Skip navigation

Advertisements

24 Comments

    • Steve
    • Posted November 19, 2010 at 12:53 pm
    • Permalink

    GREAT-!!
    I have been waiting for one of these ‘moments’ in the Lane household!
    What is Alex waiting for?… (LOL!) — (just kidding, we need him around~)

    Perhaps this upcoming Nov. 2nd, 2012 (when the Tea Party pushes more House & Senate seats into the ‘red’, and Obama loses in a landslide), Devon & Allison can have some jumbo-large bottle of Vicodin with some pitchers of martini’s to chase e’m down (??)

    Alex could be poised with the muzzle of a 12ga in his mouth… -but-, that is not consistent with a progressive household… no guns allowed, right?

    • cobainfan69
    • Posted November 19, 2010 at 3:18 pm
    • Permalink

    I wouldn’t think they’d be that depressed, at least to the point of suicide. I mean, the GOP didn’t take the Senate. It’s not quite the massacre as some outlets made it out to be, but a pretty hefty defeat nonetheless.

  1. Good thinking, Steve, RE: the Vicodin + martini chaser; you’ve got me thinking along the lines of a bonus feature for despondent liberals come next election, a kind of bartender’s guide to effective ways of offing yourself that go down smooth & easy. But no guns, that would be correct; in this house even GI Joe’s 4″ machine gun is looked upon in horror.

  2. cobainfan69: [“I wouldn’t think they’d be that depressed, at least to the point of suicide.”]

    You don’t know them like I do.

  3. The dad is going to hang himself? Don’t threaten me with a good time! And why aren’t they washing down the aspirin with some Vodka?

    • Steve
    • Posted November 19, 2010 at 9:32 pm
    • Permalink

    Zack-
    There is a sh-t load of things cobainfan “…don’t know…” -like you do !! [ still LMAO! ]

    For starters, the Berkeley-Bolshevik culture that Alex, Allison & Devon belong to, are not capable of remotely understanding what is truly behind the grassroots uprising, known as the ‘Tea Party’.
    Their freakish ideology cannot grasp the original intent of Constitutional limited government, therefore these election results.

    Further – the character descriptions of these folks are probably under-read, and also, not fully understood by the 20-something age groups.

    Their idol, soon-to-be ‘EX’ Speaker San-Fran Nancy Pelosi is a radical leftist whose dictatorial character is revoltingly alien to 90+% of the rest of the country… her time is O-V-E-R !
    Her history of ramming complex & leftist legislation into law, without the open and transparent exposure from open committee debate, is a gross & deliberate violation of her position… her thug-elitist style of leadership is soon over,…and that Boeing 767, costing taxpayers tens to hundreds of millions (over the past 3+ years), is going back to the Air Force where it belongs.

    If our visiting liberals would understand what our Founding Fathers lead a revolution against in the 1770’s, and then examine the extreme totalitarianism of Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat mob, their record ought to scare the hell out of any sober, rational person.
    “ObamaCare” is one of the vilest and most extreme violations (passed in secret), of our Constitution in history.

    The last thing I want to do is be an ‘art critic’… but seeing a smiling Diversity doing cart-wheels, or jumping with joy…would be a ‘hoot’, too !

    • ikabod9
    • Posted November 19, 2010 at 11:32 pm
    • Permalink

    The only problem with this so called landslide is now dems are going to play the mean spiritedness BS. Also, I’m hearing that a lot of the Republicans that where elected this term are not making their way to the appropriations committee.. There is a fear that they will be targeted for being anit-child, anti-old person, racist, anti-women, anti-poor, racist (always play the race card at least twice), anti-military, anti-job, and anti-union. We didnt vote them in to be liked. We voted them in to get a job done, and prevent our kids from being stuck with the bill. Sort of a like the cheap-ass relitive that never seems to pay his fare share at the iHOP. Expecting my Dad to pay up. Yeah you can say im bitter….. But payback is a bitch. One term our your out is perfectly fine with me!

  4. Vegas: [‘The dad is going to hang himself? Don’t threaten me with a good time!”]
    Your mean-spiritedness is showing, and in this case that’s a GOOD thing. Believe me there’s nothing I’d like more than to see Alex hang some days, but I’ve got a cartoon to produce and the number of characters is already limited.

    Of course the vodka chaser makes sense. If I get ambitious I may slip a bottle of Stolly’s onto the table some evening, unless there’s some preferrable, Green brand.

    • cobainfan69
    • Posted November 20, 2010 at 7:36 am
    • Permalink

    “Their freakish ideology cannot grasp the original intent of Constitutional limited government, therefore these election results.”

    There’s so many different interpretations of the Constitution that I really doubt most voters really share the exact same view as to what extent it limited government.

    For example, there are voters who think that government should not be involved in any type of health care, yet they believe there should be a federal outlaw on abortion. There are people who say that the government should not get involved at all in private industry, yet they clamored for government intervention for the BP oil spill.

