Skip navigation




  1. To quote Cher in a movie with a similar title: Snap out of it!
    The Jewish Republican’s Web Sanctuary

  2. If only Cher had been addressing these Obamabots, I would have said: “At last– an intelligent remark from Cher.”

    (Thx Eric)

    • Max
    • Posted September 2, 2009 at 2:08 pm
    • Permalink

    These just keep getting better and better, Zack. This one strikes at the heart of the matter; i.e, We, the American people. Never–at least in recent US history–have a group of political enthusiasts been so thoroughly and uncritically in-the-bag as are the Obama-zombies.

  3. BULLSEYE! Boy, you hit it direct center!
    Great Job!

    • Methodistmin
    • Posted September 2, 2009 at 2:49 pm
    • Permalink

    Wait, wait-I see Obama, Isn’t that the planet fomerly known as Jupiter-The chief god, the one that has the constellation Aquila, the eagle as his symbol? It’s the largest and brightest planet; How fitting for our notorious-uhhhh,glorious-leader.

    • Donna C
    • Posted September 2, 2009 at 4:50 pm
    • Permalink

    Methodist…you are one brilliant woman! I LOVE your comment!

    Zack, remember in the movie Field of Dreams, when Costner’s character is told: “If you build it, they will come….”

    I think that applies here…you’ve created a political cartoon that is unrivaled…and some of the most intelligent people on the WWW have shown up here. Of course, I have to disclude a few. Goes without saying, really. =oP

  4. Just because I am a teacher does not mean I’m dumb Donna! LOL

    Very funny one Zack, although I looked and didn’t see a thing!

    Methodistmin, I thought that was Sirus, the star turned radio company…

  5. It is written in the stars

    • Steve T
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 5:05 am
    • Permalink

    What a wonderful parallel to liberals in congress, and some RINO’s; they look at the US Constitution, and say, “…lookie there, everyone a FREE right to:
    – healthcare
    – housing
    – transportation
    – someone babysitting your kid
    – college

    So, folks like Ted Kennedy, by TAKING money from the most productive people, and giving it to the least productive people, are hailed as “..fighting for the little people”.
    Mass. is still full of a lot of ‘sheepeople’.
    Where is the barf bag-?!?

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
    — Amendment X, U.S. Constitution

    • 1MadJack
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 5:45 am
    • Permalink

    Much like the Germany of the 1920s and 1930s America for the past eight years was bombarded by the MSM with rhetoric, propaganda and lies about the George W. Bush administration and conservatives in general. Of course George W. did not help himself towards the end either. So last year America was ripe for the Obamassiah and his false message(lies). Most Americans take little or no time to investigate a candidate beyond what they hear from NBC, CBS or ABC. So these sheeple as we call them are mostly ignorant of what candidates really have in their hearts. It is up to open minded educated Americans to get the sheeple educated.

    Now as far as the cartoon goes it is 100% on the money. Zack excellent work! It is easy to make people see things that aren’t there. Hell some folks have seen the face of the Virgin Mary on the surface of a potato, don’t you know?

    • Jake
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 6:15 am
    • Permalink

    “Sheeple” is a great word. It lets me know when a comment isn’t worth reading, regardless of what side the the commenter is on. Wonderful time saver.

  6. I’m with you, Max: the Obama fanaticism reminds one of other zombied-out mass-hysterias of the past such as Cabbage Patch Kids and Pet Rocks… only considerably less appealing.

    • 1MadJack
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:13 am
    • Permalink

    So Jake I take it you’re one of the Progressive enlightened 30 somethings? In that case I will not use the word sheeple but the word lemmings.

  7. Thanks Kaptain Steve, good to have you here at our stargazing emporium.

    Methodistmin: You’re finding levels of Obamadepth even the Lanes missed. Welcome to Berkeley.

    Thanks Donna, and be sure to include yourself in that gaggle of highly intelligent folks who stop in here. P.S. Great to get compared to Kevin Costner in “Field of Dreams,” especially considering how mediocre I am at baseball.

    Vegas: Can’t tell you how relieved I am that you didn’t see anything in those stars.

    Chuck: Like you said. But don’t look for it too long.

    Excellent scholarly reminder of the strictures of The Constitution, Steve T. Plus always good to see Teddy brought in again for the sake of a making a good point. He’s serving a better purpose here at my blog than he ever did in the Senate.

  8. Great to see you here, 1MadJack; have read you at other blogs and you’re a real “star,” in keeping with the theme of the day.

    I too have always been dismayed at the finding of Mary’s visage on potatoes and Jesus on waterstained walls. There’s gotta be more dignified venues for God to make Himself known.

    Thanks Jake, but surely you’re not implying by that remark that faddish, bandwagon behavior is an irrelevant or nonexistent phenomenon…?

    • Jake
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:45 am
    • Permalink

    “So Jake I take it you’re one of the Progressive enlightened 30 somethings?”

    Nope. Just bored of the word “sheeple.” Sounds like something a high school anarchist would run around saying. In fact, I am pretty sure it has been used in that way in several movies. It was dumb when left-wingers said it about Bush supporters and it is dumb now.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 7:50 am
    • Permalink

    Oh, Zack, since you are reading the comments on this comic, I thought I should let you know that TKWAFLS has been using some rather “colorful” language in his last few comments on the Greatful Ted cartoon. I know you have taken a strong stance against vulgar language in the past, so I thought it might be worth pointing out.

  9. Jake: TKWAFLS drops the occasinal genteely disguised “f*ck” bomb now and then, but it is so well ensconced in the context of rational and admirable argument that I wouldn’t dream of dumping his commentary. He’s an exceptionally detailed, worthy interlocutor… context is everything.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 8:17 am
    • Permalink

    That’s what I expected. Your “no foul language policy” is just an excuse to delete comments you disagree with. Way to show your true colors. I am not surprised, but I am a bit disappointed. I am not sure how repeatedly calling someone stupid and cursing at them counts as being “an exceptionally detailed, worthy interlocutor.” I assume that just means that vulgarity is welcome here as long as you are Conservative. The depths to which you are willing to sink in the name of politics know no bounds. I thought you were better than that, you seemed like you might have some principles, but between this and the “let’s all laugh at Kopechne’s death” comic, I am beginning to see just how low you are willing to go.

  10. F**k the foul language policy!

    • GeekNerd
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 8:38 am
    • Permalink

    “Laugh at Kopechne’s death”? Didn’t Teddy do that, or was he laughing at getting away with her death? Didn’t Teddy have the hubris to get a water dog and name it “Splash”? Big laugh there ate the Kennedy Kompound.

    We laugh in our outrage at ALL the Kennedy crimes and atrocities, from Grampa’s bootlegging, to Papa’s Nazi sympathizing, to JFK’s drug addiction and adultery, to Teddy’s annulment (too bad Cardinal Woolsey didn’t think of that; Henry VIII wouldn’t have had to create the Church of England).

    Leaving a woman with whom you’ve just committed adultery to die in a car underwater is a great way to keep her silent about the affair.

  11. Sorry to hear of the incalculably profound depths of your dissapointment in me, Jake. But when I read the extremely lengthy, extremely detailed entries by TKWAFLS I somehow just can’t compare them to things like “F*ck you and go die now” or other similar remarks from the occasional leftie commentor. Can you? Really?

    • Jake
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 9:08 am
    • Permalink

    “Can you? Really?”
    Let’s find out.

    “I mean seriously, this is like a convention of GED drop outs. Reading over these posts I have to say that a few of you here miht want to check with your doctors to see if a tumor is eating YOUR brains.

    We have Jake, a guy that most likely struggles with the riddles on the placement at the Chicken and Waffle house.”

    “He also wears a hockey helmet to bed.”

    This was in response to a comment in which I addressed a comment he had made in which he quoted me:
    “Hey Jake,
    Your So Vain You Probably Think That Post Was About You.

    Who was talking to you? Who are you? Who cares about you?”

    “Again, you’re an idiot. See if you can follow this, okay stupid?”

    “Yeah, Waffles has detailed why calling you STUPID is not vitriol. It’s not vitriol when it’s true.”

    “You’re being called stupid for a very good reason. It’s because you’ve displayed abject stupidity…..but people who aren’t stupid have the ability to see through it. Are you doing it on purpose? Because if you are, that is just STUPID. if you’re not doing it on purpose, then well, you’re stupid. Are you catching on to the fact that you’re stupid?
    This is very different from some ad hominem attack. I am pointing out WHY you are stupid. Do you see the difference? Or are you just stupid?”
    It goes on like that for a while.

    Edited for language:
    “What a dipsh–”

    “If I were you I would fall back to paragraph 3 of page 67 in the Debating For Dipsh–s manual, just as you have.”

    “Uhhhh.. Just FYI, moron. iOwnTheWorld has a profanity filter on the comments – so, apparently you have no idea wtf ur talking about.
    If Zack is so offended by the word DIPSH– it shouldn’t be able to post.”

    Yes, his remarks are clearly those of a master of the language and are certainly different from “F*ck you and go die now.” I have seen the error of my ways.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 9:09 am
    • Permalink

    I hope you can recognize textual sarcasm.

  12. Jake– again, the quotes you’ve pulled comprise maybe 5% of what struck me as otherwise entirely reasonable argumentation by TKWAFLS.

    Drinking a thimbleful of ink straight up might make you ill; drinking a thimbleful of ink as diluted within the context of a gallon of water over an afternoon, not so bad.

    Besides: in some of the quotes you pulled such as the following one, what profanity there is is effectively self-censored through abbreviation, a mode I have absolutely no problem with from left or right-leaning commentors:

    “Uhhhh.. Just FYI, moron. iOwnTheWorld has a profanity filter on the comments – so, apparently you have no idea wtf ur talking about.
    If Zack is so offended by the word DIPSH– it shouldn’t be able to post.”

    • Jake
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 9:52 am
    • Permalink

    I censored “dipsh–.” He did not. I put a note before those quotes indicating that I had censored them.

    To be honest, if you think constantly repeating the words “stupid” and “dipsh–” over and over again constitute thoughtful commentary then I really see little reason to continue to attempt to engage in conversations here. You are disrespectful to the Kopechne family and hold commentators that proffer views you dislike to a very different standard than those who participate in your echo chamber.

  13. No problem– we disagree on this issue, that’s all… have a nice day. I in fact HAVE censored conservatives who have commented here, when their input– unlike that of TKWAFLS– was overwhelmingly coarse and devoid of substance.

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 10:23 am
    • Permalink

    I don’t take kindly to being called stupid, to note. Which is what Waffles was doing in the Grateful Ted comments, where Jake got a few of those. It’s insulting, and just terrible debating :3.

  14. I agree with both you and Jake, Manuel, in not liking it when debaters call each other stupid, and I think “Waffles” would do himself (and his interlocutors) a great service to completely eliminate that aspect of his debating; I just don’t think that element, or his occasional cussword, invalidates all of his very copious argumentation, to the extent that he should be spammed or “punished”, as Jake so fervently seems to wish for. He has a great deal to say and the overwhelming majority of it is reasonable opinion.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 11:49 am
    • Permalink

    I cannot see the value of using the F-bomb in discussions. Yet the koskids democratunderground seem to feel their points are not made without the sprinkling of profanity in their postings. But I get it though. “I want the government to pay for my housing!” Just doesn’t have the same impact as: “I want the F@#$en government to pay for my MuthaF#$%en housing!”. Or, “I am not a supporter of the military in anyway” can be made to really drive the point home with: “F$%k the military industrial complex!”

    • Manuel Calavera
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 3:00 pm
    • Permalink

    I’ve never once posted on any of those sites ikabod, just for the record. I’ve read an article at one of them about Freepers calling the Obama children “ghetto trash” among other things, and that’s it. “Tu quoque” (“you, also”) is a logical fallacy as well for that matter, just as much as ad hominem is.

  15. So the last two Obama comics have worked on the premise:

    A) Obama is terrible.
    B) All Liberals/Leftists blindly support Obama and all his terrible policies because they think he is the Messiah and they love Obama and they don’t know why they’re just so stupid.

    Can I ask how this is any different than saying:

    A) Obama isn’t that bad.
    B) All conservatives are flipping their lid about Obama because they’re really really uncomfortable about a negro holding power over them.

    I mean, I am sure you have reasons other than a fear of black people behind your anger, but it’s okay to make this suggestion as a generalization, right?

  16. If you want to take racism out of it, why not just say “because you are not comfortable about people whose names end in vowel sounds” or “people who have better abs than you” or something.

  17. Chris that was incredibly racist of you, but I’m not a bit surprised. Your hypocrisy is so rank that I, an English major cannot even find words to describe it. Why you have to pull out the race card when your man gets criticized like the other presidents before him is sad but totally predictable and racist. After all you must be afraid that he can’t handle the heat that the office of the presidency brings because, as you point out he’s black. That is the sickest kind of racism, the patronizing kind where they’re just not smart enough or tough enough to go it without your help. It’s nasty, asinine and as predictable as the sun coming up in the east and falling in the west.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 8:12 pm
    • Permalink

    When in doubt chris go for the race card? Right? I could care less the color of one skin of the man hold the most powerful position on earth (for now right?). its what he brings to the table. The only thing at this point I have approved of Obama’s leadership skills, was to allow the killing of those 3 pirates back in April by our NAVY Seals.

  18. Beautifully said, Vegas. No one gives a crap about your incompetent candidate’s color or name, Chris; what we bemoan is his incompetence, arrogance, appointment of genuine communists (Van Jones), etc. etc. As Vegas says, our side is utterly uninterested in him as a racial entity or symbol; that is your side’s unwholesome obsession.

  19. Are you guys autistic or something?

    You’re ascribing motives, that while they exist somewhere in the world, are hardly universally held, to all people who disagree with you.

    As an explicitly labeled flawed premise, I ascribed motives, that while they exist somewhere in the world, are hardly universally held, to all people who agree with you.

    I am willing to accept that you guys, as intelligent and rational actors, have issues with Obama outside of his last name, his race, his abs.

    Will you extend the same courtesy?

  20. Stop dropping the race card and stick to the issues, better yet shred the race card into a metal garbage can, douse the remains with lighter fluid and drop a match on them. Heck if it makes you feel better shred a picture of Bush with the race card as well. The issues we have with Obama are all political. If you really want some cred with conservatives, take your cues from Juan Williams. He’s usually on Special Report with Bret Bair. You start acting like him and you’ll go a lot further with your positions.

  21. Clearly I made a mistake invoking the horribly boogeyman of RACE in my example. Does anyone want to address the question, or are you content to just flip out the first time race is ever mentioned and move on?

    • Jake
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 9:48 pm
    • Permalink

    “You’re ascribing motives, that while they exist somewhere in the world, are hardly universally held, to all people who disagree with you.

    As an explicitly labeled flawed premise, I ascribed motives, that while they exist somewhere in the world, are hardly universally held, to all people who agree with you.”

    You are wasting your time with this. The crew here lacks any level of introspection. Attempting to use examples that are analogous to their own behavior to point out the flaws in their reasoning always falls flat. You have to use blunt, simple tools to get your point across. Subtlety is ignored or distorted, while calling people “dipsh–,” “stupid,” and/or “brownshirt” is applauded.

    • Mark
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 11:01 pm
    • Permalink

    When issues need to be discussed, time for…

    The RACE CARD™

    When ad hominems don’t suffice, you know there’s always…

    The RACE CARD™

    When stumped for a credible response, remember…

    The RACE CARD™

    You know it’s really there, no matter how much they deny it. Don’t leave home without it.

    (Anybody know how to write good jingle music? – maybe this would make a good Diversity animation)


    • Mark
    • Posted September 3, 2009 at 11:13 pm
    • Permalink


    Exhibit A, your honour.

    I cest my rase…
    Excuse me, I mean:
    I rest my case.

    (You’re actually fun, Chris, but you won’t want to hear that)

  23. No, Mark, really.

    Let’s pretend racism doesn’t exist. We live in a colorblind society and people don’t make cartoons like this:

    or this

    or this

    Now that all of that nonsense is in the past and we are a colorblind society and the race card is obliterated and there is no such thing as race and I don’t even know what you are talking about.

    Claiming all progressives blindly worship Obama as the messiah because they’re all so stupid would be a ridiculous and lazy claim.

    Almost as lazy, one could argue (OH WAIT I TOTALLY DID) as the race card!

  24. Oops, I linked too many times to cartoons in that last comment. The link-free edition:

    No, Mark, really.

    Let’s pretend racism doesn’t exist. We live in a colorblind society and people don’t make cartoons like this:

    [Diversity Lane cartoons about menacing negros]

    Now that all of that nonsense is in the past and we are a colorblind society and the race card is obliterated and there is no such thing as race and I don’t even know what you are talking about.

    Claiming all progressives blindly worship Obama as the messiah because they’re all so stupid would be a ridiculous and lazy claim.

    Almost as lazy, one could argue (OH WAIT I TOTALLY DID) as the race card!

    • Donna C.
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 12:03 am
    • Permalink

    Am I the only one who’s noticed that “liberal” is now considered passe, and “progressive” is now the mot du jour?

    • Mark
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 12:56 am
    • Permalink


    Originally I wrote another response, but then I concluded you were clearly unwilling to be rational about this so I’ll let it drop. (I’m sure Martin Luther King would be overjoyed you’re making racism boring by robbing the word of its meaning.)

    Get over it, the cartoons here have a go at Obama and leftist ideologies. Whilst 100% of moonbats may not hold to his ideas 100% of the time, that is beside the point – neither he nor his policies are allowed to be scrutinized fairly and you make that point abundantly clear by attempting to change the subject.

    The biggest irony is that you confirm much of what Zack creates.

  25. The biggest irony is that you seem to think you’re actually addressing any of the points I’m making.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 1:56 am
    • Permalink

    Your right chris I guess it is too early to actually claim that Obama has done anything right now that has harmed the country.


    Your claim that conservatives are un-supportive of his policies has nothing to do with leadership or character only his skin color is neither true nor an adequate rebuttal to any of the comments here. But please enlighten us all as to the accomplishments of this great president thus far. Don’t forget to list the millions of jobs he has created with the stimulus package. How his world apology tour made us safer. I realize you have been holding back on this so please let lose my friend!

    • Methodistmin
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 2:17 am
    • Permalink

    You’re correct, Donna; “Progressive” is the mot du jour. Given some of the tactics by Obama in Chicago as well as the actions of Obama supporters towards Sarah Palin (Wearing Sarah Palin is a c—t tee shirts for example) I think “regressives” is a much better word for some of them. You might be interested in this commentary by Laura Hollis from townhall magazine on the word “progressives”:

    • Methodistmin
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 2:22 am
    • Permalink

    Yep, if people are against the policies and actions of Obama they MUST be racist. There couldn’t be any other reason. That tactic worked so well during the election. Why not trot it out again? I’m sure this Black conservative would agree, or perhaps it’s just that he and Thomas Sowell and other black conservatives are all Uncle Toms.

  26. You guys are unbelievable.


    I never called any of you racist. I said that it would be really unfair to call you guys racist.

    I guess the problem is that you really do think that all LIBERALS/progressives/people-voting-democrat/non-conservatives are hateful, stupid lemmings with Nazi/Stalinist tendencies.

    So whan I made the comparison, you saw nothing wrong with demonizing Group A. So when I presented the counterexample of demonizing Group B, you assumed I thought it was a good idea?

    That or you’re so conditioned that if you see an ad for The Amazing Race your RACE CARD radar goes off and no one can talk to you for an hour.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 12:09 pm
    • Permalink

    “RACE CARD radar goes off and no one can talk to you for an hour.” Hardly Chris come on. Obamas latest czar the in charge of so-called “green jobs” (which have been proven in Spain to NOT work nor increase employment) is also a hard leftest with problematic thoughts of the white man causing hurricane Katrina. Normal leaders surround themselves with smart people, yet Obama seems to be surrounding himself with those with a hard left agenda and professional race baiters. But I’ll go along with it, you never called us racist:

    “Let’s pretend racism doesn’t exist. We live in a colorblind society and people don’t make cartoons like this”

    “If you want to take racism out of it, why not just say “because you are not comfortable about people whose names end in vowel sounds” or “people who have better abs than you” or something.”

