayoral race, Filner has lost all support, and Spitzer resigned. On the conservative side, John Ensign stayed in office until forced out for financial corruption, David Vitter is still in office, and Mr. Appalachian Trail was elected back into the house. More to the point, the war on women continues apace where it matters, in law and policy. If you want to keep your fantasy that “democrats make republicans look like rank amateurs,” don’t do the math, don’t look at any actual data, as you will only upset yourself.
dpbriley almost 11 years ago
Neither side has the market cornered on sexual scandal, and if you look at some of the information out there, the Republicans appear to have a slight lead.Wikipedia on Federal level political sexual scandalsThere’s links there to other pages for additional information for state and local scandals. Of course, how much actually goes unreported and do we never hear about?I think the best part of this cartoon is the focus of the “war on women.” The hypocrisy is amazing.
Fourcrows almost 11 years ago
If you’re voting for values, you’ll be hard pressed to find a candidate on either side. Stop voting Republican and Democrat and giving these idiots a job. With only two parties, people tend to vote against a candidate as much a voting for their candidate. Throw a few more parties into the mix with equal funding, and the competition will force each party to only put forth the best candidate, not just the one with the money.
d_legendary1 almost 11 years ago
Being a pervert is one thing. Writing legislation to control what happens inside a woman’s body is another. Both are wrong.
Fourcrows almost 11 years ago
We already have 2 parties doing the biddings of the megarich. Do you honestly believe that Democrats and Republicans are not being controlled by corporations and billionaires? Adding more parties will create a buyers market not for the rich, but for the people as well. Yes the megarich will still buy candidates, but now they will have to divide up themselves instead of only having to worry about 2 sides of the political spectrum. Right now it is too easy for them. Let’s make them work for their control.
Fourcrows almost 11 years ago
RV -Let me tell you why I supported Angus King for senate.During the campaign, both the Democrats and Republicans ran ads against him, not each other. The Democrats said he was to far right and pro business, and the Republicans said he was too far left and anti business. That’s how I knew he was the right choice – the billionaires on both sides put their efforts into defeating him because they weren’t sure who would control him. It didn’t work – he won the senate seat. Now I’m still hearing the same from both sides, which means he must be doing a good job.
Fourcrows over 10 years ago
Thanks, RV.While I don’t disagree that this could happen, I think that the finance reform would also help prevent it from happening. There is a reason there are 2 independent senators from New England – nobody cares about us up here outside of Massachusetts. The billionaires invested money in the two major parties, not the third party, and it didn’t work – they both won in spite of that money. This is significant because it was the senate – Maine may have a fraction of New York or California’s population, but the senator has the same clout regardless of the state. So while Murdoch or Soros are busy grooming candidates in New York, Florida, Illinois, Ohio, or Texas, they leave Maine, New Hampshire, the Dakotas, Utah, etc. alone. These states with smaller populations are more likely to vote for a candidate they know, who grew up there, and who perhaps served successfully in lower offices. While the House is determined by population, the Senate is not. As I said before, right now the billionaires only have to watch 2 parties, which is why nothing ever gets done. Money controls both of them. Third party candidates become rogue elements, able to vote their conscience or for their constituency instead of a party line. Right now, you are choosing which billionaire interest group to vote for. Allow more parties and people will vote for what best suits them. Yes, some will be funded, but there will be plenty more rogues out there who will win and will have an equal voice against the billionaires. We do not have that option with a 2 party system.
Michael Peterson Premium Member over 10 years ago
Another conservative obsessed with fallaces.