    Frankly, the world is a much different place than it was in 1776. Is it not fair to assert that perhaps we should view the governing of our nation in a different light? You have people out there acting like the Constitution is a religious document, and to even marginally veer away from it is sacrilege. There’s a letter Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1816 where he mocked people that worship constitutions, and “who ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. Let us follow no such examples, nor weakly believe that one generation is not as capable as another of taking care of itself, and of ordering its own affairs. Each generation is as independent as the one preceding, as that was of all which had gone before.”

    I can get behind that.

  5. Cobainfan69: I’m one of those people that believes that the government shouldn’t be involved in a lot of things. I’m a Strict Constructionist when it comes to the Constitution, and a Tenther. If it’s not specifically enumerated in the Constitution, then the FedGov shouldn’t be involved. That said, I also believe that if the FedGov has decided to put their fat fingers into something, then they had damned well better do the best job possible at the lowest cost to the taxpayer possible.

    Re: Deepwater Horizon: Since the FedGov has made it the USCG’s responsibility for oil spill recovery, then it’s their responsibility to get the leak stopped as fast as possible, and to get as much oil separated from the water as quickly and economically as possible.

    Where the problems came in is when the EPA decided that the water discharged from the skimmer ships could only contain 15ppm of oil. That’s 99.999985% pure. You can’t even get that from a normal drinking water source. Had they relaxed the rules, and allowed a 99% purity, then the ships wouldn’t have had to return back to port every few hours to offload the oil/water mixture to be purified. They could have worked far longer and picked up more oil, and not wasted fuel cycling between the op area and the port.

    Another problem is Obama’s refusal to suspend the Jones Act to allow foreign flagged vessels to operate in support of the cleanup.

    • Steve
    • Posted November 20, 2010 at 11:29 am
    • Permalink

    Cobainfan — focus on this, focus ‘like a laser beam’ on one, simple and unambiguous part of the Bill of Rights;

    ” 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. “— 10th Amendment, U.S. Constitution

    Given the premise that “words mean things”… which is the exact intent of how this was written~

    This amendment means only one thing: Where the Constitution does not call for the Federal government to do something, that ‘something’ belongs to the States, or to the people.

    Nowhere in the Constitution, NOWHERE at all, is the Federal government called to manage healthcare, manage education, provide (not to be confused with “promote”) housing, food,… give money to NPR, to the humanities, to the “arts”…

    ALL these items Constitutionally, belong to the responsibility & discretion of the States, or the people ( a.k.a. LOCAL government, or individuals).

  6. Steve: Much appreciate the feedback– I sometimes feel like I could turn this project over to you while I take a break for a week or two… how’s your drawing ability?

    Spot-on diagnosis of Pelosi and Co. But of course the left would revel in their sociopathic idols’ rejection of the Founders’ ideas: they’re so yesterday, don’t you know…

    A good thought, drawings of Diversity doing cartwheels. Could she accidentally be kicking Alex in the jaw in one of them?

    • Jamie
    • Posted November 20, 2010 at 2:28 pm
    • Permalink

    I love the hanky to the eye of the newsbabe… This looks like a good occasion for a butt load of BROZAC…

    • Jenn Sierra
    • Posted November 20, 2010 at 2:45 pm
    • Permalink

    Oh, goodness, no, I don’t think my eyes could handle seeing Alex doing cartwheels any more than they could take watching Devon’s full-body scan. (Shudders).

    Well, this election was fun, but what I’m really looking forward to is being able to rework some of the great quotes I’ve heard from this administration after the 2012 elections, e.g. “We won!” And “Yes, they could have, but thank God they didn’t.” Oh, how about: “We need to repeal the healthcare bill before we see any more of it.”

    Here’s to 2012 – Cheers! (NO aspirin needed for us!)

    • cobainfan69
    • Posted November 20, 2010 at 4:53 pm
    • Permalink

    “Nowhere in the Constitution, NOWHERE at all, is the Federal government called to manage healthcare, manage education, provide (not to be confused with “promote”) housing, food,… give money to NPR, to the humanities, to the “arts”…”

    Nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about the Federal government to outlaw slavery, or guarantee citizenship to all people born in the United States, or limit Presidents to only two terms in office.

    Yet, these were all ratified amendments added to the original Constitutional document. The entire amendment process allowed all these additions and modifications to the Constitution to happen. The Constitution is essentially a living document, providing the basic framework for a nation, yet allowing for adaptability to changing times.

  7. Thx Jamie. Hey how do we get folks to check out your own snapshots from Obama Hell which I’ve been enjoying all this time? I’d direct everybody to a site, but…?

  8. Jenn: Devon’s is one of the few cases where we WANT the scanners to beam out as much radiation death-rays as possible. Thanks for the –shudder– mental image.

    • Steve
    • Posted November 20, 2010 at 7:59 pm
    • Permalink

    ” The Constitution is essentially a living document…”

    CONGRADULATIONS Cobainfan-!!… you are a certified product of the public-government school system! You have swallowed the liberal lie, hook-line-sinker — rod-reel & tackle box… that the US Constitution is “a living” document.

    How about you & sit down for a high-stakes poker game, and have “living” rules,… naturally, they will be “living” to my agenda and to my interests,… but no matter, let us have a “living” rules ??

    Your belief ( if you really do ) is a token keystone of liberal-leftism — anything can be whatever you want it to, when the urge and social agenda arises.

    Perhaps you will argue that the Ten Commandments, are “living” too, hmm?

    Do you think the rules of mathematics are living too ?
    Perhaps, just like the no-math educated ignoramus arguing under Environmendacity
    – who makes up his own math-fantasy that bird kills per building logically equates to the same numerator per linear mile of electric line, or mile of road ?

    After I bankrupt you in my poker game of “living” rules, how about you design a new road bridge for somewhere near where you live – ensure you follow those “living” engineering principles… and YOU be the first to drive across YOUR bridge.
    Our debates have been fun – nice knowing you !

    • geeknerd
    • Posted November 20, 2010 at 8:50 pm
    • Permalink

    “Nowhere in the Constitution does it say anything about the Federal government to outlaw slavery”

    Au contrar, “No person shall be deprived of liberty without due process of law.” The Due Process Clause should have stopped slavery dead in its tracks, if it wasn’t for the spineless Supreme Court justices who misinterpreted the Constitution, culminating in the infamous “Dred Scott” decision.

    By the way, where is the due process when an unborn baby is deprived of life in an abortion?

    • Steve
    • Posted November 21, 2010 at 2:37 am
    • Permalink

    Zack-
    I suspect an airport security backscatter x-ray image of Devon would look little different than the scanned image of an early dynasty Egyptian mummy.

    If you want a shuddering mental image – visualize such a scanned image of Sierra (yikes!)

    • cobainfan69
    • Posted November 21, 2010 at 8:44 am
    • Permalink

    geeknerd: If only slaves were considered people when the Constitution was ratified, they would have been set!

    Steve: The amendment system is a fairly clear indication that the Constitution allows for modification for changing times, essentially allow it to have a “living” framework. I don’t remember God allowing amendments to be made to the Ten Commandments.

    Mathematics, do some degree, has living properties, but only on the higher, more theoretical levels that aren’t able to be proven easily.

    So yes, I do believe that the Constitution is a living document. It appears that your intellect has no living properties to it — I feel like I’m debating with a rock here — so I’ll just stop trying.

    • Steve
    • Posted November 21, 2010 at 9:38 am
    • Permalink

    Cobainfan — you seem to misunderstand what the term & context of “living” constitution, means.

    This “living” term is about how liberally existing elements of the Constitution are misinterpreted, by judges & others who subordinate the original intent of the Constitution to suit political & social agendas.

    This term “living constitution” has nothing -at all- to do with the amendment process, defined in the Constitution.

    For example – take the 2nd Amendment: it absolutely and unambiguously recognizes that an pre-existing right to keep & bear arms “…shall not be infringed”.

    Those folks belonging to the “living constitution” culture (Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, Ruth Bader Ginsburg,… et al) have decided this amendment does not mean that, despite overwhelming documented support that is does.
    These libs have repeatedly perverted the meaning of the 2nd Amendment to equating the “militia” to being our National Guard. Not true, that is a lie – NO such thing as the National Guard existed when this was written — and further, the very idea of a national military force was an anathema to our Founding Fathers. The verifiable meaning of “militia” was & is, the common, unprofessional armed citizen.

    Those constitutional conservatives (strict constructionists), as I am one, fully believe in the established amendment process.

    • cobainfan69
    • Posted November 21, 2010 at 10:01 am
    • Permalink

    Fair enough, I misunderstood the concept of a living constitution. But I just find it hard to believe that maybe it’s not so far fetched to believe maybe such terms in the Constitution were written to have a timeless meaning and meant to be adaptable to changing social times. I’m sorry if I think maybe it might be un-American to think that times can change after over two centuries.

    • geeknerd
    • Posted November 22, 2010 at 6:21 pm
    • Permalink

    Where do you get the idea that slaves were not considered people when the Constitution was written? Darwin wasn’t even born then.

    Is it the 3/5th rule? That wasn’t put in because they thought a slave was only 3/5th of a person; it was put in by the abolishionists to limit the political power of the slave states. The slave states could literally buy Congressional seats and electoral college votes simply by importing more slaves. In fact, when the 3/5th rule was made moot by the 14th Amendment, the increased population count gave formerly Confederate states enough political power to thwart Reconstruction (provided they used Jim Crow to keep freed slaves from voting for the Party of Lincoln).


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: