Luckovich cartoon changes address!

Mike Luckovich’s cartoon has moved to a new ajc.com address. Click here to view and bookmark.

The new format features a larger version of Mike’s cartoon for the day and allow readers to vote. There are also links to recent Luckovich cartoons and special galleries.

Bloggers who want to comment on issues in the news are invited to blog at any of our four other Opinion blogs:

Thinking Right

Jay Bookman

OpinionTalk

Woman to Woman

Home > Opinion > Mike Luckovich > Archives > 2007 > August > 09 > Entry

Unchecked power

By Mike Luckovich | Thursday, August 9, 2007, 09:04 PM

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Do you like this cartoon?
  Yes
  No


Voter Limit: Once per Day
View Poll Results

Permalink | Comments (186) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorial Cartoon

Comments

By Duh stands for Democrats

August 10, 2007 8:19 AM | Link to this

Geez, Hillary is trying to give Cheney a “Monica.”

Those Clintons get freaking wild when they get in the Oval Office, don’t they?

~~~~~

{{{{But the New Republic seems not to have understood how the Kuwait “detail” undermines everything. After all, what made the purported story interesting enough to publish? Why did the New Republic run it? Because it fits perfectly into the most virulent narrative of the antiwar left.}}}}

I knew it was fake the first time I read it:

{{{{As his mess-hall buddy doubled over in laughter, Beauchamp continued: “In fact, I was thinking of getting some girls together and doing a photo shoot. Maybe for a calendar? ‘IED Babes.’ ” The woman fled.}}}}

This is a pretty easy riddle to solve, I, and any soldiers that I’ve ever met, would not have been “doubled over in laughter.”

We would have punched that loser in the eye.

End of fake story.

~~~~~

{{{{More than half of Americans say US news organizations are politically biased, inaccurate the poll conducted by the Pew Research Center said.}}}}

I know one that is!

~~~~~

{{{{AJC “Iraq Developments” Iranian officials told Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that only a U.S. pullout would bring peace to his nation and said the Tehran government was doing its best to help stabilize neighboring Iraq.}}}}

Either that or we could turn Iran into “pieces.”

By the way, isn’t it interesting that a religious tyrant, a tyrant that buries people in the ground up to their necks and stones them to death, would hold the same views on whether the U.S. should pull out of Iraq as the democrats do?

~~~~~

{{{{Normal Americans just want Iraq handled. They want America to succeed: for the war to end in a way and time that prove if possible that the Iraq endeavor helped the world, or us, or didn’t make things worse for the world, or us. My hunch: The American people have concluded the war was a mistake, but know from their own lives that mistakes can be salvaged, and sometimes turned to good.}}}}

By The BlogFather

August 10, 2007 8:23 AM | Link to this

I wonder if the birth rate will rise exactly nine months after Hillary’s Cleavage Speech?

By saywhat?

August 10, 2007 8:30 AM | Link to this

Yup. Spot on Mike. I’m waiting to hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the right in 08 when they realize what they have done. It will be fun to produce all their arguments from the past 6 years in favor of what has been created during this time, when 2+ years from now they start screaming against it. Alas, it won’t do any good to confront their hypocrisy.Their ears will be deaf,their eyes shut tight and their minds closed to the glaringly obvious as they deny, deny, deny and create some outlandish revisionist history to explain it all away, and why its still Bill Clinton’s fault.

By Paul

August 10, 2007 8:43 AM | Link to this

saywhat?

I thought we’ve read the view here over and over again that it will take years and years and years for a Democratic President to undo all the damage wrought by Pres Bush? I thought a Democratic President would, from day one, press for legislation that would undo all the power that has accrued to the Executive?

Mr. L’s portrayal of Hillary’s “can’t wait” grin seems to indicate that just might not be the case. Noooo kidding. The irony is VP Cheney’s expression - as he views the monster he helped create (and put in office).

By Eric

August 10, 2007 8:46 AM | Link to this

I doubt cheney’s capable of GETTING a Monica. I’m thinking okra pod.

By Eric

August 10, 2007 8:47 AM | Link to this

I doubt cheney’s capable of GETTING a Monica. I’m thinking okra pod.

By The Watcher

August 10, 2007 8:52 AM | Link to this

Okra Pod?

EEEEEK!

By Bosch

August 10, 2007 8:56 AM | Link to this

RW, I tried to answer your comment last night, but my posts kept getting dropped.

I do remember those guys running around the field with Hank when he broke Babe’s record, so that was a good point, I don’t know? But I do remember there were Barney Fife-ish policemen there too.

As I said, I had heard that story on NPR a little bit ago ago, and I thought it was interesting. I never knew that the race to beat Babe’s record was so intense - I didn’t know there were death threats, but then again I was a kid.

I just thought it was a good and interesting story. I’ve always had a lot of respect for Hank Aaron. IMHO, He never seemed to let fame go to his head like some do.

Have a good morning.

By The BlogFather

August 10, 2007 9:11 AM | Link to this

There were death threats against Maris when he got 61. (another asterisk record of 165 game vs the 37 games they used to play when Ruth got 60)

There were death threats against Pete Rose when he went all in at world series of poker in 1977.

There were death threats from environmentalists when Brittany Spears shot that beaver.

The point is that there are always death threats no matter what mankind does. There are folks that think some people need killin’ no matter what. Good, clean killin’ is part of the american dream.

Hell, I think they shoulda hung Benedict Arnold’s wife cause she was in on the West Point treason, but acted so hysterical that George Washington let her go. (The first lewinski payoff?)

By IN THE NEWS

August 10, 2007 9:13 AM | Link to this

Data-Mining Our Liberties

””“The Protect America Act, in short, does not live up to its name: It does not enhance security-related surveillance powers. Rather, it allows the government to spy when there is no security justification. And it abandons all but the pretense of oversight. The result, as with so many of this Administration’s ill-advised policies, is power without responsibility—and it is by now all too clear how wisely and carefully this Administration wields power in the absence of accountability. “”“

By Goldie

August 10, 2007 9:15 AM | Link to this

Yep, here comes Hillary!

Of course, that’s the media’s prediction based on current polls. And we all know what happened to the “frontrunner” in the polls during the 2004 Dem primaries, too. Good ole Howard Dean!

By saywhat?

August 10, 2007 9:17 AM | Link to this

Paul,

I believe a more overwhelmingly Democratically controlled Congress would be able to limit some of that presidential power. I don’t believe Hillary would veto such legislation, but I don’t envision her pushing it either. I think Edwards, if elected (not holding my breath) would be most likely to initiate a scale back, but the temptation is going to be there for any President to use this power while it is available( and they will convince themselves its only for good) unless Congress cuts it off.I don’t foresee any of the dem presidential hopefuls making the over the top intense efforts toward a power grab like we have seen for the past 6 years though.

I don’t think Mike’s use of Hillary in the cartoon is so much an indictment of Hillary (though it might be, Mike?), but rather the embodiment of all things bad from a right wingnut perspective, an absurd caricature which the righties have been fomenting and building up to ridiculously epic proportions since 1992.

By the stopper

August 10, 2007 9:20 AM | Link to this

Saywhat gave us: I’m waiting to hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the right in 08 when they realize what they have done.

Yep. And it’s all because the righties honestly believed Karl Rove when he said they would have a “permanent majority.” They really believed that the Republican party would be in power forever.

Of course I’m hoping it’s not Hillary, but rather a non-corporatist in the White House come 1/2009, who’ll choose to devolve this ill-gotten Executive power.

But still—great toon, great point.

By The BlogFather

August 10, 2007 9:25 AM | Link to this

Hillary’s made some botched remarks lately and doesn’t appear so invincible, but the gaffs were short lived and probably not a long term problem.

The point is that Edwards is starting to emerge from Hillary’s shadow. When he speaks, he speaks calmly and when he addresses Healthcare, people are starting to believe.

If Edwards can avoid any overly liberal stances on other issues, then he’s going to move up in the polls.

By mountain man

August 10, 2007 9:25 AM | Link to this

I hope America is over its little fling with the false promises of the radical right. It certainly did what the Repugs wanted; took away wealth from the middle class and concentrated it with the elite.

Now if we can get a Democratic administration and a larger margin on the Hill, maybe we can rejoin the modern world and work on issues like universal health care and resolving the mid east situation in a mature and sane way.

The USA is an embarrassment. We treat our poor and downtrodden worse than a lot of third world countries.

I say it again. Bush and Cheney are worse than anyone could ever imagined them to be; without doubt the worse administration in our history and the very embodiment of unchecked power and corruption in office. They make me sick.

By @@

August 10, 2007 9:27 AM | Link to this

Look at that overbite on Hillary. I’m reminded of the old expression “She can clean a COB (liberal) through a picket fence”. They won’t know what bit ‘em.

She’ll give knew meaning to the word “precedence”.

By The BlogFather

August 10, 2007 9:32 AM | Link to this

My grandfather invented the Cobb Salad.

True.

It’s so hot that @@ gave me the cold shoulder…..and I liked it!

By Great Moments in Political Debate (NOT)

August 10, 2007 9:42 AM | Link to this

””“Look at that overbite on Hillary. “”“I’m reminded of the old expression “She can clean a COB (liberal) through a picket fence”. They won’t know what bit ‘em.”“”

Who does @@ think she is?

Swift Dental Hygienists for Truth?

By Say It Ain't So

August 10, 2007 9:42 AM | Link to this

‘Summer’ a poem by Abigail Elizabeth McIntyre

Sh|t !

It’s HOT !

By Paul

August 10, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this

saywhat?

I agree with the first part - the larger issue is the relative power between the Executive and the Legislative. VP Cheney was quite open that he thought the Legislative had too much relative power (he was a Congressman, served as a Secretary, also as White House Chief of Staff, so he saw the relationships from those perspectives, over a long time). So he pursued his goal (not for himself or the Pres, as he knew the changes would remain after he left office).

But I agree: once gained, power is rarely voluntarily reduced, regardless of party affiliation. Same is true with Congressional committees (one reason for so much overlap).

I don’t see the ‘toon as a Hillary indictment or a representation of right-wing fears, just a jump to the likely Democrat who could hold the office, and once there, she’ll have the same “power” for which Cheney strove, which will make the Right nervous. It’d be interesting if it would make the Left nervous, also.

By RW-(the original)

August 10, 2007 9:43 AM | Link to this

Bosch,

It is an interesting story and one that’s probably grown into mythical proportions over time. I wouldn’t go so far as to slander all the 1974 Atlanta police, but maybe stadium security as a general rule wasn’t taken that seriously back then.

That being said, a plethora of serious death threats would certainly have led the team to involve the FBI which would tend to give these things a little more weight.

The fact that the crowd rose in unison with a thunderous ovation is a sure sign it wasn’t a prevalent thought and the fact that the only reaction from Hank was to smile and run the bases with the two white strangers that appeared beside him patting him on the back seems to be pretty convincing evidence that a racially motivated murder wasn’t nearly as much in the forefront of his thoughts as the narrative later became.

Paul,

Somehow I find it very hard to see how a CIC acting as a CIC is a power grab, especially in war time. It’s certainly not a power grab to have a coequal branch act as a coequal. So this seems to be just more hysterical moonbat(ic)® rhetoric to incite their sheep. (see: Goldie, getalife, the scribbler, etc)

I’m not sure if you really believe there has been a power grab or you’re just poking sharp sticks at the bee hive, but I’d be interested to read what you think is an unconstitutional usurpation of power by the Executive if you really think there has been one.

Later all, see you at Happy Hour perhaps.

By Right-wing nut job in full glory

August 10, 2007 9:44 AM | Link to this

Duh says: “By the way, isn’t it interesting that a religious tyrant, a tyrant that buries people in the ground up to their necks and stones them to death, would hold the same views on whether the U.S. should pull out of Iraq as the democrats do?”

It is so true. 70% of the American People would like to stone people like you to death. Most of America is exactly like Iran. Exactly. Almost everyone here is no different than the Ayatollah. And I do also find that interesting.

You know they say that adversity reveals charecter. Well, as you’ve pointed out the American charecter has been revealed as stupid, cowardly and traitorous. I’m glad there is someone like you out there who is willing to tell these truths about the American people. Usually you have to find a terrorist or a French waiter to say these sort of bad things about the American people.

I find it intersting that you agree with the terrorists that the American people are bad, don’t you?

RWNJIFG

By Paul

August 10, 2007 9:50 AM | Link to this

BlogFather 9:25

For a fine illustration, see the “nuke’em don’t nuke’em” article. You have to admire Hillary’s spin machine - it’s very good (and her supporters seem willing to accept explanations they’d characterize as “flip-flop” or “lies” from other candidates).

Link: Hillary and nukes

Paragraph 10 is great and leads to all sorts of questions (which won’t be asked, let alone answered), such as:

Can an answer to a “broad hypothetical” be in conflict with an answer to a specific derived from the broad hypothetical? If so, is the broad hypothetical answer a lie?

Do your views a Senator conflict with your views as a Presidential candidate? If so, what other views have changed? (Of course, she’s already said a Presidential candidate shouldn’t say everything she thinks…).

And on. But you get the idea.

Cheers -

By The BlogFather

August 10, 2007 9:50 AM | Link to this

Dear great moments (NOT): Would that be SwiftMolars 4 Tooth?

By Elliemae

August 10, 2007 9:52 AM | Link to this

By mountain man August 10, 2007 9:25 A maybe we can rejoin the modern world and work on issues like universal health care and resolving the mid east situation in a mature and sane way.

Right on Mountain Man. What’s been happening is a total disgrace.

By the stopper

August 10, 2007 9:53 AM | Link to this

Blogfather, about Edwards: just WTF are “overly liberal stances”?

Most so-called-“liberal” stances—equality of opportunity for all, a managed healthcare system instead of the Wild West we’ve endured for decades, cautious foreign entanglements, and so forth, are winners with the public.

I’m not playing “gotcha” here, I just want to know what you think Edwards believes, that would be politically disadvantageous to him, with voters at least (I realize that he has to forget about big corporate-funded 527s and the like going for him).

By Bosch

August 10, 2007 9:57 AM | Link to this

RW, I didn’t mean to give you or anyone else the impression that I thought there was a murderous plot to kill Hank Aaron during that time. I wasn’t trying to put anything more into it. I thought it was interesting, that’s all, nothing more. I was actually trying to let you know that I thought you had a good point to begin with.

By getalife

August 10, 2007 9:59 AM | Link to this

Great toon Mike.

I see lots of karma coming for the gop.

Lets see what dick is up to:

“Cheney pushing for attack on Iran:

Vice President Dick Cheney has proposed launching airstrikes at suspected training camps in Iraq run by the Quds force, a special unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, according to two U.S. officials who are involved in Iran policy.”

Still war mongering. dick and w screw up Iraq and now want to screw up another third world country. Tough guy.

Pathetic, when China threatens to nuke our economy. The Saudis are blowing up our troops and they hold their hand. Russia is finishing the cold war but lets pick on third world countries.

Superpower?

Please.

Geez.

By Paul

August 10, 2007 10:06 AM | Link to this

getalife

Not trying to be difficult here, but what if OBL and his gang moved to Iran and had a nice little training camp going on about 20 miles from the border with Iraq? Lotsa Dems want to strike or invade Pakistan if we know where he is. Does it make a diff if we spot him in Iran?

BTW - I’d sanction a strike on the guy even if he was hanging out in Red Square.

By getalife

August 10, 2007 10:11 AM | Link to this

And Pakistan, where the ones who attacked us are hanging out.

The press asked w about Obama’s statement and he was correct.

By The BlogFather

August 10, 2007 10:16 AM | Link to this

Edwards should spend all his liberal capital on Healthcare and then gravitate toward the middle on everything else. He should Adopt a conservative but left of center platform, and he should soar with that healthcare stance.

The timing is right for any candidate that can convince America that he/she can change the healthcare system.

It’s so early, that the candidates have room to recover from gaffs. (and learn from them).

I expect the left and the right to start sounding like parrots as they avoid the pitfalls of a unique stand on any issue. Instead of attacking opponents, they should simply sound really presidential as they address an issue. Be themselves, and speak plainly, and let their personality win over voters.

It’s about how good you look and sound while you say what you’re saying. (never sound defensive)

The Pakistan remark by Obama illustrates this. The Islamists in Pakistan are galvanized by national security issues and fears of a preemptive strike by the US into Pakistan to get Bin Laden. Pakistan is unraveling, just as Bush’s think tank predicted it would if we let OBL escape there. In 2002, Rumsfeld was ordered to attack and he refused W’s order in time of war, and that’s treason. Rumsfeld did not attack until W made Afghanistan a pentagon operation and not a CIA operation. Fact. The CIA had Bin Laden pinpointed and dead to rights. Rumsfeld delay ruined everything. And now we have all of this.

The entire region is on it’s own timetable for complications and conflagrations. Our presence is interfering with the normal development of that region. We’ve violated the Prime Directive.

By Elliemae

August 10, 2007 10:17 AM | Link to this

Plastic biometric cards to be used as drivers licenses? Help! Help! The mark of the beast is here!!!

By Dusty

August 10, 2007 10:24 AM | Link to this

Luckovich makes two assumptions in his cartoon that Americans will never accept.

Hillary Clinton will never be elected to bring more disgrace to the White House in the Clinton fashion of lies and loose morals.

If such a Clinton catastrophe might be brought about by “hook or crooks”, Cheney would not stick around long enough to even say “Hi!” He would be gone before the deterioration starts again. Bill the Shill would take his place.

By the stopper

August 10, 2007 10:31 AM | Link to this

Hey, Dusty? wot said: “Hillary Clinton will never be elected to bring more disgrace to the White House in the Clinton fashion of lies and loose morals.”

What “disgrace?” Clinton left office with higher numbers than Chimpy’s seen in five years. The vast majority of Americans continue to see him as a competent president.

And any perceived “loose morals” are sins of the husband, not of the wife.

Put more simply—just because your redneck friends don’t care for the woman, doesn’t make you representative of the nation at large.

By getalife

August 10, 2007 10:34 AM | Link to this

Paul,

The timing of dick’s proposal when Marlarki is meeting with Iran shows he does not want peace in Iraq and is a sore loser.

Iraq is not our ally they are Iran’s ally. This is a consequence of his failed occupation and he can’t deal with his failure.

He should removed from office with pathetic proposal. He is an embarrassment to our country.

By Paul

August 10, 2007 10:40 AM | Link to this

Hi Dusty

Just a bit of fun before I go -

I think I have to rethink my comment I’d sanction a strike on OBL even if he were in Red Square.

Jihadists should have Constitutional protections

Jihadists should receive trials that conform to US laws

Captured Jihadists should be treated humanely

Where does it say the US executes those suspected of a crime? We capture, try, pass sentence, then carry out the sentence. Is not ordering the execution of a suspect (as the Democratic candidates say they would, once they know where OBL is) before a trial a gross miscarriage of justice?

Isn’t the ‘proper’ course to exhaust every opportunity to apprehend him, not summarily execute him?

Just trying to logically integrate some of the past statements of the candidates and their supporters, here. You don’t think it would cost votes, do you?

By Paul

August 10, 2007 10:44 AM | Link to this

getalife 10:34

I do agree - an Iraqi government allied with Iran would be very, very troublesome for the US. Events have a way of going down a path not forseen, with very problematic consequences.

I’m gone for a while. TTYL -

By getalife

August 10, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

Stu Bykofsky | To save America, we need another 9/11

Another desperate idiot like Paul.

Another 9/11 and there will be martial law and no constitution. It will not bring this country together.

Geezuz fereaking kerist.

By Buy Danish

August 10, 2007 10:49 AM | Link to this

Woops!

They found a bug in NASA’s Global Warming “science” and the “consensus” that 1998 was the warmest year on record is incorrect and has been replaced by the pre-SUV date of 1934:

According to the new data published by NASA, 1998 is no longer the hottest year ever. 1934 is./Four of the top 10 years of US CONUS high temperature deviations are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900.

Also, scroll down to the next article which reveals that the placement of weather stations is creating unreliable data that is not in compliance with standards.

What say you, Goreacles?

Later, with a great big maybe attached to it…

By Paul

August 10, 2007 10:55 AM | Link to this

getalife 10:44

Geez, just ‘cause you’re upset with the Dem cave-in on the surveillance act, the leading candidates marching off to another war, the cartoon today showing Hillary’s gonna be like Cheney (Obama nailed it with “Bush-Cheney Lite), Edwards appearing on Fox 33 times before he figures out they’re the enemy - no need to take it out on me!

Cheers!

By N-GA

August 10, 2007 11:01 AM | Link to this

Paul,

I won’t be here after this post until much later, if at all. So this one will have to do for a bit.

When Obama said that he would strike at Osama in Pakistan (if Pakistan’s gov’t failed to do so), he was simply saying out loud what every candidate (save one, perhaps) would do if s/he were President. For them to attack him for taking that position is disingenuous, at best. All they can criticize him for is saying it out loud rather than refusing to respond to such a hupothetical situation.

Next Topic: Everyone will have their own opinion about the balance of power between the Executive and Legislative branches of government. However, the one thing people tend to forget is that if an individual who has real leadership qualities ever gets into the White House, then Congress will be forced to follow this President because the People will demand it!

Leadership can overcome huge political differences.

By getalife

August 10, 2007 11:05 AM | Link to this

Just call em like I see em Paul.

Write something that is not pathetic.

Geez.

By Paul

August 10, 2007 11:10 AM | Link to this

N-GA

I’m never gonna get outta here - or know if you saw this, same as, what, Wednesday?

Para 1 - of course it’s disingenuous. It’s politics. That was an underlying point of my post(s). And I think there’s a BIG difference between a hypothetical they’re pretty likely to encounter and one along the lines of “if we knew a meteor was on a collision course with earth…”

Next Topic: True, too. The point I’m sure you saw is that the changes carry on after the folks who implemented them leave office. The balancing act between the Executive and Legislative branches will continue - rather like water seeking its own level in a container that’s constantly being juggled.

By getalife

August 10, 2007 11:11 AM | Link to this

RW writes:

“Later all, see you at Happy Hour perhaps”

BD writes:

“Later, with a great big maybe attached to it…”

Paul writes:

“I’m gone for a while. TTYL -“

It is like they are trying to get me drunk.

I call cease fire on the drinking game to drink when the wingnuts play this silly game.

Whats up dat?

By Mrs. Godzilla

August 10, 2007 11:12 AM | Link to this

I really enjoyed my Newsweek this week.

The Science IS IN on global warming. But like so many other issues, there are those who just plain don’t like the score.

While I stand for each individuals right to free speech, I stand for my own right to freely speak the words, Climate change deniers are either intellectually defective or dishonest.

By luckovichisaheadcase

August 10, 2007 11:26 AM | Link to this

This twits hypocrisy is palpable!!! Hitlery has specialized in unchecked power and its abuse for YEARS! At least Cheney is a CONSTITUTIONAL official. Hitlery was acting as ‘co-president’ when she was only the ‘wife’ of the then B*stard-in-Chief. You folks just really are too much for color tv.

By Old Coots Political Humor

August 10, 2007 11:31 AM | Link to this

””“You folks just really are too much for color tv.”“

Thanks for your input Mr. Bodine. Double Naught Spy

By luckovichisaheadcase

August 10, 2007 11:35 AM | Link to this

Mrs. Godzilla - the science is NOT in yet. Please do not make the assumption that Newsweek somehow has a monopoly on scientific truth. True the world is getting warmer. That has been true for the last 150 years, since the end of the “Little Ice Age”. However, man has nothing to do with changing climate cycles. The Earth has warmed and cooled repeatedly throughout its 4 billion year history. 120 thousand years ago the Earth’s temperature averaged 9 degress F higher than now. We then slid into a protracted ice age.

Go read a few scholarly works on history of the planet. Educate yourself. Don’t depend on the knee-jerk (and I do mean JERK) left-wing sychophant media to feed you with a bunch of crap. You might die of intellectual cholera!

By Mrs. Godzilla

August 10, 2007 11:48 AM | Link to this

Mr. Headcase

You are wrong.

By Taylor

August 10, 2007 11:53 AM | Link to this

luckovichisaheadcase — care to quote your sources there?

By GodHatesTrash

August 10, 2007 11:57 AM | Link to this

Andi/e Duh, Cheney doesn’t need Monica with W and Karl Rove around.

By The Watcher

August 10, 2007 11:58 AM | Link to this

Hey, lalalalaheadcase

The reason the world is getting warmer - all your hot air!

By SOURCE PLEASE

August 10, 2007 12:00 PM | Link to this

when sourcing the data, please also include the names of those FUNDING the studies.

By Mother Earth

August 10, 2007 12:01 PM | Link to this

Mr. Headcase wouldn’t know a scientific journal if it bit him in the a*.

Not saying this is a scientific journal, just saw this article this morning Analysts See ‘Simply Incredible’ Shrinking of Floating Ice in the Arctic

We are ruining our planet at an alarming rate.

By Mother Earth

August 10, 2007 12:02 PM | Link to this

And Headcase - Never call Mrs. G a jerk. She has more integrity than you have in your little finger.

By getalife

August 10, 2007 12:14 PM | Link to this

headcase,

The right’s record of being right and telling the truth is very pathetic like you.

By Duh stands for Democrats

August 10, 2007 12:15 PM | Link to this

{{{{By Mother Earth August 10, 2007 12:01 PM Not saying this is a scientific journal, just saw this article this morning Analysts See ‘Simply Incredible’ Shrinking of Floating Ice in the Arctic}}}}

Ice melts in the summer, duh.

By Midori

August 10, 2007 12:27 PM | Link to this

this is the funniest you tube video EVAH!!

By JustPlainStupid

August 10, 2007 12:38 PM | Link to this

Duh, Read it again. It says that the ice has melted more now than at any previous peak time. And the peak time is still ahead.

By JustPlainStupid

August 10, 2007 12:40 PM | Link to this

Duh, Read it again. It says that the ice has melted more now than at any previous peak time. And the peak time is still ahead.

By Cindy

August 10, 2007 12:42 PM | Link to this

You “cons” can say what you want about Hillary, but she is a giant step ahead of bush and company: more intelligence, more competence, more leadership (that can be said for many of the candidates). I just laugh at your meager attempts to discredit her while your joker continues to blunder and sink this country further into a shameless position it never deserved. Doesn’t matter what you say, won’t bother me because the majority of the US sees the failure of this entire administration and I am thrilled that it will be gone; never to return. I don’t expect you to agree with me; you are all in denial.

By The BlogFather

August 10, 2007 12:46 PM | Link to this

“Look, the Sahara Desert was a tropical forest just a few millenia ago”.

“Nobody said the earth doesn’t cycle, but you need to know it’s also on a tread mill and not going anywhere”.

“The earth simply heats up and cools down like it always did…it’s called the churn….the Churn!” (George W Bush at the Tokyo Summit)

By Mrs. Godzilla

August 10, 2007 1:05 PM | Link to this

Midori

I like this one

It’s a family thing!

By I brake for humor

August 10, 2007 1:11 PM | Link to this

The Cartoon

By Right-wing nut job in full glory

August 10, 2007 1:16 PM | Link to this

Duh,

5 years ago the UN was worthless.

Now you are cheering them.

Now the administration is asking for their help.

You and they are hypocrites. I still think we can do this on our own except we have to kill all the liberals first, because its their fault that our guys are dying in Iraq. At least that’s what Dusty said last week. And she’s always right. I thought you were too until you start kissing the butts of the UN, one world government crowd.

Coward.

RWNJIFG

By Shawny

August 10, 2007 1:23 PM | Link to this

There is no stopping the Clinton machine (either of them). It absolutely cracks me up each time I hear her mention the “right wing maching”. Her machine is equally as potent and vicious.

However, after the Clinton landslide victory, I predict her sly maneuvering will come back to haunt her. No one holds her accountable for anything now, but it will all come out in the general election.

By Global Warring

August 10, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this

The Danes, Russians and Canada investing in shrinkage.

“Canada steps up fight for the Arctic”

“Canada’s ownership claim to the waters has been largely ignored because of the harshness of the climate, which makes maritime transportation in the barren region impractical.”

“That is changing, however, as warming temperatures open the prospect of resource exploitation and maritime access.”

By The BlogFather

August 10, 2007 1:25 PM | Link to this

Herman’s Hermits sings “Hillary “08”.

I’m Hillary 08 I am. Hillary 08 I am I am. I was married to a presidential ho, he Played Married many times B4, and everyone was a monica, it couldn’t be a phyllis or a pam, I’m his ball and chain I’m Hillary, Hillary 08 I am.

Second verse same as the first. I’m Hillary 08 I am. Hillary 08 I am I am. I got married to the diddler next door he’s been diddling many times B4 and everygirl was a monica, he couldn’t take a phyllis or a pam, I’m his ball and chain I’m Hillary, Hillary 08 I am, I am, Hillary 08 I am.

(sorry hillary, But you’re too shrill, and you turned me off, so this is what you get. Now, I can write FOR you or agin ya, it’s up to you. My campaign consulting services are available to you at no charge, but you must at least contact me by hacking into this blog and finding my email address, at which point I’ll know you’re qualified to be prez.)

By AntiRadical

August 10, 2007 1:32 PM | Link to this

Haven’t stopped by here in ages. I see little has changed.

Today’s toon is fantastic, ML. Of course the Dems aren’t about to abbrogate the tiniest sliver of presidential power any more than the Reps would.

I seem to remember President Clinton having line item veto authority for a significant portion of his tenure. Did he refuse to use that power?

Not hardly, but I do think he used it with considerable finesse and it was probably the single greatest reason that President Clinton was as effective a President as he was. His success was mostly due to the fact that he possessed considerably more leverage against Congress through line-item veto than our current President has. Would any of the far left now be comfortable with President Bush having similar veto prerogative?

I’m all for the line item veto but Reps treated the idea like it was Cholera when they had their chance at power with one of their own in the oval office and majorities in both house. Maybe the not so distant thought of their own struggle with President Clinton was still fresh in their memories?

By IN THE NEWS

August 10, 2007 1:36 PM | Link to this

BREAKING NEWS: 3 Killed In Indiana Mine Accident

By getalife

August 10, 2007 1:39 PM | Link to this

“No one holds her accountable for anything now.”

Just like w, look at the toon idiot.

By Mother Earth

August 10, 2007 1:43 PM | Link to this

Duh,

Yeah, duh, I know ice melts in the summer, it just seems to melting somewhat quicker than usual. Take it up with the scientists.

“Ice melts in summer” what a stupid comeback, but then again, I didn’t expect much more from someone whose name is “Duh.”

By Mother Earth

August 10, 2007 1:54 PM | Link to this

How about this “Duh” - but this abstract might be a little difficult for you to comprehend. It uses big words like “causal attribution” and “analyses” and the word “the.”

Nature 421, 37-42 (2 January 2003)

A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems

By Dusty

August 10, 2007 1:57 PM | Link to this

Right Wing Nut Job @1:15

Are the squirrels chasing your nutty head today? Maybe you are just dememted on your own. Whatever…but stop MISQUOTING me just because you are a devious liberal trying to make a point with lies.

The terrorists are killing our troops because they hate all infidels, ‘specially Americans. They are encouraged when they think Americans want to cut-n-run. That is what I said and that is what I meant.

I have no further interest in what you have to say because you are dishonest.

By Mother Earth

August 10, 2007 1:59 PM | Link to this

Current Evidence of Climate Change

By Fly-on-the-wall

August 10, 2007 2:05 PM | Link to this

There was an interesting article put out a couple of days ago by Wesley Clark and someone else. The whole point of the article was that the Bush Administration made a grave error(go figure! They made a mistake?) in classifying captured terrorists as non-combatants versus criminals. The article goes on to show how the Bush team have legitimized the terrorists by holding them in military prisons and having military trials. The article says we should treat them like they always have been - criminals and try them in criminal courts. If we did that tnen it would legitimize our stance on them. Instead we’ve raised them up and now more people of that mind want to be a martyr for the cause. Funny but isn’t this what Bill Clinton did when he wanted to pursue them via law enforcement? Oh, but the Bush team can’t do anything the way Bill did it. Sad, truly sad.

By Mother Earth

August 10, 2007 2:06 PM | Link to this

EPA Climate Change Website

By Remember When

August 10, 2007 2:08 PM | Link to this

It was the Cold War

and the Russians had thousands of Nukes pointed at our Nation.

Why are some Americans PETRIFIED with fright over the TERRORISTS?

These frightened ones are more likely to die crossing the street or eating tainted food.

Caution is called for. Alertness is called for. But mindnumbing fear?

I have no patience with the chickenhearted. They are embarrasing to the rest of us citizens here in the good old U S of A.

The Home of the Brave.

By IN THE NEWS

August 10, 2007 2:25 PM | Link to this

Fears of US attacks on Iran grow as media campaign heats up

OIL OIL OIL OIL OIL

By Right-wing nut job in full glory

August 10, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

Dusty, this is verbatim:

“By Dusty

August 2, 2007 5:13 PM | Link to this

Not much here today. Maybe I should print a little song too. Let’s see…

Our troops are dying,

‘Cause liberals are lying”

Now who is being dishonest? Have you been MISQUOTED???? It appears that you did draw a direct line between liberals and our troops dying. I agree with you. I always do, but are you backtracking on this because I thought it was some of your finest work? In fact after being inspired by you I wrote the defense dept. and suggested that on future death certificates and on the notices to family memebers they should say that the cause of death was ‘Homocide by liberalism.’

Taking YOUR logic it would appear that liberals are responsibe for nearly 4,000 troop deaths. A greater toll than 9/11, meaning that the liberals are worse than the terrorists. We are trying to kill terrorists, right? So let’s kill all the liberals too. You know they deserve it. Look at what they’ve done for God’s sake. How many troops have to die before you wake up and see what must be done?

RWNJIFG

By raisedanidiot

August 10, 2007 2:31 PM | Link to this

Dust ball @1:57 “The terrorists are killing our troops because they hate all infidels, ‘specially Americans. They are encouraged when they think Americans want to cut-n-run. That is what I said and that is what I meant.”

Dust ball - you don’t KNOW what you mean…you contradict yourself with every post…Why the hell should the terrorist be encouraged? We’re winning the war on terror aren’t we? Your daddy is gonna make us all proud, and libs will shrink with mortification cause big daddy george is here to say, “Bring it on”! You give me way too much power when you assume that my words (or anyone on the blog)could impact the current quagmire we now call the “war on terror”. Why should you hold us so accountable for our personal opinions and not hold your dick tater accountable for anything? You and your ilk are faaaaaaarrrr more responsible for the deaths of thousands of American soldiers than any cry for peace could be. You want to blame somebody? Look in the mirror…coward.

mother earth - if you feed Andy/duh he will grow like a little shop of horrors.

ITN- interesting 1:09!

By @@

August 10, 2007 2:36 PM | Link to this

FOILED FOILED FOILED

I wasn’t paying attention to politics back when Bill was in office. I’ve learned here that Bill was the first black president, but I guess he couldn’t be black AND gay.

Thrown under the bus…nooooooo way…

Well the democrats have already tossed the left on surveillance, ethics, earmarks and the war.

What’s Hillary got up her pants leg?

By Shawny

August 10, 2007 2:42 PM | Link to this

There is no stopping the Clinton machine (either of them). It absolutely cracks me up each time I hear her mention the “right wing maching”. Her machine is equally as potent and vicious.

However, after the Clinton landslide victory, I predict her sly maneuvering will come back to haunt her. No one holds her accountable for anything now, but it will all come out in the general election.

By Shawny

August 10, 2007 2:46 PM | Link to this

Q: What SPECIFICALLY was Pres Clinton effective at?

dont say the economy was good…although it was, it wasn’t his doing…$9 oil, techno boom, etc.

dont say that there wasnt a terror threat…Cole, 1st trade center, Khobar towers….

What did he do? I have one answer..He was active in Welfare to Work, and that was good.

By Duh stands for Democrats

August 10, 2007 2:47 PM | Link to this

{{{{By nut job August 10, 2007 1:16 PM 5 years ago the UN was worthless. Now you are cheering them.}}}}

Kofi Annan, a crook just as much as any lib, is gone. France is being run by a wingnut.

New world, babe.

~~~~~~

{{{{By Mother Earth August 10, 2007 1:43 PM Yeah, duh, I know ice melts in the summer, it just seems to melting somewhat quicker than usual.}}}}

Yep, and “climate change” causes it to snow in summer.

I know all of your talking points and slogans, keep them to yourself.

What’s next, this is a man made heat wave?

Duh.

By Bosch

August 10, 2007 2:50 PM | Link to this

Shawny, “No one holds her accountable for anything now”

When has Bush been held accountable for anything he’s done? A right-winger such as yourself should never use the word “accountable” in a post in reference to politicians. It just doesn’t mix well. It would be like a lefty liberal a few years ago mentioning “celebacy.” Just doesn’t go well.

By For Shawny

August 10, 2007 2:51 PM | Link to this

15 million working families enjoyed tax relief under President Clinton’s expanded Earned Income Tax Credit. Thanks to Clinton, the EITC lifted 4.3 million people out of poverty in 1998 alone.

1.5 million children benefited when Clinton more than doubled federal funding for child care.

President Clinton signed a bad “welfare reform” bill in 1996, but Clinton vetoed a worse bill twice, winning concessions each time including - increased child care funding (by $4 billion), worker retraining, extensions for benefits, exceptions for “hard cases” and more.

Clinton increased funding for the Head Start program by 90 percent in FY 2000 so 880,000 children had a better chance to learn and grow.

Clinton forced the minimum wage up from $4.25 to $5.15 per hour and demanded an increase to $6.15.

Clinton’s Workforce Investment Act reformed the nation’s employment and training system.

Clinton’s AmeriCorps gave 150,000 young people the opportunity to serve in their communities while earning money for college or skills training.

President Clinton’s One America initiatives challenged us to respect others’ differences and embrace the common values that unite us. “[T]o close the opportunity gaps that exist for minorities and the underserved in this country.”

The poverty rate fell from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 12.7 percent in 1998. That’s the lowest poverty rate since 1979 and the largest five-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years (1965-1970).

The African-American poverty rate dropped from 33.1 percent in 1993 to 26.1 percent in 1998 — the lowest level ever recorded and the largest five-year drop in African-American poverty in more than a quarter century (1967-1972).

The poverty rate for Hispanics fell to the lowest level since 1979, and dropped to 25.6 percent in 1998.

African-American unemployment fell from 14.2 percent in 1992 to 7.3 percent in March 2000 — the lowest rate on record.

The unemployment rate for Hispanics fell from 11.6 percent in 1992 to 6.3 percent in March 2000 — and in the last year has been at the lowest rate on record.

For women the unemployment rate was 4.3 percent in March 2000, nearly the lowest since 1953 [when few women sought employment outside the home].

In 1999, the homeownership rate was 66.8 percent — the highest ever

By getalife

August 10, 2007 2:52 PM | Link to this

Geez, the wingnuts are more unhinged than usual today.

Must of realized Clinton will be back in the WH and there will be karma.

Bwa.

By @@

August 10, 2007 2:53 PM | Link to this

Speaking of surveillance, I’m always amused by how paranoid the left is.

Smile, you’ve been on candid camera for some time now.

Let me guess, some of you leftists have been caught cheating on your spouse or committing a crime.

I wonder if they ever caught Bill passing through with a big smile on his face? Let’s take a closer look at Hillary’s overbite…yup, looks like a smile to me.

By Goldie

August 10, 2007 2:55 PM | Link to this

{{Hillary Clinton will never be elected to bring more disgrace to the White House in the Clinton fashion of lies and loose morals.}}

Dust-For-Brains, there’s been no bigger disgrace in the White House than what your guy Bush has done for the past 6+ years — all the lies told and spun, and the lack of morals, only looking out for his corporate bigwig buddies… not only 72% of America knows that he’s a disgrace, but about 95% of the rest of the world knows it, too. Total disgrace!

The Dems Can’t Wait For ‘08! It may be Hillary, or Obama, or Edwards, or Kucinich… It won’t matter who leads the Dems — there will be a loud breath exhaled around the world once America gets the Repugs outta the White House in Jan. ‘

By Mother Earth

August 10, 2007 2:56 PM | Link to this

Oh another great “Duh” comback. Why don’t I just “keep them to myself” did you read any of the other posts? I’m not the only one concerned. I thought those words might be too hard for you. Is that your response to the scientific community? Just keep this to yourself!

Duh, duh, duh, duh is dumb.

By The Graduate

August 10, 2007 2:56 PM | Link to this

Funny toon, Hillary is goosing Cheney under the desk with her foot.

Wonder how many applications will be submitted for internships?

getalife will be the first (only) in line.

By For Shawny

August 10, 2007 2:57 PM | Link to this

Clinton succeeded in brokering peace negotiations in Northern Ireland between warring Catholics and Protestants, and — after a failed first attempt at outsting a military dictatorship in Haiti — in ending the murderous rule of Haitian leadership.

By Bosch

August 10, 2007 3:00 PM | Link to this

Shawny, It is very impolite to ask a question on this blog and then tell everyone else how it can and can not be answered. Isn’t that right, RW? Where are your manners?

You should never make assumptions about how some one will answer. I know that may be a little hard for you, but just try.

By ??

August 10, 2007 3:01 PM | Link to this

Who’s that @@?

And does he ever have something constructive to say?

I guess he