I apologize for the crudity of this cartoon. I’m normally not this vulgar, but it really has become this type of election campaign.
Support the artist and buy a signed print!
I apologize for the crudity of this cartoon. I’m normally not this vulgar, but it really has become this type of election campaign.
In case you live under a rock, or in case you get your news from MSNBC, the big scandal of the day is that the IRS is targeting conservative and Tea Party groups.
Yawn. This is news? I mean, I guess it is in the fact that it’s finally being reported, but no doubt this has been suspected for a long time.
My biggest frustration with all of this is the Democrats. When are you going to start cleaning house? What boggles my mind is that honest, hard working, freedom loving Americans are so loyal to their own party, that they are unwilling to rid it of corruption as it has taken over. I’m sorry, using the IRS as bullies to shut down political opposition (aka speech) during two election cycles is tyranny. There is nothing else you can call it. Sure it’s your guys doing it, so you’ll look the other way, but you same people screamed foul at W for barely even sneezing!
The Republicans have NOOOO problem jettisoning politicians the moment they are accused of wrong doing, whether or not such accusations are even true. Remember Tom Foley? Tom Delay? Dan Maes? Why can’t you Democrats do the same?
Of course, these attacks by the IRS are justified according to Democrat Harry Reid. According to him, because these conservative non-profit groups are sometimes fronted by rich (gasp!) people, they shouldn’t be allowed to qualify like the liberal non-profit groups (fronted by rich people). So, let me get this straight, rich people shouldn’t have free speech protection? Actually, yes, I’ve had some liberals tell me, and with all sincerity, they say money should be removed from speech so that it becomes fair. Then they pat themselves on the back for being so freedom minded.
Money does make speech easier, but guess what, it exists on both sides. Need I remind you that Democrats have outspent Republicans on every major national election since 2006? Money is speech and there shall be NO law restricting it!
Other prominent liberals have justified these IRS attacks by saying violent and racist groups like the TEA party should have extra scrutiny placed on them. WHAT?!? I’m confused. Do these liberals really believe that the TEA party is racist and violent, or are they just saying this as a convenient way to quickly demonize and dismiss their opposition? Every time a liberal tries to pin the TEA party as violent, I ask them, based on what? Can you name for me an actual violent incident involving a TEA party member? I can tell you how many times TEA party members have been falsely accused after any number of terrorist attacks, only to be quietly exonerated later. (Gabby Giffords, Aurora shootings, Boston bombings.) Perhaps they only remember the first media accusations and not the later correction?
And the charges of racism? Sooooo… let me get this straight. Smaller government and fiscal responsibility are racist?
This is a tactic often used by dictators. Falsely accuse your political opponent of the worst possible immorality you can think of. (In America, right now, that’s the charge of racism.) Then because they are so immoral, you can justify perpetrating whatever injustices against them you want, you know, like IRS harassment. It’s how Hitler got an entire German country to turn against the Jews.
What are your values? Forget party allegiance. Take the time to investigate the people on your side and those from the other side. When anyone, Republican or Democrat, engages in unethical activities in order to gain political power, the entire nation should be holding them accountable, not just the opposing party.
Neither side wants to be the side to rob grandma of her means of living through entitlement cuts. This is the untrue accusation that crops up every election cycle. So neither side seems to have the political courage or moral fiber to do the right thing.
One observation I have made through all of these impending deadlines we have encountered over the past four years, from fiscal cliffs to debt ceilings, is that the Democrats seem scared to death to have the deadlines pass without another “bandaid” fix. It’s as if the Democrats don’t want the sequestering to occur and the closer to the deadline we get, the more irate they become. I find it fascinating. Why could this be? Could it be a clue for the Republicans?
The Republicans must believe that if we go into sequestering that somehow they will get the political sword for it. Certainly polls indicate that this will be the case and we’ve got a media that is more than ready to write that story and broadcast it 24/7. But if this truly was the case, then I would believe that the Democrats would be a lot more casual about these approaching deadlines. I don’t think we’d see Obama come out shaking his finger at Republicans accusing them of not being willing to come together for the good of the country. Perhaps the Democrats do have something to lose.
Here is what I suspect. This new deadline includes several mandatory cuts. What do we know about government spending? Once it starts, it’s nearly impossible to stop. It becomes an unchecked cash flow from that point forward. This sequestering will automatically stop a lot of that spending. The biggest issue I believe is not that these programs will loose money. That’s not what the Democrats are worried about. No, it’s that when the cuts do go into place, we will discover that all of that spending wasn’t necessary in the first place! Those in charge, Republicans and Democrats alike, are not allowing these deadlines to lapse. Wishful thinking, maybe, but should the cuts occur, I think it becomes much harder to sell additional spending to the general public. This could potentially pay huge dividends in the upcoming midterms.
I am sick of party allegiance. Seriously folks, I don’t care if you are a Democrat or a Republican, don’t you care about out of control spending?
I know that in addition to fabulous cartoons, you, my fans, await anxiously for whatever contrived commentary I will give to compliment the cartoon. So here it goes… Drumroll, please… “This is one of my first cartoons that I’ve painted digitally. It’s quite a different technique than my normal, Adobe Illustrator, renderings. I think I kind of like it.” So there you have it.
Seriously, I cannot watch Barack Obama much anymore without nearly blowing my top. The things that come out of his mouth are almost venom. I know politics are dirty, just ask Aaron Burr, but for crying out loud, to say that capitalism has NEVER worked, and that the Republican’s way of doing things have failed us? Is he for real? How on earth did America become the most prosperous country in the world, if not for capitalism? The numbers don’t even add up. Higher unemployment, gas prices and discouragement now than when he first took office. The only thing lower are home values, which have tanked! If capitalism doesn’t work, then how does he explain the late 1800s, when capitalistic tycoons like Carnegie, and Mellan, and Vanderbilt, and Rockefeller ruled the roost, even then, American prosperity and ingenuity flourished? How does he explain that the greatest advances in science, medicine, cinema, sports and art have all come from a country built on free markets?
Then he goes on and says if it weren’t for those dern Republicans who won’t pass all his jobs bills. Huh, what? What jobs bills? Like the pipeline he shut down? That wasn’t the Republicans! Like all the rhetoric about forcing the rich to pay more? How does that create jobs? (I’ve never been hired by a poor person, just FYI) Like all the stimulus bills? Where the average, so-called, job created cost the taxpayers approximately $200,000? (according to figures put out by the Weekly Standard). Are there more job bills just like these that those evil obstructionist Republicans are refusing the pass that I’m unaware of? If so, thank God for the Republicans!
Everybody points to George Bush and blame him for all the troubles we face now. Only problem is, when you trace the start of the downturn, it just so happens to coincide with Democrats taking control of the House and Senate in 2006. Since then, they’ve been in the driver seat. That’s six years they’ve had and they celebrate at 8% unemployment! What about the 4% we enjoyed in 2006? And while they can claim we are in recovery, the results speak for themselves. As an sales person, I have seen a dramatic drop in sales since 2006 and it has not ever come back.
So what is capitalism and what is it that Obama really opposes? Another word is “free markets”. To be opposed to free markets is to be opposed to freedom. If Obama had at least said something like, “While capitalism has its positives…” I could have respected him a little more. Instead, he cannot concede even the tiniest bit, for doing so will reveal how destructive his redistribution policies are. To say the stuff that he does, I have to conclude that either he is an idiot who does not have a clue about history, or he is diabolical and doesn’t care, because it’s all about the agenda.
Listen, I’m not rich. It’s easy to envy them, and they certainly have their excesses. But I like living in a society that rewards hard work with the possibility of achieving greatness and wealth. I do not want to be punished for achievement. Success should not be immoral, but the way our president spins it, he makes it sound like it is.
Final thoughts. The Democrat Party can sit on their little mound of rocks and call it a recovery all day long, but I think the American people remember what it was like to walk along the edge of the canyon and until we get back to that point, there’s going to be a lot of turnover in Washington.
I originally created this cartoon three years ago. It never made it to my blog for some reason, but considering all the craziness in Washington right now, today seemed as good as any to put it in.
Gotta love it. So the Democrats win this time in Colorado and they win big. With no pretense, the create a map that will replace key Republican seats with Democrat seats, by oozing in Democrat strongholds into other districts and lumping together Republican districts. The whole process they took was disgusting, and of course, it was upheld by our liberal supreme court.
Not that gerrymandering is anything new. Republicans do the same thing when it’s their turn, but this takes it to a whole new level. That’s why party does matter. You may like a particular candidate that doesn’t necessarily share all of your world view. But if he/she is in office when redistricting comes around, the state changes its makeup for the next ten years.
Goodbye lovely purple-ly red Colorado. Hello blue Colorado. Has nobody learned anything from Michigan?
As our economy spins out of control, the persistent argument I hear from Obama lovers is “Obama saved us from going into Depression! Can you imagine how bad it would be if he HADN’T done the things he did?” As a rational person, I’m really trying to make sense of this statement. Not being an Obama fan, I truly wonder if these people actually believe what they are saying.
Obama takes office at 7% unemployment. It’s now close to 10%. The housing market has tanked since the passage of the stimulus bills. Commodity prices have soared. And Tim Geitner tells David Gregory that if Obama hadn’t stepped in, unemployment would easily be 15%, as if he has some sort of magic powers to know these kinds of things.
In my mind I started thinking about the logic. Suppose I had a skin rash. A doctor prescribes a cream. When I start using it, the rash worsens. As a rational person, what would I assume? That the cream is working, and that if I hadn’t used it I might be far worse? No, we would immediately get rid of that cream and find something else. So the question is, why doesn’t the same logic apply to Obama and the economy?
Thus is the thinking behind this cartoon.
Funny how so many urge for a coming together and bipartisanship, yet when push comes to shove, they refuse to compromise their own values and simply expect the other side to cave.
That’s fine, in fact, I prefer people with opinions, even if they are in direct opposition to mine, over those who prefer to remain wishy-washy over issues and choose to remain ignorant on the hot topics that are affecting our nation today.
Those of us who have been through a few election cycles know that nothing really ever changes. The candidates make feel-good promises that could never really be implemented without some sort of consequence, and yet we buy into it, follow the hype, buddy up to our candidate and hammer in those yard signs. It seems both sides make the move to the center, contrary to how they historically have voted. This year the Democrats have especially done so, but to be fair and objective (like there is such a thing, anywhere), this toon lampoons both sides.
Tax cuts, strong defense, limited spending, pro small business, wait a minute, those are Republican talking points! Use the federal government to stop corporate greed? Now my side is sounding like Democrats! Anecdotally, I occasionally hear individuals talking about how they will support a certain Democrat candidate because they promise to reach across the aisle and be bipartisan. When it was brought to their attention that said candidate was one of the most liberal in the House or Senate and has yet to reach across the aisle, according to readily available congressional records, those people merely replied with, “but now they say they will this time.”
A liberal will always be a liberal and a conservative will always be a conservative and a campaign promise is not worth a whole lot. It amazes me how some people vote based on what a candidate says rather than what a candidate has done.
And after the hoopla that was the Democrat Party, the biggest news ever was… John McCain chooses Sarah Palin as his running mate. Sarah who? A female vice presidential candidate on the Republican ticket? Unheard of! What a way to upstage Obama!
After initially learning about who she is (and reading her Wikipedia page) the social conservative branch (a big branch at that) of the Republican party went nuts. Is she for real? Can this be too good to be true?
Some are accusing McCain of choosing her only because she is a woman. There may be some of that, but if that was the case, why not Condoleezza Rice? And don’t tell me the reverse isn’t true. I know of prolife Republicans who are voting Obama simply because he has African blood.
Truth is, she is a no nonsense, gun totin’, sports fanatic, business owning, middle American woman, beauty queen, someone hard working Americans feel they can relate to and trust. As this election heats up, we’ll learn more about her, for better or for worse. But for now, Republicans couldn’t be happier
abortion Barack Obama Baseball big government Bill Ritter business Carbon Christianity Christmas Church conservatism Democrat Party Donald Trump draconian laws easter economy election Election Day elections first amendment football free speech Global Warming Hillary Clinton Hummel Heights immigration John McCain Nanny state Political Correctness Public Education Religion religious freedom Republican Party republicans Rockies Sarah Palin Socialism stimulus package supreme court TABOR taxes TEA party tolerance western conservative summit _health care