Mike Luckovich

By RW-(the original)

December 15, 2005 10:24 PM | Link to this

ml, thinks President Bush is David Blaine?

By Scooter

December 15, 2005 10:29 PM | Link to this

Luckovich has limited creative abilities. Is this some sort of implication that the media wants to tell the president what to do. Of course the media gives the people the information to think about and the politicians should react.

Leaders do what They feel is right not what liberal intelligencia tells them to. Let the blogging begin, GO!

By whynot

December 15, 2005 10:31 PM | Link to this

Um… I’m pretty sure that’s an advisor not a reporter

By RW-(the original)

December 15, 2005 10:33 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

Thanks for clearing that up. A two panel cartoon is quite a stretch for ml, apparently a bubble is too. I wonder what an ice block would look like?

By Scooter

December 15, 2005 10:35 PM | Link to this

Geesuz, See the end of the last toon blog.

By RW-(the original)

December 15, 2005 10:38 PM | Link to this

Scooter,

Geezur left this for you over there

By whynot

December 15, 2005 10:40 PM | Link to this

Scooter, yeah this had nothing to do with the media… good job

By Dusty

December 15, 2005 10:43 PM | Link to this

RW,

You probably read Maureen Dowd’s piece on Bush in a Bubble. Atleast she knows a bubble is round.

By whynot

December 15, 2005 10:46 PM | Link to this

gee it couldn’t be a metaphorical bubble could it?

By RW-(the original)

December 15, 2005 10:47 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

In Maureen Dowd’s column she says Mothra was a hawk that strongly supported both Iraq wars.

Who is it in a bubble again?

By whynot

December 15, 2005 10:50 PM | Link to this

“A globular body of air or gas formed within a liquid”-dictionary.com

nothing about biegn round there

By getalife

December 15, 2005 10:54 PM | Link to this

“I’m looking forward to something funny to happen,” he said. “Maybe Kerry in the bubble-boy suit.”

By Semper Fi

December 15, 2005 10:57 PM | Link to this

Wow.. just got finished reading post from previous toon. Continue to be proud of Andy, RW and Dusty for fighting the fight. Also have to add Carol. She was great. Getalife is getting along. IRA and DR R are either lions in sheeps clothing or just need some enlightening.

From my view, I don’t see how you can be a Christian and vote democrat, since you should only be considering moral issues. Also, don’t see how you can be a Christian and not realize the ACLU is the moth slowing eating way the moral fiber of the country, mainly by trying to eliminate Christianity influence on society.

Where is Ricky and Buff. They were missed..

By Dusty

December 15, 2005 10:58 PM | Link to this

whynot, did you ever blow square bubbles?

By whynot

December 15, 2005 11:03 PM | Link to this

Dusty, ha good point

Semper Fi, hey I think I attended the same brainwashing Catholic school as you unfortunetly unlike you I actually have independent thoughts about my country that differ from some old guy in Italy ranting about babies he will never have and never have to take care off but of course he speaks from expierience. JOIN THE VATICANS ARMY

By Semper Fi

December 15, 2005 11:14 PM | Link to this

Whynot, you just confused hell out me. Your independent thought about attending the same Catholic school as me, is wrong, I never went to a Catholic school and am not Catholic. Independent thoughts??? OK. Anyhow, this proud member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy has got to go to bed, there are people on welfare depending on me going to work and supporting them tomorrow. You??

By whynot

December 15, 2005 11:19 PM | Link to this

Semper Fi Yes and thats how I have a computer, wellfare. In the future I will try to dumb down my coments for you, oh and if you have a marine slogan as a name shouldn’t you be in the army and not at a job? indepedent thoughts aren’t the ones they hand out in church on how to vote they come from your own brain (you should try using it) good night

By RW-(the original)

December 15, 2005 11:19 PM | Link to this

Semper Fi,

I was surprised not to see Ricky, but buff hasn’t been around much lately.

Dusty, when the welcome mat wasn’t picked up I was a little suspicious, too.

By rushncap

December 15, 2005 11:37 PM | Link to this

You don’t see a lot of things, Semper. Fortunately, that just means you need better glasses. For instance, Jesus’ greatest commandment (after loving god) was to treat your neighbors the way you want to be treated. Democrats, by and large, keep to that one far far better than Republicans.

By whynot

December 15, 2005 11:41 PM | Link to this

Hey rushncap, some people like abuse(cough Semper)

Im not dem (or repub) but Im definatly with you on this one

By Greg

December 16, 2005 12:04 AM | Link to this

I am beginning to think it is the Demacratic party that is in the bubble looking out and they think that clear wall is actually around the president.

By Marion of Texas

December 16, 2005 12:07 AM | Link to this

Another great cartoon, Mike Luckovich! You are definitely my favorite editorial cartoonist. Bush has a small and select group of sycophants who give him limited information. Karl Rove unfortunately is the one calling the shots. (Boy, I wish he would be indicted!)

By mikesux

December 16, 2005 12:21 AM | Link to this

It is Mike and the rest of the elitists at th AJC who are living in a bubble.

Mike hypocrisy is laughable.

By rushncap

December 16, 2005 12:27 AM | Link to this

What exactly is an “elitist”, mikesux? How do you define it?

By mikesux

December 16, 2005 12:48 AM | Link to this

Well, in the case of the elitists at the AJC, it is defined as arrogant folks who believe themselves to be of superior intellect, thus giving them the privledge to criticize any and all who disagree with their narrow view of the world as being stupid or evil.

A good example is Jay Bookman’s article claiming that no one really wants 2 acres of land and a four bedroom house. Instead, Bookman claims that all of us dummies are being tricked by developers.

By mikesux

December 16, 2005 12:54 AM | Link to this

rushncap -

I love to see Democrats make statements that they are more Christlike than Republicans. I am sure that you are one of the liberal hypocrites who claim that Republicans claim to be more moral.

Thanks for demonstrating once again that the core of liberal though is HYPOCRISY.

Nighty night,oh Christ-like one. LOL.

By Semper Fi

December 16, 2005 01:00 AM | Link to this

Well, I couldn’t sleep. Rushncap, I am a Repbulican. I cut my neighbors grass 5-10 times a year, I have built 7-8 Habitat houses, Am the handyman for our church and several widows, work with scouts, stopped counting gallons of blood to the Red Cross 20 years ago, Played Santa Claus for the kide last night. Not that I am a saint mind you. there is only so much time.

Jesus sent the disciples out with their tools to earn their food, saying if you don’ work, you don’t eat. Republicans will take better care of the needy. We would distingish the needy from the lazy. We would help the needy and give opportunity to the lazy. Right now, we have 3rd generation of able bodied men and women on welfare. I think Jesus would take this as stealing the hope and diginity from a lot of his creatures. If we stopped supporting the lazy, we could take care of millions more needy folks in the world. What we are doing now is diverting help from a lot of needy folks in the world, and thinking we’re doing good. My parents worked 40-50 hours each in a cotton mill and our standard of living was a lot worse than what we are freely providing a lot of lazy people. My folks were proud. I don’t see much pride from the projects.I do see a lot of democrat votes from there.

Now I am going back to bed..

By Semper Fi

December 16, 2005 01:13 AM | Link to this

Getalife - and by the way, I did give a few hundred bucks for Katrina victims, although i couldn’t say I was a cheerful giver after seeing the behavior of some of the democratic base after the storm.

By Tex

December 16, 2005 01:21 AM | Link to this

Another good one, Michael. It’s great to see them exposing this alcoholic rodent again and again. The more he babbles his lies and inanities the more he reveals layer after layer of culpably human ignorance and stupidity. His mind is deeply disturbed - like those who annointed him Fuhrer. Bush is not just a gross embarrassment to watch/hear, he’s an embarrassment to the nation. If not to mankind itself. Hey! But we have another huge Bush victory in Iraq and moving with lightening speed thru other countries. How about some more gigantic Bush Iraq victory parades?? Bring em on!! Let’s celebrate just like we did for Bailout Bush.

By Clem

December 16, 2005 01:27 AM | Link to this

Semper Fi. You’re a pathetic self-deceiving joke. Badly named at that. The usual self aggrandizing garbage and lies. Nothing new there. Who or what could possibly take you seriously. Check yourself into a mental ward.

By Fred

December 16, 2005 02:47 AM | Link to this

I’m not a supporter of President Bush but just damn. His numbers are UP. According to Lookie and the rest of the leftist media the ONLY two days anyone has liked him and his “numbers” were higher than a leftists IQ were the two election days………

By rushncap

December 16, 2005 03:12 AM | Link to this

So we criticize because we’re “elitist”. Fine. Why do YOU criticize, then? What’s your excuse?

And, yes, Democrats are, on average, more Christ-like than Republicans. Not by their words but by their actions. And, for the record, I never claimed to be Christ-like, nor do I have any desire to be. I’m not a Christian, and have no more desire to be Christ-like than you have to be Muhammed-like or Buddha.

By rushncap

December 16, 2005 03:20 AM | Link to this

Semper, have you ever lived in a project? I don’t imagine it would be easy to be proud of a place where the only way you can see to make money is by selling crack. My parents have worked just as hard as yours, that does not mean that everyone has the same opportunities as us. You were lucky. So was I. A black kid growing up without a dad, with a crack-addicted mom, going to a school which is more dangerous than a bad neighbourhood in Tikrit, with no opportunities for a decent job, a decent education or even decent food I would consider slightly less lucky. I work my a* off, but every day I remember that I’m lucky to even have that chance.

By candide

December 16, 2005 05:54 AM | Link to this

It doesn’t matter whether Bush gets out. Intellectually speaking he is autistic, without any reactions to people or problems. He is a walking zombie. A drink would do him good. His crazy evangelical beliefs also insulate him from reality — a walking Christian zombie.

By Objective Observer

December 16, 2005 05:56 AM | Link to this

R.W.-Dusty-Getalife: Just caught up on yesterday’s remnants. Checked out Getalife’s link ironic Is ml using the talent and controversy on this site to further himself?

Think about it. Previous day’s topic appears in next day’s cartoon and so on and so on and so…….Now there is a conspiracy theory I can sink my teeth into.

“Roll me over, in the clover, roll me over, do it again” (no musical notes on keyboard). “ml’s blog site hard to find” maybe not anymore! You guys are just kidding about the BD/LW thing right???

By Objective Observer

December 16, 2005 06:24 AM | Link to this

Candide: Good morning! There is something about you that I just cannot resist. I spent nine years working with children with autism. Amazing little people. Insight which is hidden from the world. My previous minister and I have enjoyed a drink or two on occasion. At least concede that some of “the faithful” can be approached with reason. Come on Candide…not looking to snatch your soul just asking you to open your mind.

Is Pope Benedict really a friend?

By keeping it REAL

December 16, 2005 06:25 AM | Link to this

I have faith he and his crew tell a lot’s of lie’s. They used people of faith in his lie’s. He and our nation will reap what we sowed

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 06:54 AM | Link to this

It looks like cartoon boy and ABC built themselves a little block of ice-

ABC News- Bush’s Approval Up, but Disagreement Why President’s Speeches on Iraq Followed by Boost in Poll Numbers, but Some Disagree Over the Cause

Merry Christmas!

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 06:58 AM | Link to this

Let me see if I remember this right, in pinko speak an arrow pointed down really means up-

C B.S. News Poll- Poll: Bush’s Ratings Bump Up

Merry Christmas!

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 07:04 AM | Link to this

Well, well, look at the front page of the litter box liner, “Judge skeptical,” and read through to the very last paragraph. There’s your ACLU for ya, ever vigilent anti American pinko blood suckers that they are. Calling evolution a theory is an endorsement of religion?

But it’s no big deal, right?

Merry Christmas!

By Ugotme?

December 16, 2005 07:12 AM | Link to this

Andy: Another day! Onward & “UPWARD”, the latter being key. Good luck today. Off to work.

By candide

December 16, 2005 07:27 AM | Link to this

Objective Observer: Glad you and your minister drink together on occasion. When you’ve had a few and get real with one another, does he ever let on that he isn’t sure all that Christian stuff he preaches is really true? Christians like the biblical phrase: when two or three are gathered together there I am. Why? Because they need one another to reinforce their faith, knowing that if someone else believes or says he believes the nonsense they claim to believe, well maybe it’s true. This is called Christian fellowship: the blind leading the blind.

Pope Benedict? The only good pope was John XXIII. The rest are fools or knaves or both.

By candide

December 16, 2005 07:32 AM | Link to this

Tex: you are right about Bush. How did he ever get elected? Well, even I voted for him the first time, before I got religion (heh, heh.) The American public can easily be hoodwinked.

But we have had bad presidents before. Bush is unusual in that he is cut off from every human contact that is not a toadie to him. Even his father he avoids. Not that his father was so great. The Bush clan shows over the generations genetic degeneracy caused by too much WASP inbreeding. And the addition of Mother Barbara, who despite her sharp tongue is a certified moron, well she couldn’t have done the Bush gene pool much good. Look at Marvin and Jeb.

We need to run that moron out of the White Haus.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 07:34 AM | Link to this

Candide: Apparently, the verse you quote must be the Truth. Look around at all of the other nations of the world and compare how much better the United States is. The Lord loves us!

Merry Christmas!

By candide

December 16, 2005 07:41 AM | Link to this

Andy: the Lord is about to take us down. Yahweh is a capricious God and does not like all this pious nonsense. Look what he allowed to happen to the Israelites of old and the Jews of the modern age. He will not be any easier on the damned Americans.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 07:48 AM | Link to this

Candide: Yep, and our economy is going into a depression, we’re going to lose in Iraq, global warming will flood Florida and burn the rest of us to death, the bird flu is the end of the western civilization, blah, blah, blah. Do you kooks have a conspiracy dartboard to help you decide which swamp to wade off into?

Merry Christmas!

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 08:09 AM | Link to this

I thought this was a quagmire; that our Army was bogged down and broken? Do pinkos ever get it right?-

Iraqis send Jack Murtha and Howard Dean a message; Go To Hell

Voter turnout was reportedly high across nearly all regions of the country, including such former no-go zones as Fallujah and Tal Afar in the Sunni Triangle. Terrorists managed only scattered attacks, far fewer than in the first round of elections in January.

Merry Christmas!

By candide

December 16, 2005 08:18 AM | Link to this

Andy, and all other Fascists: Within six months Iraq will fall apart in civil war. The economy here will go ok but Republican tax cuts for the rich and program cuts for the poor will get nowhere. Bush will go from one lying speech to another until the country finally sees what they have put in charge of this dying nation. We will have to put a lot of Republicans in jail before we can dig ourselves out of the muck.

Happy Kwanza, y’all. Happy Feast of unwed mothers, know as Christmas. Happy Hanukah, you hebejebes. Happy Winter Solstice, shortest day of the year. May the spirits be with you: Gray Goose Vodka, especially.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 08:23 AM | Link to this

I couldn’t have said it better myself:

NY Sun- It’s like the anti-Bush left chewed some giant wad of Bazooka and blew the biggest bubble every blown. Senator Clinton, Maureen Dowd, Rabbi Yoffie, Newsweek are but a few of the many who just can’t see their own isolation from mainstream American reality and values. They just keep mis-underestimating Mr. Bush. That is why the party that represents them, the Democrats, holds but a minority in the House and the Senate and has lately failed to gain the presidency. It’s hard to win elections from inside a bubble.

Merry Christmas!

By Abby Normal

December 16, 2005 08:49 AM | Link to this

Republicans truly have the naiveté of 6-year-olds. Only they would be dumb enough to still support Bush through all his robber-baron administration’s blunders and theft from the American taxpayers.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 09:12 AM | Link to this

Whats so funny about Lucko is that yesterday Iraq conducting hugely successful elections with a great deal of Sunni participation. These are probably some of the most important elections we have seen in the last decade and nobody wants to give the President any credit at all. Yes huge mistakes have been made in Iraq but the situation is getting better. The President has finally realized he needs to get out and talk to the American public and look what happens, his poll numbers go up and Dems are back on the defensive. Dems always talk about being the champion of the little guy and yet not many of them are praising the elections. It just goes to show it is all about politics.

By cynic

December 16, 2005 09:17 AM | Link to this

No, they aren’t naive. They choose to be willfully stupid, emotionally stunted, psychically ugly and mean to the core.

They are an expression of everything that is vile, dark and compassionless in the human soul. There may have been a time when they were less ideological, but it has passed into a Party Against People.

As well as being lost in a past that didn’t exist, they lack the perspicacity to see into the future they are makeing for themselves but it’s a choice similar to the one the Germans made embracing Hitler.

Bush is just a personification of his supporters rejection of intellect, enlightenment and their preference for the worship of money. They are for the most part liars and cowards.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 09:25 AM | Link to this

cynic: That’s very good, you are able to see through the grand scheme of the Conservatives to the underlying shop of horrors they have in store for us. Most people would have been fooled by the constant talk of freedom and prosperity; tricked into believing all of the good things happening to the United States, like the evil bull stock market, the rising growth rates, freedom in the Middle East. You should be commended on your exceptional vision.

Merry Christmas!

By Eric

December 16, 2005 09:29 AM | Link to this

Not a single word from you Bush supporters is worth a response. God, you’re Dumb!

By Wilma Lamb

December 16, 2005 09:29 AM | Link to this

I don’t care what they say about you, I love your cartoons and signed up for the AJC emails just to get your cartoons. Up here in dear old flat-earth Kansas they are as narrow minded as the Inquisition I like to twist their tails

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 09:30 AM | Link to this

Just reading most of the posts that slam conservatives and Bush, there is never much substance just ranting about how evil conservatives are and how terrible everything is when they are in power. And Dems wonder why they don’t win elections anymore, it because they don’t bring ideas to the table.

By getitright

December 16, 2005 09:33 AM | Link to this

Once again, Mikey got his marching orders from the MSM Command Center on what to draw. Too bad he couldn’t think for himself and make some positive statement about the voting in Iraq. You remember them, don’t you? The millions of people who are really voting for the first time without fear of reprisal. Keep up the negativity, Mikey.

“We must abolish the cult of the Individual decisively, once and for all” - Nikita Khrushchev, Feb, 1956

“We must stop thinking of the Individual and start thinking oabout what is best for society.” - Hillary Clinton, 1993

By Rich

December 16, 2005 09:39 AM | Link to this

Bush is Dumb!

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 09:41 AM | Link to this

Wow, Candide is an elitist alcoholic, with here Grey Goose and her “rural idiocy”. Maybe one day she will let it go and realize that she is not the smartest person in the world, as none of us are. But, until then she will rabidly fight so that her and all of here intelligent leaders can rule the rural idiots, nice. I think her best was saying that she would strangle one of you Christians with her bare hands, if she could.

Candide darling, those rednecks know how to manage land resources better than you city elitist. The city elitist know how to manage bums, garbage, parking contracts,, massive numbers of citizens and shed their pollutants into streams and rivers that flow out and “poison� the little baby rednecks. Think about that next time you are strapping one on.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 09:45 AM | Link to this

Good toon (nice recovery from yesterday). It seems like “whynot” from the beginning of this thread could be ml??? (was doing a good job interpreting the toon).

Food for Thought: I’m sure that the Bush Administration had absolutely NOTHING at all, what-so-ever to do with ANY of the candidates that were up for “election” in Iraq, right? I mean this HAD to be TOTALLY hands-off, right? They would NEVER plant any candidates so that they are Guaranteed optimum results from the election, right? I mean there was an international, neutral contingent monitoring these elections to assure there was no fraud/outside intervension, right?

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 09:50 AM | Link to this

…or is this when the Repubes play the “democracy-in-progress” card? You know, the one where they can justify giving the elections a little “push” to help get it started. (BTW all of the previous thoughts are mine, just speculating…you know free speech and all)

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 09:51 AM | Link to this

Wow, I just read all of the post and I must say, I certainly do feel like the liberals on this blog are the tolerant ones. They are more intelligent than all conservatives so certainly they wouldn’t lower themselves to slinging epithets and acting like children. Children b*!ch, moan, groan and complain, but have no alternative solutions. Because they are young, naïve and short sighted. You don’t have to offer much in the way of plans when all you want to do is divide Americans with a corrupt tax code, that nobody can understand, and be a master social engineer. Well it would be like being god and maybe they think there is only enough room for one, so they want to clear the way.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 09:53 AM | Link to this

Scooter, picking up on our little environmental sidebar yesterday, did you see this article by George Will?. As an environmental engineer, what is your opinion on ANWR drilling?

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 09:54 AM | Link to this

Isn’t that cute, missuz is dressing up as Jimmy Carter today, Mr. Fair Elections himself. No, missuz, all those women you saw lined up waiting thier turn to cast a ballot were TEXANS! Didn’t you see all of the RNC! buses parked out back? You freakin kook.

Where’s your help at today, they punk out?

Merry Christmas!

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 09:57 AM | Link to this

Geezus, well I certainly hope the generals and forces on the ground had something to do with the candidates. We spent all of our time, under Reagan, getting intelligence sources in Eastern Europe and they are slowly coming around to a peaceful existence. Wouldn’t in be in the interest of protecting America, if we had some human intelligence coming out of the center of the Middle East?

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 09:59 AM | Link to this

Geezur,

Would this be an example of coercion, or is it really just troops terrorizing Iraqis like the caption says?

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 10:00 AM | Link to this

…cAndy, make sure you know what a purple finger means here before you leave the house. Also, Why is it that you celebrate meager economic spikes in year 5 of the Bush Theocracy??? Let me say that again …. meager…year 5…? Are you serious? Your brain has been washed SO well that you can rationally associate ANY positives with Repubes and ALL negatives with lib-dems?? That is completely insane. At least some of the Repubes WILL admit mistakes by the administration.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 10:04 AM | Link to this

Big Daddy, I have found that Mother Nature has a funny way of reacting to our overpopulation miscalculations. ANWR is a coastal plain region and our extraction processes have gotten pretty darn low impact. Not to mention that that is what it was set aside for oil exploration. Who knows, we may start moving away from oil in the future.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 10:04 AM | Link to this

….year 5????? Come on…if you’re laying flat on your back on the ground, the ONLY way to go is up. Don’t call it progress.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 10:06 AM | Link to this

Oh yeah, here comes RW’s link parade….oh joy!

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 10:07 AM | Link to this

missuz: Let’s see, because Bush has only been in office for 5 years? Again, I honestly feel sorry for those of you so economically challenged that you cannot find success in these times of prosperity. Maybe if you started listening to Bush and taking his advice you might advance your financial situation like the rest of us have.

Or you could remain mired in your kook fantasy world, gee, I wonder which path he’ll choose?????

Merry Christmas!

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 10:09 AM | Link to this

Geezur,

How else do you post a picture here?

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 10:10 AM | Link to this

cAndy, talk to the 30,000 former GM employees about how great the economy is…or maybe whomever did this the other day can explain again how 30,000 people out of work is “good” for the economy…lol

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 10:12 AM | Link to this

RW, I post thoughts, not pictures

and cAndy, the 30,000 is only GM…I chose not to include Ford.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 10:14 AM | Link to this

missuz: You know, in this season of giving, a time when we should thank the Lord for all that he has done for us, a wave of generosity has overwhelmed me and I feel like giving something back to the community, some of that old Christian goodness. Say, which soup kitchen do you frequent?

Merry Christmas!

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

Geezur,

You do a pretty poor job of that, maybe you should try a few pictures.

btw, those 30,000 GM workers will receive 90% of their current pay and tuition reimbursement for job training.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 10:20 AM | Link to this

missuz: What kind of pinko car do you drive?

Merry Christmas!

By Jay

December 16, 2005 10:20 AM | Link to this

Scooter, I’m glad this point was finally brought forth. What the Arabs must not understand is that they are causing us to accelerate the development of technology - the fuel cell technology seems to be the way of the future- so that we will eventually not have to rely on their oil. In effect, they are speeding the drop in demand for their oil and without that they are left with nothing but sand…

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 10:28 AM | Link to this

“Your brain has been washed SO well that you can rationally associate ANY positives with Repubes and ALL negatives with lib-dems?? That is completely insane. At least some of the Repubes WILL admit mistakes by the administration.�

Geezus, I assume that I am one of those that can criticize Repubes. You and I may have very well talked about this stuff at a bar, or party. I don’t know if you consider yourself a liberal or just a anybody but a Repube, I prefer republicrat.

Can you see no potential of anything positive coming out of enforcing our 1991 cease fire agreement?

The jobs leaving the country are good for the economy in the following way; it forces unions to bend with market pressures. GM was caught behind the eight ball when Honda & Toyota started making hybrids, not to mention the 80’s, so they lost market share and money. How many shares of GM stock are out there? How many jobs, in a failing company, will one union take down for their own self serving interest? Surely it is better than loosing the entire company.

GM is now forced to get their act together or die to the forces of the market, efficiency and demand. It is that efficiency of capitalism that makes goods cheap so that the masses can have them. I think of Henry Ford’s assembly line every time I get in my personal vehicle. That is good, yes.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 10:34 AM | Link to this

Geezus, I never claimed that 30,000 people losing their jobs was good for those people. I stated that GM was forced to make that decision in order to stay competitive in a global marketplace. Please feel free to review my comments and I’ll be happy to answer any follow-up questions you might have.

RW - those workers receiving those types of pay packages are part of the problem that GM is having. Their costs have gotten out of control while experiencing declining revenues. Now would actually be a good time to buy GM stock though - it’s worth a gamble that a reorganization will return them to profitability.

By Sooter

December 16, 2005 10:39 AM | Link to this

RW, true, true, I still kick myself for not putting some money in the the K-mart Holding Company. From 7.00 to 135.00 per share, shizil.

By Mrs. Godzilla

December 16, 2005 10:41 AM | Link to this

If I poke that bubble with one of my hair pins, will he careen around in the air making a “TTHHHHHHHHH” sound?

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 10:41 AM | Link to this

1st, Health care cost helped to cripple GM (actually the Peter Jennings report last night was very insightful…and kind of eerie because he is dead and it was his last piece).

2nd - The Myth of the Global Economy: (and yes cAndy that pinko lib college that I went to did a fine job of teaching Economics). In order to achieve a true global economy, trade barriers need to be removed (NAFTA is a 1st step). In order for the global economy to work, it must find equilibrium. In order to find that equilibrium (or “balance” for cAndy) wealth must be redistributed globally i.e. the “haves” will lose and the “have-nots” will gain. This trend will persist until equilibrium is reach in the global economy. America has always been the strongest economy on the block, so in a global economy we will only lose until equilibrium is reached. I don’t think this is good for America. It’s is like sports … as long as you are going to play there will always be a winner and always be a loser. I prefer for Amercia NOT to lose.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 10:46 AM | Link to this

Geezus - as to your first point - you’re right - that and the unfunded pension liability for workers that are no longer needed are the biggest factors for the rising costs with which GM is faced.

As to your second point - that is economically fallacious. If that were the case, why would American companies ever seek out markets away from the United States? I don’t think the people running those companies are imbeciles. Do you?

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 10:46 AM | Link to this

Jay, Yeah the Fuel Cell Pact signed by Bush’s Energy Department didn’t get much play in the media, but what do I expect? The only problem with the Middle-East being left with only sand is their rulers perversion of misery. The rulers are already using the misery, that they themselves create by keeping the money they get for oil, and turning it against us. They are a proud people who don’t want to feel like outsiders are controlling them. Or they are just plum crazy with religion, but while religion plays a role, I doubt it.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 10:52 AM | Link to this

Geezus, are you not talking to me? I’m hurt you and i probably have a lot in common. I have always hung out with liberals. They like to tie me to their whipping post and I see it as mental massage to debate them. But, they still like me, cause they say I’m crazy.

The wealth must be redistributed? Wealth is created by mans manipulation of natural resources into marketable goods. We don’t need to redistribute anything. We need to educate people so they can help make the “pie” bigger.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 10:53 AM | Link to this

BigDaddy:

I never said that any one person will redistribute wealth. It will happen of its own accord and will be driven (as always) by profit margin: “make it for less, sell it for more”. Economic Equilibrium is not a falicy, it is one of the cornerstones of Economics (along with supply/demand).

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:00 AM | Link to this

Scooter:

It’s not about creating more wealth. Economics IS redistribution of wealth and redistribution of wealth IS economics. Tariffs and other trade barriers help to retain wealth (control the flow if you will). When those barriers are removed, the money will flow it’s natural course - where labor is cheap. Then, when (say India) labor cost rises in foreign areas and labor cost drop domestically (lose) and balance is acheived then companies will see that there is no benefit to ship jobs off. In Global Economic theory America loses.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:02 AM | Link to this

BTW it’s nice that I was able to say all that before the whack-jobs start posting. I need to work now, you know to feed my brood-mare and 55.6 kids.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 11:02 AM | Link to this

I always like it when missuz proves my point for me. It just goes to show you how lame college has become, most of these “schools” are just venues for professors to showcase their anti American sputtering rage, an indoctrination facility for future pinkos. And they call religion a cult, sheez..

Look at how Saudi Arabia just hosed down Harvard with that $40,000,000 grant. Harvard couldn’t have fell to their knees any quicker. In return, we get to build a “bridge to Islam” like this won’t create a whole nother tribe of home grown loonies. Where’s the “bridge to Christianity” going to be built?

Merry Christmas!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:04 AM | Link to this

and what point did I prove for you cAndy?

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 11:07 AM | Link to this

Geezus, since America has the strongest and most robust economic system what is your basis for saying we lose in the global economic system?

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 11:10 AM | Link to this

missuz: Your economic ignorance.

Merry Christmas!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:10 AM | Link to this

Ricky, I think that I explained that pretty well above. If it seems a bit ambiguous, let me know…but I think it is clear. We have a strong economy now when global equilibrium is achieved our economy will not be as strong as it is now - it will be equal to the other participating countries. We lose, they gain.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 11:11 AM | Link to this

Geezus, the trade barriers and terriffs only deal with the exchange of capitol, goods and/or labor. The goods were not just sitting there waiting on us to evolve. No, man had to create something and be willing to trade it for something else, which eventualy became currency. Then we get into currency valuations, like China’s right now, Purchasing power parities, etc… The simple fact is wealth is created thorough human work and or mental property.

Geezus, I’m gonna let you in on something, thos etax cuts to the rich that some scream about. Well those rich people use their money to get more money, so they invest it. I am in the process of writing a business plan so that I can shop the market of angel investors to start my own business. My business will eventualy employ people. That is one of the ays that tax cuts help to stimulate the economy. It comes down to who do you trust government, or regulated individuals?

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:14 AM | Link to this

wow cAndy, maybe now you can dazzle us with you far superior economic intellect. I mean just saying “you’re an idiot” errrrrr “Your economic ignorance” is not really a good counterpoint. So, by all means, show us the way….

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 11:14 AM | Link to this

Geezus, I disagree with your definition of economics. Economics as a science is the study of the allocation of scarce resources. That definition steers clear of loaded phrases like “redistribution of wealth,” which is a socialist economic construct, not economics itself.

Second, I agree with your statement that, absent barriers to trade, economies will reach (very quickly) a state of equilibrium, balancing supply and demand (both macro and micro) where companies seek the point at which marginal cost equals marginal revenue.

But here is where you go astray:

1) Your assertion subsumes static markets, and that we receive nothing in return when American companies invest overseas. In a state of economic equilibrium, we receive in turn, increased investment in American companies by foreign investors. That capital is used to develop American businesses.

2) In a global economy, just like in a purely domestic economy, you’re right, there will be losers - employees that have priced themselves out of the job market (in this case UAW workers), will lose. But who gains? American consumers. I stated the case for how and why the American consumer gains in such a situation, and I’d be happy to cut and paste it over.

By Semper Fi

December 16, 2005 11:15 AM | Link to this

Geezus— meager economic spikes???? The Federal Reserve raising interest rates 13 times??? I suppose they are in on the lies.

MERRY CHRISTMAS

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 11:16 AM | Link to this

Andy wannabe, that was an interesting link to teh Saudi donation. So they are getting hteir point presented over here, Good thing we made our donation to an entire country to get our word out. Because, I doubt they give the West much favorable reporting in Saudi Arabia. As the ruling family plunders the countty’s oil revenues.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 11:16 AM | Link to this

missuz: So you are basing your economic predictions on things that haven’t happened and the chances of them happening are slim to none. Never mind the fact that we have a fluid economy that reacts to changing conditions quite well, thank you. Just think of where the housing market would be at today if we had listened to you pinkos.

Merry Christmas!

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 11:21 AM | Link to this

Jay, Scooter, I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss OPEC in relation to pricing themselves out of the energy market. OPEC is very savvy in pricing strategies and they will milk the market for as long as they possibly can by keeping the price of oil just below the price of alternative energy sources.

Eventually we will make the shift, as the ever-accelerating pace of technology will make the cost for switching (and that will be an expensive shift) energy sources attractive in the market.

What I can’t comprehend is why “progressives” were all up in arms about the high oil prices in the wake of increased global demand and Katrina. Don’t they realize that the higher oil prices are, the more attractive alternative fuels become?

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 11:26 AM | Link to this

missuz: I already did. Maybe you weren’t paying attention. Extend the tax cuts, reform the tax system, reform social security, prepare to for the biggest economic prosperity the country has ever known. First task to enacting these programs is for Bush to put himself in a bubble where he can’t hear the pinko nonsense like what you are saying. Please write this down so I don’t have to continue repeating it.

Merry Christmas!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:28 AM | Link to this

Scooter, I never said anything about tax cuts for the rich. I’m pretty sure that I’ve never even posted anything that would indicate my position on that either way.

BD: I also never said anything about a static economic system. American consumers will only gain when jobs are created here, which increases individual wealth and ultimately buying power. You assertion that American companies gain with foreign investment is accurate, but only in so far that those American companies are gaining abroad. Only those who share an ownership stake will gain domestically.

Scooter (I think): Physical money is created by governments. If you make something that someone wants, they purchase it with money that they earned at a job. This process is known as redistribution of wealth. The company that made the product didn’t actual make the money, they received money. It is unfortunate the phrase “redistribution of wealth” has been bastardized with a negative connotation.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 11:32 AM | Link to this

Geezus, America has had the strongest economy in the world for decades. Even during the Cold War when there was a large portion of the world we wouldn’t trade with.

By Jay

December 16, 2005 11:32 AM | Link to this

I agree BigDaddy, OPEC will try to keep in the game but I think many Americans are so fed up they will be willing to pay a premium for Fuel Cell transportation (I for sure would). It will take time, but with the events of the last couple of years the change over has been greatly accelerated. Another great benefit I would like to add of these trying times the past few years is that the UN has been shown for what it is.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 11:34 AM | Link to this

Big Daddy, I speculate that the liberal leaders (cause they are pulling the party) are just so bent out of shape they got their precious power taken away. The problem is the only reason they had power was because they coddled our self confidence and stole from one individual to give to another individual. You know what? It would be awesome if there was some way that taxes could be paid on a voluntary basis and people would be encouraged to reuse goods. But, there would be no federal income tax taken out of your paycheck, no FICA, no income tax. Just everyone getting along, if Mr. corrupt politician wants to raise taxes he has to do it everyone. There is a plan out there that does that, but I can say anything or BC will open mindedly knock down a straw man.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 11:35 AM | Link to this

Geezus, if what you say is true, how then do you account for the historically low unemployment rates? When jobs are outsourced to other countries, we receive foreign capital in equal proportion to those jobs (part of economic equilibrium). That capital is used to create, for example, manufacturing facilities for Hondas, Toyotas, Mercedes and BMW (just to name a few “foreign” auto-manufacturers with domestic production capacity).

And again, while the displaced workers certainly don’t immediately gain, the American consumer gains (and certainly those with an ownership interest).

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 11:36 AM | Link to this

Lucko, has obviously run out of material when he is stealing material straight from Newsweek. Again, hugely successful election in Iraq yesterday with 70% of the eligible voters participating. The silence from the left is deafening.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:36 AM | Link to this

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 11:26 AM | Link to this

missuz: I already did. Maybe you weren’t paying attention. Extend the tax cuts, reform the tax system, reform social security, prepare to for the biggest economic prosperity the country has ever known. First task to enacting these programs is for Bush to put himself in a bubble where he can’t hear the pinko nonsense like what you are saying. Please write this down so I don’t have to continue repeating it.

wow, and you try to rip me for “theories”…lol. For those who are wondering, here is (apparently) cAndy’s economic theory: “Bush needs to do some stuff and reform some stuff and America will be great, oh yeah, he can’t listen to anyone either”

cAndy if you want to sit at the big table, you need to bring something with you. Semper Fi, I’m not even sure what you are talking about.

and apart from the ignorant interjections, this has been a nice debate.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 11:40 AM | Link to this

Jay, I’d be willing to make the switch too, though not at a premium, as long as the performance of fuel-cell or hydrogen-based or electric could match the performance of my 330-hp Denali. Plus, those new cars don’t make any sound. I want to hear my V-8, not some weany whirring. BigDaddy is nothing if not manly. Except when it comes to daytime rushncap (sighing). Then I just go all to pieces…

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 11:42 AM | Link to this

Yes, Geezus, it has been a nice debate. And I would like to compliment you on your knowledge of economics. I wish more liberals (and erstwhile fiscal “conservatives” for that matter) shared your degree of comprehension of economics decisions.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:46 AM | Link to this

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 11:32 AM | Link to this

Geezus, America has had the strongest economy in the world for decades. Even during the Cold War when there was a large portion of the world we wouldn’t trade with.

Exactly, trade restrictions, tarrifs and embargos. Operating without those barriers is new uncharted territory.

Scooter: I’m not sure where the train ran-off the tracks for you. Unfortunately, we need a tax system to support our military and our government - it just needs some better management.

BD: The companies you list are NOT getting the NAFTA trade relief, i.e. they are not in North America. Their incentive to build here was to avoid tariffs - which is the point > bring jobs here, not send them away.

Ricky: It is an issue because ml doesn’t draw a toon specifically on a topic YOU would like? Maybe you can post YOUR toon about the Iraqi elections….lol

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 11:46 AM | Link to this

missuz: So social security running out of money is no big deal, it won’t effect the future tax burden? We wouldn’t add trillions to the GDP by eliminating the IRS and it’s compliance costs?

You want to reform our economy by removing the tariffs on banana imports? Tell us more.

Merry Christmas!

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 11:49 AM | Link to this

Geezur,

Didn’t you say about an hour ago you were going to work?

Those fries aren’t going to cook themselves.

Although, with an automated line process similar to warehouse packaging….

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 11:50 AM | Link to this

Charles Krauthammer just scared me…

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:51 AM | Link to this

cAndy, at no point did I support removing tarrifs. I have always been critical of raiding Social Security. Are you reading what everyone is posting?

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 11:51 AM | Link to this

Big Daddy, the oil price encouraging alternative fuels wasn’t the only display of blind hatred. How about it was them who would never allow man to build oil extraction structures in the first place and inflated the price of the home supply. Or, the dams for hydro electric power and fresh water source for enjoyment. Or, The Old Teddy K. and his distaste for certain renewable energy sources. With the republicrats I have intitial problems with stuff like this, but I feel ike there could be some long term good in it.

I’m out to stimulate the economy for Crhistmas, and a merry one to you all.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this

Geezus, free trade is better for all parties. So by opening our trade borders and expanding who we trade with it will only make our economy stronger. I don’t really care what ml draws about, I know he has no desire to present something that would make the President look good. However, I was just making the comment that for the last couple of weeks all the anti-war crowd has been making a big deal about how we can’t win and we need to start pulling out and now that the elections have gone better than most expected with a large Sunni turnout and they are nowhere to be found.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this

A president decides that Social Security is in need of radical reform. He assembles a team of experts to examine the issue and they conclude that allowing workers to privately invest a portion of their Social Security taxes in individual accounts is a viable way to solve the program’s financial problems, increase the rate of return to young workers, and allow low income workers to accumulate real wealth. They conclude that most criticism of individual accounts — they would be too risky, too costly to administer — is unfounded. The president leans toward quick implementation. George Bush? No. Bill Clinton. So much for the myth that Social Security privatization is a “partisan” or “conservative” issue.

cAndy’s economic theory Yep, me and Bubba’s theory…

Merry Christmas!

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this

Geezus, I would also like to compliment your conduct - you have been challenged from a number of different people and have carried yourself very well - without even having to resort to calling anyone a nazi pig fornicator…

Must be Friday!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:54 AM | Link to this

RW: I guess in a round-about way that was an Economically directed question, so yes - I am getting back to work.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 12:03 PM | Link to this

Geezus, I saw what you said and i have to say befor i go. To say that I ran off the tracks some where is not to discuss the issue. If you want to act like you can talk about economics with Big Daddy and myself, then do it. Don’t do it when it is convenient and say ahw “your crazy” some other time.

You need to give up your idea that government can be the social engineers of an efficient country. America is great because of her people, not because of her government, simple as that.

Who will be the next to come in and use a philosophical fallacy.

Now I’m out Geezus, the original link you sent me to, the one that started out with reasonable logic about marketing in the free market and marketing in politics, gave me hope. I still have it for you, you just should think about learning to criticize and compliment both sides. If someone can’t do that they have no business saying someone else is brainwashed.

By Jay

December 16, 2005 12:07 PM | Link to this

Big Daddy, they are saying you will be able to get more power out of a Fuel Cell. Currently the sound is nothing to get the heart pumping (clicks and whirls) but I’m sure that will be changed to accomodate the consumer if they become mainstream. I’m not some green-peace activist by any means, I see this alternative as a great tool for putting the screws into Saudi among others.

Ricky, as far as the Iraqi elections, I don’t see one mention of it on the AJC’s main page today, hmm…go figure…

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 12:11 PM | Link to this

Jay, I agree that companies will respond to fill the demand for consumer products. And more power you say? SWEEEEEET!

Oh, and I never meant to imply that you had a tree fetish. I’d like our country to be weaned off oil too. I just want it to be done via free markets and not through government intervention…

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this

Does anybody else find it bizarre that cartoon boy has a “Bush in a bubble” on the same day that Bush got suckered by listening to the Biggest Pinko The Republicans Have John McCain by signing up for the Al Qaeda bill of rights legislation? I for one wish Bush would seal his bubble off a little tighter. As always the pinkos fight for America’s enemies but not for their country.

Merry Christmas!

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 12:16 PM | Link to this

Andy,

That other RINO, Chuck Hagel, just voted to filibuster the extension of the Patriot Act, too.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 12:20 PM | Link to this

I’d like our country to be weaned off oil too Dream on, “libertarian.” Could we first come up with a viable alternative before we blow smoke up everybody’s a-ss? Until then, could we please drill, create an energy surplus and lower prices?

If these kooks were truly interested in “alternatives,” nuclear plants would be a dime a dozen. As it is, they go berserk at the first mention of uranium. I mean, all of the people that died at CHERNOBYL! what was it, seven, maybe?

Merry Christmas!

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 12:23 PM | Link to this

Geezus, are you some how able to go back in blog time and resond to things on se the blog has moved on? I can’t say that I remember reading your lost listed below. Did I kill that many of my brain cells in my youth?

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 11:28 AM

Scooter, I never said anything about tax cuts for the rich. I’m pretty sure that I’ve never even posted anything that would indicate my position on that either way.

Scooter (I think): Physical money is created by governments. If you make something that someone wants, they purchase it with money that they earned at a job. This process is known as redistribution of wealth. The company that made the product didn’t actual make the money, they received money. It is unfortunate the phrase “redistribution of wealth� has been bastardized with a negative connotation.

How can you rationalize acting offended that I insunuated you thought poorly of tax cuts for the people, and then say that government creates wealth? And when did you say that?

Now, I’m leaving and everyone keep an eye on the ball or me if “I’ve lost my mind up in heuh”!

By Jay

December 16, 2005 12:25 PM | Link to this

Andy not really weened off Oil, just off THEIR Oil…Until a viable alternative to make this happen, of course we must use our resources to the best of our ability.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 12:26 PM | Link to this

Andy, I’m absolutely in favor of drilling in ANWR. I’m also in favor of removing regulations so that we could increase build new oil refineries. I’m also in favor of building new nuclear power plant facilities (heck, even France knows that - 90% of their electric power comes from nuclear power).

My point is that technology will eventually get to the point where it is a cheaper source of fuel than oil. OPEC, and other countries that rely solely or heavily on oil to drive their economies have an incentive for this not to happen, and will cut prices to maintain their market share for as long as possible. Competitive pressure from alternative fuels will lower oil prices, and that’s good for all of us - just means I get to drive my Denali a little longer - great!

And why the scare quotes around libertarian? Was that for A Libertarian’s benefit?

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 12:27 PM | Link to this

You watch. We’ll spend decades and billions of dollars researching fuel cell technology and on the day it gets rolled out for general use, some pinko will write a book about how it harms bird egg shells and you’ll be right back at square one. Drill In ANWR!

Merry Christmas!

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 12:27 PM | Link to this

One more thing. Geesuz I thought this was funny(hopefuly it works) and thought you may like. It came to me from my cousin. While I disagree, it is still funny.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 12:32 PM | Link to this

BigD: The “liberatarians” were mouthing off in favor of the ACLU and some other pinko stuff the last couple of threads, it’s got me all ate up. I’m calming down some.

Merry Christmas!

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 12:35 PM | Link to this

Andy, you’re probably right in respect to the environmental movement’s overall motivations. They have become the catch-all for assorted socialists, communists and anarchists. Their goals are to bring down economic systems, not to provide resources so that people can uplift themselves. And that indictment is from one of the founders of either the Sierra Club or Greenpeace (I can’t remember which…)

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 12:40 PM | Link to this

BigD: On that same subject, one of my posts reminded me of something, think about this- Rachel Carson wrote that pinko manifesto about DDT!, gasp, supposedly weakening bird egg shells. The libs panicked and outlawed DDT. Now, 150,000 children in the world die every year from malaria, which could be eradicated by the use of… DDT! to kill mosquitoes. 150,000 children dead per year to supposedly protect bird eggs, what a delightful trade off. Even if it wasn’t a DDT issue, why do I have to read about this in the Conservative media? Why the pinko cover up?

Merry Christmas!

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 12:43 PM | Link to this

Andy, because as avowed socialists and communists, though hiding behind the mantle of “environmental activism” they can engage in the favorite pastime of socialists and communists: social engineering.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 12:47 PM | Link to this

Okay, a moment of levity:

As this tale of woe occured in California, what do you wanna bet the antagonist of this story is a registered Democrat? Is this the “progressive” idea of “redeployment” (ie, cut-and-run strategy)?

(Naughty language alert)

By getalife

December 16, 2005 12:50 PM | Link to this

So the terrorists want to change the American way of life This is not good.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 12:55 PM | Link to this

getalife, I just saw that. If these allegations turn out to be true, that will be another black eye for the Bush administration. Adbridgment of civil rights without due process is a serious charge.

What’s up with the timing, though? This is a NY Times piece, an avowed enemy of the Bush administration, that is released during what has been one of the best weeks of the Bush presidency. I don’t go for conspiracy theories, but the timing does seem a little odd.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 12:55 PM | Link to this

getalife, would you rather not catch terrorists or people plotting against us?

By Daniel

December 16, 2005 12:56 PM | Link to this

America suffers from a lack of leadership. I recall DDE. I enlisted in Service when he was president. We are a great people with a grand and glorious history. This government is grossly incompetent. All of us will pay for the excesses and corruption of this government. We borrow 2 Billion a day from Asia to keep America fat, lazy and weak. They shovel the money out of Washington. Bush loyalists need to wake up. No one, none of us and America’s vital national interests and not being served by this government. We have been betrayed. No? Google: Contract with America, read the first line. Then respond. Oh, Luckovich gives us a laugh. Thank you.

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 12:57 PM | Link to this

getalife,

What the New York Times doesn’t tell you is that this was signed off on by both parties in the intelligence committee.

They also leave out this tidbit

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 01:01 PM | Link to this

Daniel, we know you don’t like this administration. Nothing they do will be good enough for you. Thats cool, thats your opinion. What are you ideas about what to do? What would you be doing right now as President? It’s easy to hurl insults, but its not as easy to actually give solutions to the problems you are complaining about. And what does the Contract with America have to do with Bush? That was a campaign platform in 1994 that the signess to accomplished almost all of their goals.

By getalife

December 16, 2005 01:02 PM | Link to this

The live Stern on Yahoo is pretty good and I saw this on Leno last night. The Patriot Act is in debate and it changes some freedoms we enjoy.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 01:04 PM | Link to this

getalife, what freedoms does it take away specifically? And would you not be willing to sacrifice a few minor liberties in order to safeguard your country?

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:07 PM | Link to this

Ricky, no we cannot “sacrifice a few minor liberties” for any reason. First of all “minor” is a loaded word - what is minor to you, may not be minor to someone else. Second of all, it’s a slippery slope argument.

By getalife

December 16, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this

Ricky, My point is that the terrorists wanted to change the American way of life which I believe is taking away some privacy rights. Think of all the changes made since 9/11.

By Daniel

December 16, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this

No insults. Just facts. America borrows 2 Billion a day! Stop spending money we don’t have. Stop borrowing. This last pork laden national budget is a disgrace. Hopefully, there is a small but growing group of Congressman, yes, republicans! who are after a balanced budget, (of all things). One is Congressman Flake from Arizona. That’s a start. Also, write these people let them know we care about these issues. No name calling please. Ask for fiscal responsibility, from Dems and Repus. You ask a good question. How do we hold these people accountable?

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 01:09 PM | Link to this

BigDaddy, what liberties have we given up? People like to talk about the liberties we have had taken away, but very rarely mention a specific thing.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 01:12 PM | Link to this

Scooter, if you have thin skin, perhaps an anonymous blog is not this best place to post (IMO).

Off the tracks (11:34 post): I speculate that the liberal leaders (cause they are pulling the party) are just so bent out of shape they got their precious power taken away. The problem is the only reason they had power was because they coddled our self confidence and stole from one individual to give to another individual. You know what? *It would be awesome if there was some way that taxes could be paid on a voluntary basis and people would be encouraged to reuse goods. But, there would be no federal income tax taken out of your paycheck, no FICA, no income tax. Just everyone getting along, *if Mr. corrupt politician wants to raise taxes he has to do it everyone. There is a plan out there that does that, but I can say anything or BC will open mindedly knock down a straw man

None of this fit the discussion at the time (hence off the tracks).

Government creates money…pay attention…the Federal government operates these large devices known as printing presses that are used in the actual, physical creation of tangible money. That observation has nothing to do with Tax cuts (perhaps you misinterpreted the government creating money statement?) That is the way the statement was intended to be read (if it was vague,I apologize).

The link I sent you was a library of DiLarenzo (sp?) articles (the same person that you frequestly post a link to). It was intended to show you that the person you are relying on for your economic fascism arguement is very much on the left. Yet you “a la carte” only certain thoughts of his and try to apply them to your own ends. If you support his position that’s fine, I respect that.

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 01:12 PM | Link to this

Ricky,

BigDaddy is just p-issed because he keeps getting arrested for streaking.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:13 PM | Link to this

Ricky, if these allegations made by the NY Times are true, they constitute an abridgment of the Fourth Amendment, which states, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” This states that the federal government cannot intrude on the privacy of citizens without due process. As these alleged “spying” activites took place without a warrant, they would constitute an illegal search.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:16 PM | Link to this

RW - you’re right they never do get a warrant before I’m suggested to all those “cavity” searches. But then again, I never ask for one either…

nyuk, nyuk, nyuk…

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 01:16 PM | Link to this

BigDaddy, if the gov’t suspects someone is invovled in terrorist activities, I have no problem with them listening to their phone calls and monitoring the email, mail, etc. I would much rather my country be safe.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:17 PM | Link to this

oops, I didn’t mean “suggested”. I meant “subjected”. No, I meant “begged for”…

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 01:20 PM | Link to this

BigDaddy,

You suggested the cavity searches?

The scenario you lay out about the fourth amendment is true and if someone was being taken to court over something that violated it the case would be thrown out on these grounds. Trying to gather information to prevent a terrorist attack is another matter entirely.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 01:21 PM | Link to this

I have to agree with BD here. I am unwilling to give up ANY liberties. And what qualifiers does the government use to determine is someone is involved in terrorist activities?

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this

Ricky, I appreciate your sentiment. And I don’t have a problem with them listening either - as long as they obtain a warrant to do so.

Look, I want our country to be safe too. But part of that safety is to ensure that the freedoms that are an innate right as part of our birth are not trampled upon to obtain said security. Granted, it is much more difficult to do both, but that is what must be done.

By getalife

December 16, 2005 01:24 PM | Link to this

Think about how many times the government has been wrong.

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this

Geezur,

For the most part you seem to have more sense than most on your side, so I’m sure you realize that if we are attacked again the first thing “insert date here” commission would ask is, “Why didn’t the President do everything possible to find out what was planned and stop it?”

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 01:27 PM | Link to this

For the most part you seem to have more sense than most on your side, so I’m sure you realize that if we are attacked again the first thing “insert date here� commission would ask is, “Why didn’t the President do everything possible to find out what was planned and stop it?�

Sorry, but McCarthyism has no place in my America. How much infringement has been done based on if?

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 01:32 PM | Link to this

Geezur,

I take back the first part of my comment, sorry for trying to give you some credit.

McCarthyism?

btw, Don’t read any more of this post.

For anyone interested in the vote to reject the Patriot Act this is the link

Frist voting no doesn’t count because he has to be on the prevailing side to control bringing the issue back up.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 01:34 PM | Link to this

Geezus, you said the following and I am certainly not thin skinned, do me a favor and always assume that I don’t take offense. Now, you said the following;

Government creates money…pay attention…the Federal government operates these large devices known as printing presses that are used in the actual, physical creation of tangible money. That observation has nothing to do with Tax cuts (perhaps you misinterpreted the government creating money statement?) That is the way the statement was intended to be read (if it was vague,I apologize).

Scooter is disappointed that Big Daddy didn’t handle this while I was out, but I’m not hatin on you Big Daddy. To address Geezus’s assertion; if the government just goes out printing dollars, that dollar that you have in you pocket becomes worth 99 cents, 98 cents, 97 cents and so on. It is not so simple as just going out and printing money. This creates inflation because things become more expensive in comparison to the purchasing power of the wealth that you worked for.

Geezus I hope you are honestly taking all of this in, cause it is a good debate and hopefully we will get to the bottom of it. I’m goin back out to throw a potato down may neck and check some past work after this rain. Geezus I look forward to continuing. America is great because government stayed out of the peoples business, in the beginning.

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:35 PM | Link to this

Not a single word from you Bush supporters is worth a response. God, you’re Dumb! - Eric

Eric, if you’re out there, and you’re the same kind-hearted genleman that claims to know me, would you please tell me how? And would you please regale everyone with your vastly superior intellect and argumentative skill some more? Or does Zed only let you out of your gimp box for one post a day?

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 01:37 PM | Link to this

Ricky:

Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act allows the government to obtain materials like library records without probable cause. Under the PATRIOT Act, the FBI can obtain records – including library circulation records – merely by specifying to a court that the records are “sought for� an ongoing investigation. That standard (sometimes called a “relevance� standard) is much lower than the standard required by the Fourth Amendment, which ordinarily prohibits the government from conducting intrusive searches unless it has probable cause to believe that the target of the investigation is engaged in criminal activity. Although the Justice Department is assuring the public that it remains constrained by the standard of probable cause and that the standard “is the same as it’s always been,� the government has been telling a different story to its own attorneys. For example, an October 26, 2001 memo to “All Divisions� from the FBI’s Office of General Counsel (and approved by FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III) included a section on “Changes in FISA Business Records Authority�

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 01:41 PM | Link to this

And Geezus, that DeLarenzo article you linked me to started off about marketing. Then went into America/Bush being stupid for enforcing our 1991 cease fire agreement with Saddam. It was the enforcement of the UN cease fire agreement that I disagreed with.

Delarenzo admitted that politicians can get away with lying and it is in their best interest. But, the ability of politicians to lie about the cost of serviices and entitlements is all tied into the tax code. That is why I will continue to bring it up.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 01:42 PM | Link to this

“The field may continue to request business records orders through FBIHQ in the established manner. However, such requests may now seek production of any relevant information, and need only contain information establishing such relevance.”

Sorry, hit the wrong button

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:46 PM | Link to this

Pay no attention to Big Daddy. I know that twit and trust me on this one, he’s more Big P* than he is Big Daddy. - Eric from 12/10

Eric, I’m calling you out. Get out of your gimp box and defend your statement. Or are you afraid that a “twit” will make look like a fool? I’m waiting. Coward…

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 01:49 PM | Link to this

Iraq Votes!!!

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 01:50 PM | Link to this

Geezus, How did you like Clinton’s “Know your client” plan. The one that was going to allow government into our banking records. Then Hillary would have gotten government into our medical records. It’s sacry on bith sides of the isle. Dependency surrenders power.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this

….and for cAndy…

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 01:51 PM | Link to this

Oh yeah, here comes Geezur’s link parade….oh joy!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 01:53 PM | Link to this

…and Ricky….

Alright, I’ll stop the spamming now…lol

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 01:54 PM | Link to this

Geezur,

Now that last one was funny. lol

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 01:54 PM | Link to this

BigD: It’s no use. Eric, Phil and Tex can only do drive bys. While this may excite some of the pinkos in here, the Cons know that these clowns are too educationally and ideologically challenged to debate their own nonsense. They’re probably at Air America right now, furiously taking notes.

Merry Christmas!

By getalife

December 16, 2005 01:56 PM | Link to this

Bush is on. Mr. President, why are you spying on Americans without a warrant?

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:56 PM | Link to this

RW - I’m waiting for Geezus’s inevitable flip/flop show:

FLIP: AP 4/8/03 - President Bush claims that he likes to eat pancakes in the morning.

FLOP: AP 7/3/04 - President Bush says, “nothing starts my day like Belgian waffles.”

(Geezus commentary): See the inconsistency! He can’t even make up his mind about breakfast! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

By BigDaddy

December 16, 2005 01:58 PM | Link to this

Geezus, that last one was great…

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 02:03 PM | Link to this

LOL

Scooter, I agree. Apparently, somewhere in cAndy’s label fest, most people think I’m a Dem…not true. I am very much a Libertarian.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 02:06 PM | Link to this

… see, you can’t get one by RW

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:08 PM | Link to this

missuz: Don’t get confused, I didn’t call you a “dem,” I called you a pinko.

Merry Christmas!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this

In 2000, Bush argued against new military entanglements and nation building. He’s done both in Iraq. FLIP: BUSH OPPOSES NATION BUILDING… “If we don’t stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we’re going to have a serious problem coming down the road.” [Gov. George W. Bush, 10/3/00]

FLOP: BUSH SUPPORTS NATION BUILDING “We will be changing the regime of Iraq, for the good of the Iraqi people.” [President Bush, 3/6/03]

LOL

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 02:11 PM | Link to this

BigDaddy,

Then he’ll say “paragraph 9, paragraph 9” about six thousand times.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 02:12 PM | Link to this

Here’s what Bush said about nation building during the October 3, 2000 debate with Gore:

“MODERATOR: New question. How would you go about as president deciding when it was in the national interest to use U.S. force, generally?

BUSH: Well, if it’s in our vital national interest, and that means whether our territory is threatened or people could be harmed, whether or not the alliances are — our defense alliances are threatened, whether or not our friends in the Middle East are threatened. That would be a time to seriously consider the use of force. Secondly, whether or not the mission was clear. Whether or not it was a clear understanding as to what the mission would be. Thirdly, whether or not we were prepared and trained to win. Whether or not our forces were of high morale and high standing and well-equipped. And finally, whether or not there was an exit strategy. I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don’t think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we’ve got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. ”

By Eric

December 16, 2005 02:16 PM | Link to this

ANDY’S insectile mind just keeps ticking.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 02:23 PM | Link to this

RW, so you never did figure that on out? (paragraph 5 … I think) what a shame, but it still is hilarious, especially when Repubes keep repeating the rest of the paragraph…lol

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this

Eric: My insectile heart keeps on ticking. My insectile mind keeps on having neurological and chemical reactions. Sheez.

Merry Christmas!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 02:28 PM | Link to this

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 10:20 AM | Link to this

missuz: What kind of pinko car do you drive?

Merry Christmas!

Sorry cAndy, I must have missed that one. 1995 Jeep Wrangler

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

Hi there pinkos turds…

Who wants me to track them down with my mad internet skills and kick ‘em after jumping out from behind a tree??

Anyone?

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

Dear Cartoon Boy:

That’s a real swell drawing that you have there today. I think you are a great guy and I voted for Kerry. It is an honor for me to be able to critique your handiwork. There are a few suggestions to improve the functionality of your blog that I would like you to consider.

First, is it possible for you to link to the “ditto” cam, perhaps placing it in the upper right hand corner of the page? It would be great if it stayed constant regardless of where you scroll. I would also like to see a link to the Wall Street Journal, The American Spectator, National Review and Drudge. These can be placed at your convenience.

Your attention to these matters is greatly appreciated.

Merry Christmas!

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:36 PM | Link to this

DAMMIT!

QUIT PRETENDING YOUR ME!

IT’S NOT FUNNY AND I KNOW WHO YOU ARE AND I’M GONNA GET YOU.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:38 PM | Link to this

HEY! WHO DID THAT??

ONE OF YOU GAWDDANG PINKO LIBERAL SCUMBAGS IS GONNA GET IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU WENT AND MADE ME MAD NOW.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this

No!! I’m the real Andy and both of you better stop pretending to be me. The National Security Agency knows who you are and are watching you both.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this

Alrightty then you slithering pinko turdheads.

I will now take a pill, calm down, and revert to my old self.

Beware though, I WILL STILL GIT YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this

Andy, can you understand this concept:

Religion in private life = good.

Religion entangled with government = bad.

If you can’t acknowledge this concept, then clearly you are advocating that we should live in a Christian fundamentalist theocracy.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:45 PM | Link to this

Awww, isn’t that cute? The little overmatched pinko comes out to play. Isn’t he sooo clever? Aren’t the rest of you libs just so proud?

Merry Christmas! (<——Hint!Hint!Hint!)

By internet police

December 16, 2005 02:45 PM | Link to this

Andy impersonator, we used our moonbat detectorto”>http://www.barking-moonbat.com/index.php/weblog/thinkingoutloud/)to trace you to the idiot pervert posting as Jesus yesterday. Now go back to your momma’s breast.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:46 PM | Link to this

B S, I’m the real Andy and I can prove it. How many people do you hate? I hate more than all of you imposters combined, so there.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:47 PM | Link to this

Pinko,

That’s exactly what I want. All them dang voodoo loving orientals, satanic Catholics, tamborine slapping darkies, and all the rest of you that aren’t good God fearing Christian warriors like me and RW need to learn your places.

Bow down before me and my breathren, the one true righteous race. We are the only ones God loves and if you don’t want to face my wrath, you will worship as I tell you to worship.

Deal with it. We’re the majority and this is America and in America the majority rules.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 02:49 PM | Link to this

Pinko: The United States made it through 2 and a quarter centuries without being offended by the Blessed Name of Jesus Christ Lord and Saviour. I’m good with what our elders decided. You are the one throwing the fit. When will you answer my question? How does hearing the name of Jesus hurt you?

Merry Christmas!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 02:54 PM | Link to this

I’m not offended by the uttering of Jesus name, nor am I offended by “Merry Christmas.” Your weakminded paranoia is quite pathetic. You seem to still be missing the point. It’s only two lines, and take particular note of the first line where it says religion is good. Stop refusing to answer the question. Andy, can you understand this concept:

Religion in private life = good.

Religion entangled with government = bad.

If you can’t acknowledge this concept, then clearly you are advocating that we should live in a Christian fundamentalist theocracy.

By getalife

December 16, 2005 02:55 PM | Link to this

I bet it was someone at the Communication Department at Kennesaw State University. Maybe Leonard Witt or Tom Tomorrow. Here is what someone wrote about this blog.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 03:00 PM | Link to this

getalife, thats great, its one person’s opinion. If you scroll through that blog you will see that there are many ideas for the pro-Bush cartoon that he ignored. Also, if you read interviews of ml you will see just how much he hates Bush and while he will admit that Clinton gave him tons of material, he will also admit that he loved Clinton

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 03:02 PM | Link to this

JesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesusJesus

Take that you pinkos.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 03:03 PM | Link to this

oh…PLEASE tell me this isn’t our RW….LOLOLOL cough LOLOLOL

By getalife

December 16, 2005 03:06 PM | Link to this

Check this out Click on i like mike and look at the first post.

By getalife

December 16, 2005 03:11 PM | Link to this

Ricky, Yes, he met Clinton and Clinton shook his hand and was nice. I posted, I wonder if Bush would shake his hand, but I think Bush does have a good sense of humor.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 03:14 PM | Link to this

getalife, I am not just talking about that interview. ml obviously has a democratic bais. No big deal, I think we all expect that from the AJC. I would just love to see ml take a day off from bashing Bush on days like Vets day and the day of the Iraqi election that were extremely successful.

By getalife

December 16, 2005 03:19 PM | Link to this

Ricky, The last eight cartoons do not have Bush in them.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 03:20 PM | Link to this

getalife, you are correct they don’t. But they all bash the right. I don’t remember the last time ml ran a cartoon making run of a dem pol. He has plenty of targets

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 03:21 PM | Link to this

getalife.

They may not have Bush in them but they’re all anti-Bush.

You know it.

Marry Christmas!

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 03:23 PM | Link to this

Ricky,

Get the heck outta here!

This is my place and I’m the one that points out the obvious to these pinkos.

Merry Christmas!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 03:23 PM | Link to this

Stop refusing to answer the question. Andy, can you understand this concept:

Religion in private life = good.

Religion entangled with government = bad.

If you can’t acknowledge this concept, then clearly you are advocating that we should live in a Christian fundamentalist theocracy.

By getalife

December 16, 2005 03:25 PM | Link to this

Like this

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 03:27 PM | Link to this

getalife, thats a a bad cartoon because there are plenty of Dems that are supporters of the Iraq policy. ml could have had an easy target with the recent comments of Howard Dean, Jonh Kerry, etc. It its okay for the right it should be okay for the left

By getalife

December 16, 2005 03:37 PM | Link to this

Ricky, The GOP could use some cartoonists in the big newspapers. I bet RW knows where to find them.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 03:40 PM | Link to this

getalife, the GOP has very few voices in the big newspapers

By getalife

December 16, 2005 03:47 PM | Link to this

Ricky, Damn liberal media bias. Got to go, will check in later.

By Ricky

December 16, 2005 03:50 PM | Link to this

getalife, I don’t necessarily buy into the evil media liberal bias. However, I do firmly believe that the writers that make up most of the big newspapers are liberals. And to argue that doesn’t affect their opinion and take no issues is a joke.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 04:13 PM | Link to this

IMO, the Repubes don’t get cartoons in major papers because overall they’re not funny or poignant … also, they seem to do the same thing as the Dems, only in reverse. Also, where is it written that the Political cartoonist have some objectivity code they are expected to adhere to?

By Objective Observer

December 16, 2005 04:13 PM | Link to this

Getalife: What was that publication you linked “Flannel Enema”,no wonder it was so chafing. “out idiots for just what they are” like the lalalaloonies on yesterdays cartoon blog. Do they fall under this guy’s definition of idiots.

By Objective Observer

December 16, 2005 04:32 PM | Link to this

Candide: You are right, sharing a drink of two with your minister is fellowship. And when we all get together, that too, is a fellowship of sinners. No greater than or less than anyone else. I am so excited, didn’t you acknowledge God’s existence on your 7:41 A.M. post.

I think that we are going to be friends! I promise, I won’t try to change your beliefs, just your tendency to generalize.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 04:35 PM | Link to this

Geezus, I am only in for a second but you have avoided some questions. The first was from three days ago and you asked me to phrase it properly so her it is again; Why do you seem to not have a problem with Saddam not living up to the cease fire agreement that he signed with us after desert Storm?

Secondly, I believe you when you say you are libertarian but I think you need to understand and appreciate the free market more, before you become a full fledged Libertarian. Did you understand why the government can’t just go printing currency to distribute to people? Do you understand that wealth is created from the interaction of labor capitol and the transformation of natural resources into marketable items?

By WTH!

December 16, 2005 04:41 PM | Link to this

Some evidence is as plain as the nose on your faces. The problem with a liberal is that they can’t distinguish their noses from the crack in their a* because they’ve got there head where it shouldn’t be.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 04:44 PM | Link to this

I just saw this link and had a thought. Why doesn’t ML draw a cartoon that shows the Democrats standing at the Iraqi polling locations and telling them they don’t deserve this opportunity. That would be funny, but it will never happen. He doesn’t have to pen a pro Bush toon, just show that the dems S^*t stinks just as bad, if not worse than, the repblicrats.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 04:44 PM | Link to this

Pinko: I’m not sure if you are done playing games yet, I would like to know when I ever advocated having religion mix with government. My point is people that sue to hide the name of Jesus are childish tawdry little pinkos. It isn’t like in 1990 we all of a sudden went to calling everything in Jesus’s Name. There is a tradition in this country, part of what makes it great, that you libs want to get rid of. I just feel like it would be better if we got rid of you instead.

Merry Christmas!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 04:49 PM | Link to this

Why do you seem to not have a problem with Saddam not living up to the cease fire agreement that he signed with us after desert Storm?

Again, the burden of proof. Show me where it was violated to justify our current situtation. YOU made the claim that he made a mockery of something and therefore have the burden to prove it. Secondly, FACT: our government prints our currency (has not been outsourced yet). FACT: our currency is no longer valued against anything (i.e. the gold standard). Financial wealth in accrued in many ways. Personal wealth is accrued in many ways. I have a great understanding of the capitalistic model, perhaps you should reread what I posted about the government printing money and take it in the context of the post.

A little help (from my 11:28 post): Physical money is created by governments. If you make something that someone wants, they purchase it with money that they earned at a job. This process is known as redistribution of wealth. The company that made the product didn’t actual make the money, they received money. It is unfortunate the phrase “redistribution of wealth� has been bastardized with a negative connotation.*

i.e. physical money is printed by the government (still a fact). I NEVER implied that the gov’t should “just print more money”

By RE

December 16, 2005 04:50 PM | Link to this

Maybe it is not so much a left wing bias as it is the fact the republicans seem to be in so much trouble lately.

Scooter Libby-Indicted, resigned

Duke Cunningham- Resigned plead guilty

Tom Delay- under investigation in texas and for dealings with abramoff

Bill Frist- under investigation by the ftc

Bob Ney- under investigation for dealings with abramoff

Grover Norquist- under investigation for dealings with abramoff

Micheal Scanlon- resigned, cooperating with prosecuters in investigation of abramoff

Did I miss any, it is hard to keep track of all the criminal investigations, or is this just the criminilization of politics ?

Bob Ney-

By getalife

December 16, 2005 04:52 PM | Link to this

I remember this guy posting here Google Luckovich blog to see what is written about this blog.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 05:08 PM | Link to this

RE: Here’s one you didn’t get-

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid sent a letter to Norton on March 5, 2002 … The next day, the Coushattas issued a $5,000 check to Reid’s tax-exempt political group, the Searchlight Leadership Fund. A second Abramoff tribe sent another $5,000 to Reid’s group. Reid ultimately received more than $66,000 in Abramoff-related donations between 2001 and 2004

Merry Christmas!

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 05:09 PM | Link to this

I finally found something to quantify cAndy’s debate style (along with Ad Hominem)

Straw Man (Fallacy Of Extension): attacking an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent’s position. Example: “Senator Jones says that we should not fund the attack submarine program. I disagree entirely. I can’t understand why he wants to leave us defenseless like that.”

On the Internet, it is common to exaggerate the opponent’s position so that a comparison can be made between the opponent and Hitler.

LOL…thank God Al Gore invented the internet…lol

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 05:11 PM | Link to this

RE: I found another one-

Many intervened with letters to Interior Secretary Gale Norton within days of receiving money from tribes represented by Abramoff or using the lobbyist’s restaurant for fundraising, an Associated Press review of campaign records, IRS records and congressional correspondence found.

Merry Christmas!

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 05:11 PM | Link to this

RE,

Do you really want to get rid of everyone mixed up with Abramoff?

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 05:14 PM | Link to this

Mary Landrieu, D-La., now where have I heard that name before…

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., who was engaged in a tight re-election race in 2002, sent her letter March 6, 2002. That same day, the Coushattas sent $2,000 to her campaign and she received $5,000 more by the end of that month. By year’s end, the total had grown to at least $24,000 accepted from Abramoff.

Merry Christmas!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 05:16 PM | Link to this

Stop dodging the question. Are you seriously such a fundamentalist theocrat that you cannot acknowledge this concept? Andy, do you agree with the following:

Religion in private life = good.

Religion entangled with government = bad.

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 05:16 PM | Link to this

maybe this one will help you cAndy

By Butch Gaddy

December 16, 2005 05:18 PM | Link to this

It’s so funny how we aren’t talking about the important news, like our Nations security and the elections in Iraq. Nope, it’s the same old “Bush Bashing”. How sad that hatred also makes you blind.
Merry Christmas to All and God Bless America.

Butch

By getalife

December 16, 2005 05:19 PM | Link to this

There’s that J.D guy that sounds just like Rush

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 05:21 PM | Link to this

Pinko: I would like to know when I ever advocated having religion mix with government. My point is people that sue to hide the name of Jesus are childish tawdry little pinkos. It isn’t like in 1990 we all of a sudden went to calling everything in Jesus’s Name. There is a tradition in this country, part of what makes it great, that you libs want to get rid of. I just feel like it would be better if we got rid of you instead.

Merry Christmas!

By buff

December 16, 2005 05:22 PM | Link to this

Hey, getalife, your 2:55 post: Yes, that sounds like Leonard Witt to me too

By getalife

December 16, 2005 05:24 PM | Link to this

buff, welcome back. I was thinking LW was you. How bout them Dawgs!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 05:27 PM | Link to this

I would like to know when I have advocated the abolition of religion. No one wants to deprive you are anyone of saying Jesus’s name all you want to, even in public, on the top of mountains, on TV, in newspapers, on the internet, in department stores, even if you work there. Hey, Merry effing Christmas, buddy.

But you are basically agreeing that religion entangled with government = bad, correct? If you can’t give a yes or no answer to this, then can we assume that you think religion entangled with government = good?

By buff

December 16, 2005 05:28 PM | Link to this

Media bias can come across in several forms.

For one, CBS, Viacom, Simon Schuster all have the same ownership

After 9/11 there was a big event in NYC w/ Giuliana, Richard Gere, and both Clintons

The crowd loved Rudy, accepted Bill Clinton, booed Gere when he said we needed to try and understandthe terrorists, then, booed Hillary off the stage

A few weeks later, MTV, owned by Viacom, ran a tape of the aforementioned event. The boos of Hillary were deleted

Hillary had just signed a contract w/ Simon Schuster for a book deal. Hmmmmmmmmm

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 05:31 PM | Link to this

…cAndy and his alter-ego after the big Brokeback Mountain premeire…

By getalife

December 16, 2005 05:37 PM | Link to this

Look Mike is on Jerry Springer

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 05:42 PM | Link to this

Look, pinko, you morphodite: I would like to know when I ever advocated having religion mix with government. My point is people that sue to hide the name of Jesus are childish tawdry little pinkos. It isn’t like in 1990 we all of a sudden went to calling everything in Jesus’s Name. There is a tradition in this country, part of what makes it great, that you libs want to get rid of. I just feel like it would be better if we got rid of you instead.

What are you missing here? We made it fine for 225 years without you busy body nosy little sissy libs going around and suing everybody. Look at today’s litter box liner. The pinko ACLU is suing Cobb County over an “educational” matter that they have deemed religious. They should F—k off and die, not be causing municipalities to waste money in court defending traditions. Blow me.

Merry Christmas!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 05:44 PM | Link to this

Well, there you have it everyone. After two days, Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy has revealed himself as right-wing nut who wants us to live in a fundamentalist theocracy. He is so far outside of the mainstream, that he cannot bring himself to acknowedge that religious entanglement with government is bad. Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, how does it feel being such a crazy radical, that even the overwhelming majority of good Christmas-celebrating and Christmas-loving Christians won’t even touch you with a ten foot pole?

By pinko

December 16, 2005 05:48 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, good luck advancing your closeminded, radical, fundamentalist ideas. Even you are entitled to free speech. I wish there were more true conservatives who posted to this blog, as opposed insane zealots like you who are so completely out of touch. You insult all conservatives every time you open your mouth in this forum.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 05:48 PM | Link to this

What ever pinko, that’s nice. I’d rather be a “theocrat” than stick up for pedophiles at the North American Man Boy Love Association like you do. Sicko.

P.S. Jesus was a “theocrat.”

Merry Christmas!

By Hangman

December 16, 2005 05:51 PM | Link to this

It appears the noose is getting quite tight around Mr. Bush’ neck.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 05:55 PM | Link to this

O.K. since now I’m a “theocrat” I’m going to need help on how to act. Somebody clue me in on the things “theocrats” do. Is it like in Iran where they bury adulterers up to their necks before they stone them to death? Or maybe like Saddam’s Iraq where religious sentences included cutting off hands and blowing people up with dynamite.

Funny how these things don’t bother the pinkos as long as they don’t happen to them. And it’s also kind of funny that Conservatives from the religious right are the ones spreading freedom in the Middle East, the same freedoms the pinkos are fighting so hard against.

Hypocrites.

Merry Christmas!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 05:56 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, keep spouting your radical, Taliban-like views. Like I said, the right to free speech of even zealots like you is as sacred as anyone’s. Enjoy yourself on that uber-radical island you find yourself on.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 05:58 PM | Link to this

The religious “bigots” fight for freedoms, the pinkos fight against it. What doesn’t anybody understand?

Merry Christmas, from a proud Christian.

By pinko

December 16, 2005 05:59 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, calling yourself a Conservative is an insult to nearly every Conservative in America. Call yourself what you are: an extreme radical fundamentalist. Do not insult good Conservatives by bastardizing that label, you insane zealot.

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 06:00 PM | Link to this

pinko,

The garbage you have spread around here for the last two days is far more offensive than what you pretend Andy is saying.

If you are so sure Andy is demanding a theocracy, why can’t you find one post that says that?

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:02 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, there are many good Conservatives who support the policies of the President. You, however, are not one of them. You, on have extreme radical fundamentalist views, some of which happen by chance to coincide with the President’s. You are so far outside the mainstream that it’s not even funny.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 06:02 PM | Link to this

What would a “pinko” know about Conservatism? Why don’t you run along back to your little war protest back at the campus, get back to undermining the spread of freedom in the Middle East?

Merry Christmas!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:03 PM | Link to this

RW, learn to read and go away.

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:08 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, my father is a good man, and a good Conservative, who does not spew the radical, fundamentalist bile that you do. We debate world issues constantly, especially during our weekly Saturday phone conversations. If you cannot understand how far outside the Conservative mainstream your Taliban-like mouthings are, then that is just pathetic.

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 06:10 PM | Link to this

pinko,

I’ll take that as your tacit admission that you don’t have any idea what you’re spouting off about.

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:14 PM | Link to this

RW, learn to read and go away.

By RE

December 16, 2005 06:18 PM | Link to this

In response to everyone getting kicked out of congress who was involved with Abramoff, I say yes. I do not care in a corrupt official has a D or R after thier name, only that they are corrupt. If Harry Ried and Mary Landrui are corrupt, arrest them, convict them, get them out because they have violated the public trust. At some point the rule of law has to be put above party loyalty. If you do not share this view, you have no business calling yourself a patriot at all. It does not matter what political affiliation a person has, only what thier conduct is. Keep the criminals out of government

By getalife

December 16, 2005 06:21 PM | Link to this

Amen RE!

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 06:21 PM | Link to this

It’s kind of cute being a “Fundamentalist Theocrat.” I’m starting to really get into it. Check this out- Pinko, get to the back of the bus. Don’t drink from that water fountain you infidel. Am I doing this right?

Merry Christmas, fellow “theocrats!”

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 06:22 PM | Link to this

pinko,

Were you by any chance the inspiration for Rainman?

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:24 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, free speech for everyone, you crazy sicko!

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 06:24 PM | Link to this

RE,

Good, your first list didn’t look quite so even handed.

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 06:27 PM | Link to this

RW: My stint in Psychology Studies taught me that when a hysterical male child brings up his daddy out of the blue, that means he either didn’t have a father raise him or he was severely abused. This fits pinkos profile without a doubt. It’s the good Christian thing to not taunt him about it and to not bring attention to his shortcomings. When he talks about his “daddy” again, just act like you don’t know.

Merry Christmas!

By getalife

December 16, 2005 06:31 PM | Link to this

Well we had one good politicion

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 06:33 PM | Link to this

I also noticed that he has a persistent personality and if you combine that with the absence of the father figure, he is most likely a serial m-asturbator. This causes severe anti social behavior which is quite evident in his hatred of God. Unfortunately, his prognosis is not promising, these conditions will deteriorate rapidly. Pray for him.

Merry Christmas!

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 06:35 PM | Link to this

Andy,

You mean if we look at pinko’s typo pattern we can figure out if he is right or left handed?

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:36 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, it seems that all you do is attempt to exploit non-existent shortcomings of others on this blog who are clearly smarter than you and not quite so radical and insane like you clearly are. But keep it up, guy, you’re making yourself look like the fundamentalist zealot that you are!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:38 PM | Link to this

RW, go away. You’re completely boring. At least Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy is interesting. Why don’t leave the computer and go masturbate to the lifesize portrait of Andy hanging above your bed?

By I Wish I Was Andy

December 16, 2005 06:41 PM | Link to this

RW: I’m pretty sure pinko has his right hand in use at the moment and it isn’t on the keyboard. This would make him a lefty.

Why has this freak taken such an interest in me? Am I that fascinating to these pinkos? Are they just hypnotized that I don’t just nod my head in unison like all the pinkos do to what ever nonsense they share with us? I sure hope this isn’t some queer deal.

Merry Christmas!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:42 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, I’m heading out for the day, but I’ll definitely see you here another time. Have fun in your parents’ basement in front of the computer on this wonderful Friday evening!

By pinko

December 16, 2005 06:44 PM | Link to this

Fundamentalist Theocrat Andy, you’re interesting because you’re pathetic. Looks like you’re pretty stupid, too, if you haven’t realized that by now.

Bye!

By RW-(the original)

December 16, 2005 06:45 PM | Link to this

Andy,

I think it is. Notice how pinko wants you alone.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 06:47 PM | Link to this

Geezus, stay with me your snide comments and whatnot are making me think you are slipping intot the closed minded, ruled by emotion thinking.

You were talking about redistribution of wealth around the world and how the rich nations had to sacrifice to bring the poor nations up. I countered that wealth is created form human labor interaction with natural resources to produce marketable goods that can be sold on the free market (libertarians love the free market). You came back with a snide rremark about printing (since you seem to have an open mind I will go find it for us):

Geezus, 11:28 A.M.

Scooter (I think): Physical money is created by governments. If you make something that someone wants, they purchase it with money that they earned at a job. This process is known as redistribution of wealth. The company that made the product didn’t actual make the money, they received money. It is unfortunate the phrase “redistribution of wealth� has been bastardized with a negative connotation.

I’m going to take this chance to repeat this statement of yours;

“It is unfortunate the phrase “redistribution of wealthâ€? has been bastardized with a negative connotation.”

It is a shame that you haven’t realized that socialism will not provide goods, efficient services and convenience for the people. Not even if democrats institute it. Dems are politicians fighting for power to control the people and that makes them just as corrupt as the republicrats.

Humility may save you. Because, true knowledge is within the humble man.

By Scooter

December 16, 2005 06:52 PM | Link to this

Alright all, I am heading out to a party that will be full of liberals. Maybe one or two will still have an open mind. The open minded amongst the anybody but Bush crowd are becoming fewer and fewer. I will keep fighting for my economic freedom and liberty.

Peace to the gods.

By keeping it REAL

December 16, 2005 06:53 PM | Link to this

Is it Chirst like to lie about a war get people kill about a lie use people of faith in your lie .you reap what you sow america!!! Merry chirstmas

By Geezus

December 16, 2005 07:07 PM | Link to this

You were talking about redistribution of wealth around the world and how the rich nations had to sacrifice to bring the poor nations up. I countered that wealth is created form human labor interaction with natural resources to produce marketable goods that can be sold on the free market (libertarians love the free market). You came back with a snide rremark about printing (since you seem to have an open mind I will go find it for us

The bolded text is inaccurate and illustrates my point (if it is bolded…lol). I was talking about Global Equilibrium which occurs naturally in ANY economic system. It IS supply/demand (the equilibrium points of change). No where did I say that nations would have to “sacrifice” wealth, I said that the wealth would be redistributed based on equilibrium. Sacrifice implies a choice and in a global economy there is no choice (except for trade barriers).

I don’t dispute your ascertion that (some forms of) wealth is created form human labor interaction with natural resources to produce marketable goods that can be sold on the free market The printing of money was used in a micro example (in a small system to show to flow of money in a small system) where global economics is a macro example. I just think that something got lost in translation/interpretation. If I sound short, I apologize but I feel that this has been covered and we are not “clashing” on anything. I never said your theory of wealth is wrong, it just happens to have nothing to do with the statement you keep bringing back up.