    These are postings you entered here. I am to assume then that these postings where NOT to imply we are racist? Just that OTHER conservatives, in your progressive mind ARE? But I will leave that an get to what I think is your point. Obama, is a far left radical. Period. His sham of an election had fooled a large segment of the population to believe he was a centrist. His association with the criminal organization ACORN has never nor will it ever be investigated. Then theres the sending of 2 billions of dollars of loans to Brazil to drill off their coast… Huh? George Soros connection? Nah just wingnut conspiracy theory. No Chris I have nothing to fear from Obama as president.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 12:10 pm
    • Permalink

    Yet again its too early to tell, what damage he has done to country. I mean we are still waiting for the stimulus package to kick in, and create jobs. Green ones too!

    • Jake
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 12:30 pm
    • Permalink

    “His sham of an election had fooled a large segment of the population to believe he was a centrist. His association with the criminal organization ACORN has never nor will it ever be investigated.”

    Haha…wow. You guys really have been drinking the right-wing extremist Flavor Aid.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 12:59 pm
    • Permalink

    Oh he got the votes. I will grant you that. Yet where are the jobs Jake? When do we break ground on our new solar power plants?

    So Oabama is not loaning money to Brazil for oil exploration?
    Soros not connected financially with Petrobos. I’m sure if Cheney was connected with Blackwater the left would be all over that calling for an investigation! Look I understand though, Soros helped Obama get elected, so this is only pay back.
    As for ACORN
    Nope nothing to see here just right-wing extremist flavor aid… Just lies and more lies from the vast right wing conspiracy!

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 1:02 pm
    • Permalink

    Again more lies! Bush caused the mortgage mess. Those greedy no good Republican varmints!

    I’ll try and not post anymore bad things about Obama. Since, well, I have no proof!

  27. “I am to assume then that these postings where NOT to imply we are racist? Just that OTHER conservatives, in your progressive mind ARE?”

    There exist in the world people who are racist. I am not assuming you are. That’d be incredibly unfair.

    There exist ill-informed people who only support liberal policies or the Obama administration because he is ‘cool’. Thete might even be people who assume he’s “The Messiah” but I literally have never seen that outside of conservatives complaining about it.

    To assume all liberals are in this camp would also be incredibly unfair.

    Is this that hard to understand?

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 10:49 pm
    • Permalink

    “Is this that hard to understand?” Cute.
    Chris, racism does indeed exist in the world. Sometimes its used as a crutch by the same people who scream about its presence the loudest. You are absolutely correct that there were a lot of people that voted for Obama how indeed felt that it was cool. Perhaps even historical to vote for person of color for the POTUS. Yet that was the primary reasoning for his winning. He’s “cool”. I am very worried as are a lot of conservatives of his agenda, his background and his total lack of experience and naivete of global security. His handling of the pirates of the coast of Somalia was a good thing. It was an early test and he kick some ass. Good! Yet now we have North Korea, and Iran quickly approaching uranium enrichment. And the best he could do is send Hillary? How about strengthening our ties with Israel? Instead of throwing them under the bus. Time will tell of course.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 4, 2009 at 10:55 pm
    • Permalink

    “his background and his total lack of experience and naivete of global security.”

    Palin 2012. You betcha.

  28. ikabod:

    See, these are substantive complaints about Obama. None of the recent strips address these. And early response was essentially that no one needs to provide substantive complaints about Obama, because people just worship him and he’s so obviously bad. That’s just as lazy as “the race card”, which was the entire point I was making.

    Thanks for actually addressing policy instead of perceived personality!

  29. Palin LESS experienced than Obama? Wow, what are you on anyway? I mean seriously you actually believe what you wasted that server space with?

    Let’s see, Palin was both Mayor and Governer while Obama has a grand total of say SEVEN months and FIFTEEN days of exectutive experience. At yet Sarah is LESS experienced?

    I’ve seen better comments from 7th graders…

    Oh, foreign policy experience suddenly matters? Really? Didn’t seem to matter when Clinton was elected, or Carter for that matter. Or is this one of those double standard things you liberals are so fond of?

    • Jake
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 10:17 am
    • Permalink

    Ikabod brought up foreign policy, not me, so I am not sure what you are talking about with the double standard remark. Sounds like it is the conservatives who hold double standards with regards to foreign policy, since you are asserting that it is not important for Palin, but Ik brought it up as something that is important for Obama. I’d expect an English teacher to do a better job reading.

    Obama was probably responsible for a larger number of people as a community organizer than Palin was as mayor of Wasillia. Oh, and Obama hasn’t quit his executive job due to pressure, unlike a certain Alaskan governor. If she couldn’t handle being governor of one of our least populous states, how can she handle the presidency?

    Here, I have her campaign slogan all set:
    “Palin: The Experienced Quitter”

    • Mark
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 10:29 am
    • Permalink

    Very droll Jake, but don’t let any inconvenient facts like spurious lawsuits diverting the governor from her job get in the way of your argument. She could handle it quite well, but also understood her responsibilities to the people. Sounds exactly like someone you want – someone who doesn’t covet power for its own sake.

    Community Organizer stands for not much, as we are seeing so clearly.

    Palin would probably be very good at president, but someone who’s idea of public office was voting ‘present’ a record number of times and striking down laws to protect babies from being killed isn’t fit to be a door attendant.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 10:48 am
    • Permalink

    “triking down laws to protect babies from being killed”

    Open the Bloodgates.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 11:00 am
    • Permalink

    “spurious lawsuits”

    Ah, like the birth certificate nonsense. Obama seems to have been able to continue doing a higher pressure job while facing such pointless legal action.

    “She could handle it quite well”

    Quitting your job sure is a great way to handle pressure.

    “someone who doesn’t covet power for its own sake.”

    It’s cute that you seem to genuinely believe this about Palin. Naive people are so precious.

    • Mark
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 7:36 pm
    • Permalink

    I have two words for you:

    Track record.

    Delude yourself all you like.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 7:57 pm
    • Permalink

    “Track record.”

    You mean her record of non-criminal ethics violations, or her record as a quitter?

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 8:23 pm
    • Permalink

    I never brought up Palin, never even made a point that somehow Palin would have been better. Yet we where given the impression that experience didn’t matter. Coming from the Obama side. Rather Biden was the master of foreign relations. How that going? Liberals look at Foreign relations on the premise of equality, rather than negotiating from a stand point of strength. I can remember the idiotic unilateral disarmament agenda back during the 80’s. The hell Reagan got for wanting “Trust but Verify”. Or Clinton treating terrorism as a law enforcement issue rather than a military one. I’m guessing after we are hit by Al Queda again, we should open peace talks with them?

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 8:29 pm
    • Permalink

    As For pail in 2012 I will be very surprised if she runs. Despite the popularity she has. Her quitting has nothing to do with her running. Liberals cannot support a women as a conservative. Palin is not on the liberal reservation, despite the fact that she’s an empowered women. No she broke the basic tenant of feminism, she doesn’t support abortion. From that point forward NOW will NOT support her, progressives will shun and hate her.
    “You mean her record of non-criminal ethics violations” let know which one of these so-called ethics violations she has been found guilty of.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 5, 2009 at 8:35 pm
    • Permalink

    “she has been found guilty of.”

    That’s why I said “non-criminal.” She was found to have acted improperly, but not in a way that warranted legal punishment.

    But I think I misread Mark’s last post. “Track Record” is actually the name of one of her children, isn’t it?

  30. Good news everyone, Van Jones shows his integrity and leadership by stepping down so that spurious complaints about him did not get in the Obama administration’s way of creating green jobs. Everyone should applaud his courage!

    Or wonder why screeching talk show demagogues have such power. One of the two.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 6, 2009 at 3:02 am
    • Permalink

    Oh come on, Fox News is doing the disabled a great service. Who else would hire an off-meds schizophrenic like Glenn Beck? It gives hope to those whose loved ones suffer from serious mental disorders.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 6, 2009 at 3:06 am
    • Permalink

    You betcha! I’m sure your aware of his resume, and racial comments regarding Columbine, I think that trumps his reference to his “integrity”. But I’ll let that one go. Let me know when the next “green” power plant begins construction. Or was the guy going to strong arm these green jobs like solar power plants into construction?
    or hey how about this one:
    Next time your guy decides to bring on another radical leftist into the administration maybe he should find someone who can keep their sweet-collectivist-racist-911truther-mouth shut for a change. Your right Chris, Obama ain’t so bad. Its just the people he surrounds himself with.

  31. Quitting your job sure is a great way to handle pressure.”>>>

    Or not reading someone’s deconstruction of your asinine positions.

  32. The reason someone gets so angry at an anonymous poster is that that poster makes it hard for the jackass to continue believing that they are somehow smart.
    The smell of the own farts gets a little more unpleasant.
    The clickety clack of the keyboard becomes less mellifluous.

    Hey, how bout that quitter Van Jones? eh?

    • Jake
    • Posted September 6, 2009 at 11:32 am
    • Permalink

    Ah waffles, your sharp wit never ceases to amaze. If only everyone was has witty and insightful as you, my dear.

    “Or not reading someone’s deconstruction of your asinine positions.”

    No, see you changed the rules of the game. I wanted to discuss my points, but you just wanted to curse and throw about ad hominems, so I changed to your style. See, the way things work now is that I call you an idiot, and you go off and die. It puts us on equal footing. See, you proved incompetent at real debate, so I magnanimously lowered myself to your level so you wouldn’t feel so bad. However, I have since tired of engaging in your style of debate, as acting as foolish as you is a rather mind numbing experience. Fly away troll.

    And yeah, Van Jones is a quitter too. I will agree with that. See, not everyone is as much of a mindless ideologue as you are. Have a wonderful day.


  33. Good point about Van “I’m outta here” Jones, TKWAFLS. Palin called it quits only after all the forces of the mainstream media came down on her with their McCarthyite, witch-hunting zeal for a period of many months, attacking viciously her family (incl. her children) as well as herself and necessitating enormous expenditures of time and money in spurious legal challenges which she simply could not afford as a busy governor. For Van Jones on the other hand, the heat got to him after just a couple days of, not a mainstream media attack (they assiduously covered up his communist/radical mouthings) but rather the protests of normal American people who, oddly enough, chafed at the idea of an admitted communist in the administration.

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 6, 2009 at 1:11 pm
    • Permalink

    I can hardly think that this administration didn’t know this maoist was communist? Sort of sneaking him in there and no one would notice? The formulation of so-called “green jobs” was more important than ones ideology? Look Obama new damn well who he was, what he stood for, and his radical leftist agenda (no, not the radical leftist agenda that is all about peace love and the American way.*).

    *Sarcasm alert here…..

    • ikabod
    • Posted September 6, 2009 at 5:59 pm
    • Permalink

    Sorry about the complete lack of spelling correction. Did the last post in a hurry.

  34. Thanks Ikabod. And, you know all this as well as I, but it never hurts to reiterate: of COURSE Obama knew Jones was/is a communist, just as he knew his reverend and mentor of 22 years was/is a racist anti-Semite America-hater, just as he knew that Sotomayor is a racist (i.e. she professes to believe Latinos superior to whites based on their race), just as he knows that Eric Holder prefers to, e.g., defend the racist Black Panthers as opposed to, say, defending the CIA in it’s battle against Islamoterrorism; and there are dozens of other examples. However he DOES talk smoothly and IS a chic, much-in-fashion skin-color (and skin-color is of overwhelming significance to liberals), so the profoundly anti-American Obamist impulses continue to be soft-pedaled by a populace that seeks to congratulate itself on its “openmindedness and goodness” in electing a black guy; as patronizing and anti-intellectual a mindset as can be imagined, particularly patronizing to black people, to whom such an attitude insultingly thinks it is throwing a bone.

  35. Could someone point to all these crazy evil things Van Jones said? Because all the stuff the EVIL LEFT WING MEDIA has been saying he said (like the Columbine comments) were really quite reasonable and I have no idea why people are so outraged about them besides the fact that, you know, he acknowledges that races exist, which I know is the RACE CARD and that is like deadly kryptonite to anyone responding to questions.

  36. Also you’re grossly misrepresenting pretty much every single person and topic you’re describing, which is awesome.

    • Jake
    • Posted September 7, 2009 at 9:37 am
    • Permalink

    This is one of those times when something reasonable is presented, but we are supposed to be outraged for no reason. Like an Asay comic.

    • martyfink
    • Posted September 12, 2009 at 4:04 pm
    • Permalink

    Neocons are like judenrat in the way they helped the nazis go after the Serbs a second time a half century later and then went around calling Islam a “religion of peace”. Who are they to criticize those who voted Obama?

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: