Advertisement
Advertisement

Ted Rall for January 27, 2010

  1. Missing large
    Gangsteroflove  over 11 years ago

    Too bad all politicians are criminals and do not have the best interests of their constituents in mind.

     •  Reply
  2. 80x80 cartoon0144 55lwwwustftoczzcecr3q
    tracht47  over 11 years ago

    Fortunately for Democrats, Republications seemed determined to eat their own. They seem to think that there is no such thing as being too conservative. Look what happened in the 23rd congressional district in New York. In Florida they are going after Charlie Chris and in Arizona that idiot former congressman is taking on John McCain. They could very easily make it more difficult for the GOP to make bigger gains in congress. They seem to be saying that moderates and moderate conservatives are no longer welcome in the Republican party.

     •  Reply
  3. New bitmap image
    NoFearPup  over 11 years ago

    What is a “moderate”? Do they vote?

     •  Reply
  4. 8863814b f9b6 46ec 9f21 294d3e529c09
    mattro65  over 11 years ago

    scott, the keyboard warrior. You are an immature, close-minded jerk. Grow up, little boy!

     •  Reply
  5. 300px debs campaign
    BoxCar66  over 11 years ago

    The Radicals on both sides are wrong. Most Americans tend to be closer to the middle of the pile. So why do we let the far right or the far left run things? Beats me.

     •  Reply
  6. Grimace
    Lt_Lanier  over 11 years ago

    …all staffed by young college liberal Republicans, RINOS, that have graduated and are now unemployed.

     •  Reply
  7. Reagan ears
    d_legendary1  over 11 years ago

    <==========That’s what bubble economics does Captain Jay.By the way you’re welcome.

     •  Reply
  8. Missing large
    AJLCAB  over 11 years ago

    McCain may be in trouble with the fringe in the republican party. His re-action to the latest Supreme Court ruling about corporations and campaign finance may lose him his seat in AZ. He may push for a re-writing of the campaign finance bill he sponsored a while back and that would put him at odds with those candidates that are running against key democrats in 2010 and are looking for corporate donations to help them out. But then again, if the religious right and other such groups are correct, the world will be ending in 2010 anyway. So the makeup of congress will be irrelevant.

     •  Reply
  9. Cheetah crop 2
    benbrilling  over 11 years ago

    The cartoon appears to be referring to unskilled jobs that have no intellectual requirements. If you can talk loud without thinking, you’re hired.

     •  Reply
  10. Missing large
    Magnaut  over 11 years ago

    too bad that we don’t have the parliamentary option of a ‘non-confidence motion”

     •  Reply
  11. Missing large
    jaxaction  over 11 years ago

    this is abt correct, TED! as one who has run races….at least the gop pays and runs professional races, they pay. sadly, the dems do NOT pay(other than the common”you get the anti smoking ads if i win”.) dems run races like jr high, and do not fight. See the “beautiful loser wing” of MA. msclinton/algore. all brown had to say: “i drive a truck” and these losers folded, after taking the $$ and paying the TV.

    Magnaut; if the face of these ukingtedstates is not ugly enuff, then you can live in royal countries, brits, iraq, saudi, kwuait, and love the royals and their forms of gov…designed to hide the Royal interests…of course this is the very SAME view held by john Mc Cain, a brutish form of government, typical for GOP tories.

     •  Reply
  12. Grimace
    Lt_Lanier  over 11 years ago

    The President, like Satan, will fall through force of “gravity”, for never was there a more dour angel.

     •  Reply
  13. Grimace
    Lt_Lanier  over 11 years ago

    @dlegendary_1: The same bubble which inflated under Carter as the CRA initiatives, offering help to low-income families trying to finance a home, the same bubble, over a decade later, that Clinton utilized Reno’s Justice Dept. to uphold as part of his “civil rights” policies, this time as sub-prime mortgages, and the very same has come to a head and burst under Bush and Obama, both of whom beckon to Wall Street (I see no difference in either President). Bush had a heart of a gallon capacity, and his head held scarecly a pint; Obama, on the other hand, has a head, yet lacks a heart (no passion).

     •  Reply
  14. Wombat wideweb  470x276 0
    4uk4ata  over 11 years ago

    Scott, no one is saying that the 9/11 terrorists were all heart, either - but don’t let it stop you. And what did the dead Iraqis have to do with 9/11? They didn’t get on those planes. They didn’t pay for it. No one freaking asked them. They just died because Bush played geopolitics and didn’t do it right.

    The people who did were mostly Saudis. Yet they didn’t get invaded. Their king (a conservative despot, mind you) didn’t get ousted. No statues were toppled there. That is what Saudi Arabia got (warning, graphic image): http://aleksandrakristina.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/bush-kiss.jpg

    Jay, I disagree with Bush having a big heart. He knew how to fake it, more like. And if you mean that Obama doesn’t have passion, I can agree with you to a point - he has been very lukewarm about pushing the agenda that got him elected. Clinton might (note the “might) have been too hands-on in pushing his healthcare reform, Obama seems to be too disinterested.

     •  Reply
  15. Wombat wideweb  470x276 0
    4uk4ata  over 11 years ago

    “Don’t pretend to give a turd about dead Iraquis. Saddam Hussein had been mass-slaughtering, and torturing, and brutalizing, and raping, Iraquis (and various others, like Kurds) for DECADES. Bush’s actions drove Hussein out of power and caused Hussein to later suffer the same fate he so often handed out to others: an ugly, undignified death. ”

    Oh yeah, as if Bush did it for the Iraqis. Please, that excuse was only invented when no one found any WMDs and it became obvious the occupation would not pay for itself, and there needed to be some reason why the US did it.

    The US and the coalition attacked Iraq and ousted Saddam, sure. That doesn’t make those that died after it any less dead because the planners of the war wanted to do it on the cheap and couldn’t be bothered actually providing for adequate security in the post-Saddam vacuum. The invading country is responsible for the war; the victor has responsibility for what happens in the territory he occupies. This responsibility lies with the US and the countries that stood with it. Long before insurgents became an actual threat to the US soldiers, looters and murderers troubled the people of Iraq.

    And scott, I really doubt most of the “Lefties” here despise Christianity - I certainly do not. I respect it, a lot, for what the actions of many good people throughout the ages and the moral principles it teaches. That is exactly why it sickens me to see what some people are doing with it, twisting and turning it to see their ambitions of power fulfilled. I just don’t see what you propose as morality as the religion that I respect.

     •  Reply
  16. Raccoon1
    sirrom567  over 11 years ago

    All of us non-Christians are deeply relieved that we won’t have to endure eternal life in the company of lunatics.

     •  Reply
  17. Avatarmess03
    audieholland  over 11 years ago

    Most of the American X-ians go to hell anyway. At least, if they truly believe what they preach.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment
Advertisement

More From Ted Rall

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement