Ted Rall for December 03, 2009

scotty agrees with Rall? I should call Hell to ask them about the weather down there…

I just want to say that it’s a treasure to freely read all of Ted Rall’s cartoons, dating back to 1996. Thanks Ted, for the years of enjoyment!

We should take this the next logical step: take the leaders of companies who took TARP funds and then paid huge bonuses, and send them to Iraq and Afghanistan as cannon fodder!

It’s a waste of the time to pick on those who got paid (as they are so easily replaceable). What you need to do is send those who have been writing the checks and insisting there was no time to waste

Pretty hilarious, rikoshayrabbit, I mean it.

Been reading Scott too much already…the funny thing is, I’m almost certain he is a genius. Unfortunately, the higher one’s IQ, the more prone one is to developing a stronger ideological immunity. Scott hasn’t seriously considered the cascades of contrary evidence to his positions since high school, I’d wager. At least stop calling Mr. Obama “Osama.” It’s assinine. So their names are similar…since I am annoyed with you does that mean I should incessantly refer to you as “scat” or “skirt” or something else idiotic?

Anyway, funny cartoon, Mr. Rall!

However, a person who has taken the time to financially educate himself does not need a job–that’s the least financially intelligent way to get income.

just to be fair… the US is basically the most sophisticated economy in the world… hard to make new jobs… Afghanistan is probably the least sophisticated… it will be agriculture jobs, low level manufacturing, etc.

Wow, so much to say after just a few good posts. I’ll say I’m confused; I don’t remember seeing so many good comments on previous strips. ^^

Thank you for the welcome it’s good to be here. I’ve been skimming the comments of Mr. Rall’s strips for a couple weeks now, never making it into the “fray” at a relevant time.

When I realized that Mr. Rall was the person of influence I could consistently agree with, I made sure to look him up and see as much of his work as I could. Sure there are plenty of other figures who can make some sense but no one so consistently. Mr. Rall is the most valuable because he makes it his business to point out what most of us are missing and what should be obvious.

I can grant you that I am perhaps too generous to Scott, oldlegodad. I am because of what I suppose is my own version of the principle of charity. We can all point out how unreasonable he can be, but what strikes me is his abilities. Notice his word choice, sentence structure, his unique, scathing tone, and most of all his sheer cleverness in making an outrageous argument appear almost reasonable. The best example that comes to mind is when he spouts off against women. He makes some sense, but unfortunately, the argument remains fundamentally a sexist one. Scott may be a convoluted bitter man, but he is a rather skillful one at least. :] He is rather different from say Glenn Beck, who is the most childish and insane person I could imagine. Scotty is childish though, don’t get me wrong. The difference is that Glenn Beck is a monster with no redeeming qualities or even PRETENSE of intellectuality.

GringoRegio’s comment is worth mentioning. The work to be done in Afghanistan is vast and obvious as well.

rikoshayrabbit, your comment was just so terribly blunt, unengaging, and irreverent! (understatement) I’m glad you like my choices. I have yet to enjoy a book as much as I did Candide. What a giant of men Voltaire was.

linusbern’s assertion is invaluable. He reminds me why Republicans, instead of always arguing on ideology, are often sophists. Please forgive me for not providing much support here it is difficult because my head reels at how many instances of hypocrisy there are. Giuliani for instance cut the Obama administration down for giving terrorist defendants rights after he had praised W. for doing showing the world that we are a country of law through similar actions. Republicans argued against action in Kosovo and then for the opposing reasons supported Gulf II. What it comes down to, is that Republicans HATE charismatic democrats ESPECIALLY at a time when they have no good leaders. They will usually fight anything Mr. Obama does because he is the enemy. Nevermind that creating jobs would be “socialist.” If the president isn’t doing it then he is failing us. If he does do more, then he becomes an anti-American socialist.

Fighting the last war is never a good strategy. Even Vietnam, for all the insurgency employed, was a war for land. This is not.

In this type of war, many of the young soldiers involved in the insurgency are simply idle and available to be sucked in by the True Believers. Also, the people in the streets support them not ideologically but because they are local kids and the “cops” are from Over There – either foreigners or, for instance, Pashtuns. If the young men had jobs and if the foreigners and Pashtun were seen to be rebuilding communities and offering something more than “shut up and keep your hands where I can see them,” the war would end.

That’s how you fight an insurgent war, but it really doesn’t compute for all the chickenhawks who want to stage a D-Day or perhaps a Battle of the Bulge, because their daddies told them that’s how you win a war.

I’m beginning to wonder if I shouldn’t attempt to dissuade my youngest daughter from getting an MBA - a glued-on beard wouldn’t suit her delicate features at all, and I can’t see her handling a Kalashnikov ! Great cartoon, Ted - but not particularly encouraging !…

Henri