Friday Funnies

Posted July 16th, 2009 at 08:58 PM by Joan Dykstra

Humor

And Biden's most recent gafftastic? That we have to spend money so we don't go bankrupt. Hey, that works at my house...

What can I tell ya. This was the only anti-cap and tax I could find.

Joan Dykstra's blog

On July 16th, 2009 at 09:10 PM, Joan Dykstra said:

On July 16th, 2009 at 09:46 PM, Keith_Hays said:

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Pat Bagley - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 16th, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Arvid said:

What can I tell ya. This was the only anti-cap and tax I could find.

That should tell you something....

-----
This last post conclusively proves that Arvid is in fact Laurel Prussing. Sad. - Anonymous on 2009-06-22 @ 9:30am

On July 16th, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Arvid said:

-----
This last post conclusively proves that Arvid is in fact Laurel Prussing. Sad. - Anonymous on 2009-06-22 @ 9:30am

On July 17th, 2009 at 04:49 AM, Michael (not verified) said:

And Biden's most recent gafftastic? That we have to spend money so we don't go bankrupt. Hey, that works at my house...

One of these days I'm going to find a Republican who understands that there's a difference between macroeconomics and microeconomics.

On July 17th, 2009 at 08:22 AM, Corben Rice said:

Keith don’t you think comparing Republicans to confederate slave owners a little much?

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for.-Obama

On July 17th, 2009 at 08:22 AM, Mike (not verified) said:

And Biden's most recent gafftastic? That we have to spend money so we don't go bankrupt. Hey, that works at my house...

Hey, mine too! Gotta spend money to make money you know. Not making enough in the current situation? Spending some dough on further education might help you get the job that helps you avoid bankruptcy in the long run. Or, I might need to invest in some equipment so that I can do part-time work to supplement my income. It's so hard to think past how that crazy Biden must be sticking his foot in his mouth isn't it?

On July 17th, 2009 at 08:47 AM, IlliniPundit said:

On July 17th, 2009 at 08:50 AM, Keith_Hays said:

Keith don’t you think comparing Republicans to confederate slave owners a little much?

Corbin, have you actually listened to Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions?

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 17th, 2009 at 08:55 AM, Toldja So (not verified) said:

Mike, that theory works in some situations but not all. The problem with it in this instance is the government is spending far more than the "investment" could ever reasonably recoup. Considering how deep in-the-hole they already are and interest expense, it is simply irresponsible. Let's also not forget it is not their money they are tossing in that hole either. It's our future earnings, our children's and grandchildren's. Tell me, do you really think any of that hypothetical revenue produced by these investments would ever find its way back to our pockets? No, it will go towards debt service or some new entitlement program. Consider history my friend.

On July 17th, 2009 at 09:19 AM, Joan Dykstra said:

Hey, mine too! Gotta spend money to make money you know.

Good point except that's not what the most articulate vice president in history meant in his defense of massive health care spending.

On July 17th, 2009 at 09:19 AM, Corben Rice said:

Corbin, have you actually listened to Senator Jefferson Beauregard Sessions?

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for.-Obama

I haven’t had that luxury perhaps you can enlighten me with the statements he made that justifies calling the whole senate GOP confederate slave owners. I realize its just a comic but to me it just seemed alittle over the line. Perhaps though there are statements made that justify it that I haven't heard.

see more Political Pictures

On July 17th, 2009 at 09:25 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

OK, I've had it. I'll post this comment here because the reaction will at least be funny.

We are NOT saddling our children and grandchildren with debt. Our grandparents and parents said the same thing.

Did WE pay the debt incurred by them? No. What makes you think the children or grandchildren will be called upon to pay the debt?

They will pass it on to the great grandchildren, and they will pass it on to their grandchildren, etc.

Get a reality check. Your personal debt matters. The national debt is meaningless.

What would happen if America defaulted? Will China invade? Will we starve? No, we have the most productive land in the world, and America re-develops self reliance., What would happen, reduced imports of Perrier water?

OK, country "A", you don't want to trade with us? Fine. You are very overpopulated. Go starve if you don't want to trade textiles for food. Oil? Here is dirty little secret: there is lots and lots and lots of oil in the USA, lots and lots of it.

So quit your whining about the national debt. It is a myth. Run it up as far as other nations let us. Screw them, I'm an American.

On July 17th, 2009 at 09:28 AM, Mike (not verified) said:

Toldja -

We can agree that every situation is different. History does show that spending is one way to go, but I believe that a lot of the current spending is misdirected at best. I just get sick of partisan cheap shots that focus on personalities instead of ideas. Have a good Friday.

On July 17th, 2009 at 09:51 AM, Saul Alinsky (not verified) said:

Keith Hays "over the line?" No way...say it ain't so.

I find it striking that he's comparing the GOP to Confederate slave owners, too. Maybe Keith should brush up on his history a bit--seeing that he always has this snarky, snide, know-it-all attitude in his posts. Who did former Confederate slave owners and their posterity vote for from Reconstruction till the 1970s and 1980s? The so called Southern Democrats that's who.

I've read most of Keith's posts. The only predominant quality I find is his spirit of one-upmanship by using condescension and outright ridiculous inferences (i.e. aforementioned cartoon) to make his point. I'm suprised IP didn't say anything about the cartoon (perhaps he hasn't seen it yet). Yet, I get the feeling that Keith is one of the teacher's pets and wouldn't get called on it anyhow.

The cartoon is insulting, unwarranted and backward thinking. Such bilge, whether it be this cartoon or Barbara Boxer's finger-wagging attitude towards a Black CEO, continues to show that Democrats and their operatives are consumed with using race as a focal point.

http://www.breitbart.tv/god-awful-black-chamber-of-commerce-ceo-rips-sen-boxer-for-condescending-racial-remarks/

So, Keith have you actually listened to Senator Barbara Levy Boxer?

On July 17th, 2009 at 10:01 AM, IlliniPundit said:

"I'm suprised IP didn't say anything about the cartoon (perhaps he hasn't seen it yet)."
I've seen it. Meh.

On July 17th, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Toldja So (not verified) said:

"So quit your whining about the national debt. It is a myth. Run it up as far as other nations let us. Screw them, I'm an American."

Where ever did the world get the impression America is arrogant? "Screw them" is quite a well thought out and detailed national economic strategy.....I'm just sayin!

On July 17th, 2009 at 10:11 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

IP has attained Bodhi. He is now "meh" to the world.

On July 17th, 2009 at 10:26 AM, IlliniPundit said:

Heh. I've got an article saved that I've been meaning to post that touches on my "meh-ness" with national politics right now. Maybe I'll do so later today so you can all laugh at me all weekend. :-)

On July 17th, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Keith_Hays said:

Perhaps though there are statements made that justify it that I haven't heard.

Ok Corbin, for starters:

Then go here:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/meetjeffsessions/sets/72157617657257303/show/

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 17th, 2009 at 11:16 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

America is arrogant for good reasons.

We are, with all our faults, the greatest civilization, the geatest society, the greatest people the world has ever known

Peaceful transititions of power, the right to disagree, the right to vilify the government, best food, water, education, infrastructure that ever existed.

Screw em, Toldja. Let em call the debt. Tell em to bring battleships to take our food and abundent natural resources.

On July 17th, 2009 at 12:03 PM, Corben Rice said:

Well that was interesting. Now I know where you are getting your generalizations of Republicans.

Step one: Paint Sessions as a racist

Step two: Republicans must all be like sessions

Step three: Repulicans have no credibility questioning any minority

I don’t know if Sessions is a racist or not. If that reporting was accurate, he has said some pretty stupid/racist stuff. However, nothing in that report had anything to do with Sotomayor or what Session has said that was racist in respect to her.

I see the attraction of this game though. I think I want to play.

Step 1: Byrd is a racist evidenced from statements in the past and membership in the KKK

Step 2: Democrats like Byrd therefore are racist

Step 3: Democrats have no right to question any minority who is Republican or has been nominated by Republicans regardless of their positions.

Wow that was fun.

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for.-Obama

On July 17th, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Arvid said:

So all you've got is that Byrd is an old racist? Do we really need to run down the litany of racial issues in the past couple of years with the Republican party? We can go that route if you want, but I suspect your memory isn't that bad and you're just attempting to deflect and hope that nobody digs too deep as to why most racial issues in politics lately originate from the Republican side. You don't see too many Democrats or Greens having to apologize for racial slurs or for comments about marrying other species/races and allowing them to breed.

What's also fun is that you have problems with cartoons generalizing Republicans but have no problems with generalizing anything "liberal" or painting all liberals/Democrats with the same broad brush.

-----
This last post conclusively proves that Arvid is in fact Laurel Prussing. Sad. - Anonymous on 2009-06-22 @ 9:30am

On July 17th, 2009 at 12:45 PM, Corben Rice said:

What's also fun is that you have problems with cartoons generalizing Republicans but have no problems with generalizing anything "liberal" or painting all liberals/Democrats with the same broad brush.

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for.-Obama

I would say that is not true about me. If you are basing that on my previous comment I was illustrating how ridiculous the line of reasoning was. Sorry you missed my point perhaps it wasn’t expressed well.

I am glad you agree that the line of reasoning is not logical.

On July 17th, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Corben Rice said:

Do we really need to run down the litany of racial issues in the past couple of years with the Republican party?

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for.-Obama

If you feel it is necessary. However, I won't stand for the broad paintbrush of racism applied to Republicans. It is Ridiculous. If you feel the necessity of pointing out individuals fine. We can look at the merits of your arguments on an individual basis. Otherwise, you are just creating stereotypes and prejudice.

On July 17th, 2009 at 03:03 PM, redstatewannabe said:

You don't see too many Democrats or Greens having to apologize for racial slurs or for comments about marrying other species/races and allowing them to breed

How about recent comments by Ruth Ginsburg? Of course, you won't have to hear her apologize because no one will call her on it. Well no one but the pro-life/religious folks and Drudge, but they don't warrant a response.

On July 17th, 2009 at 05:09 PM, Keith_Hays said:

Well, RSW, I read Justice Ginsburg's entire interview. I see nothing for which she needs to apologize - nothing at all.

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 17th, 2009 at 08:02 PM, Keith_Hays said:

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 17th, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Dan Fielding said:

"I've read most of Keith's posts. The only predominant quality I find is his spirit of one-upmanship by using condescension and outright ridiculous inferences (i.e. aforementioned cartoon) to make his point. I'm suprised IP didn't say anything about the cartoon (perhaps he hasn't seen it yet). Yet, I get the feeling that Keith is one of the teacher's pets and wouldn't get called on it anyhow."

I'm relieved someone else noticed. I never dreamed I'd be a fan of Saul Alinsky!

On July 18th, 2009 at 07:02 AM, Keith_Hays said:

Interesting pseudonym Saul - the original community organizer. Aren't you being a bit "condescending" there? Perhaps a tiny bit, maybe?

So, Keith have you actually listened to Senator Barbara Levy Boxer?

Yes, I have, and here is a transcript of the exchange as published on Politico:

Boxer then quoted a NAACP resolution that passed and put it in the record.

Alford: "What does that mean?"

Boxer: "Sir, we're going to put that in the record..."

Alford: "What does that mean, though? The NAACP has a resolution, what does that mean?"

Boxer: "Sir, they could say the same thing about what do you mean..."

Alford: "I've got documentation."

Boxer: "Sir, they passed it. They passed it. Now, also, if that isn't interesting you to we'll quote John Grant, who is the CEO of 100 Black Men of Atlanta." [She goes on to read quote.]

Alford: "Madam Chair, that is condescending to me. I'm the National Black Chamber of Commerce and you're trying to put up some other black group to pit against me."

Boxer: "If this gentlemen were here he would be proud that he was being quoted."

Alford: "He should have been invited!"

Boxer: "...just as he would be proud.." Alford: "It is condescending to me."

Boxer: "...he's proud, I'm sure, that I am quoting him."

Alford: "All that's condescending, and I don't like it. It's racial. I don't like it. I take offense to it. As an African-American and a veteran of this country, I take offense to that!"

Boxer: "... offense at the fact that I would quote ...?" Alford: "You're quoting some other black man. Why don't you quote some other Asian ... or ... you are being racial here. And I think you're getting to a path here that's going to explode."

Boxer reviews what she had been doing and then mentions that "there is definitely differing opinions in the black community. Just as there are in my community."

Alford: "You're speaking on behalf of the black community?"

Boxer: "No. I am putting in the record a statement by the NAACP."

Alford: "Why?"

Boxer: "Because I think it is quite relevant."

Alford: "... Why are you doing the Colored People Association study with the Black Chamber of Commerce?"

Boxer: "I am trying to show the diversity of support that we have."

Alford: "Diversity?"

Boxer: "And I will go ahead and do one more diversity of support..."

Eventually Alford declares, "We are referring to the experts regardless of their color. And for someone to tell me, an African-American, college-educated veteran of the United States Army that I must contend with some other black group and put aside everything else in here -- this has nothing to do with the NAACP and really has nothing to do with the National Black Chamber of Commerce. We're talking energy and that road the chair went down, I think, is god-awful."

Please, Saul, explain to my poor condescending mind how it was improper for Senator Barbara Levy Boxer to place a resolution passed by the NAACP in the record? I wouldn't like to make any ridiculous inferences now would I?

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 18th, 2009 at 07:47 AM, roughriderfan said:

In my opinion, the purpose of a political cartoonist is to make a point with his illustration - and if he/she makes the viewer think - then he/she is doing their job. I have always thought that cartoonists who use the rapier point are better then those who need to use a sledge hammer - hence my dislike of both Mallard Fillmore and Doonsbury - which in my opinion use a sledge hammer approach. The two cartoonists I enjoy most are Chuck Assesy from Colorado Springs - and Mark Streeter from Savannah - one conservative and one liberal.

In the "Offensive" cartoon mentioned drawn by Pat Bagley - the point is well made - is the GOP in danger of becoming the party of the "Old South". What happened before - ie when the "Old South" was the party of the Democratic Party - is historically interesting - especially when one remembers that by doing so the Democratic Party gave up its ability to effectively be a national party from 1880 to 1932 - till FDR put in back on track. After all, most of the Democratic presidential victories from 1880 to 1930 were the result of divisions within the GOP

So lets look at the issue of today. The fact that the Democrats can elect 60 members to the senate is something that the GOP needs to ask why - and a look at the parties image as the last stand of the Confederacy does not help reach out. Do we want to be the party on the outs for the next 50 years - Bagley has raised a good point - so do we look at the issue - or kill the messenger because we don't want to hear his message

My .02

Greg Novak

On July 18th, 2009 at 08:35 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

This is IP.com, where is de riguer to kill the messenger.

Unless the messenger is Rush or Sarah Palin.

On July 18th, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Keith_Hays said:

In my opinion, the purpose of a political cartoonist is to make a point with his illustration - and if he/she makes the viewer think - then he/she is doing their job.

Will Shakespeare made the same point some 400 years ago when in Hamlet he told the players that their purpose was to prick the conscience of a King. Pat Bagley has certainly achieved the purpose to prick many a conscience hereabouts. Unfortunately the reaction has been to react rather than to think, attacking me for posting an "over the top" and "offensive" cartoon or trying to paint any liberal or Democrat they can find with a racist label.

Frankly I find many of Ms. Dykstra's selections over the top and offensive, especially two of her selections this week. That is, of course, the whole point of political cartooning - to go over the top and evoke a strong reaction.

Thanks Greg for your reasoned approach but look around. You may be more comfortable in the big tent on your left. You will be welcome!

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 19th, 2009 at 09:12 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

Well frankly Mr. Hayes many of the long time readers of this blog have found your rants over the top and offensive. You should take narrow mindedness and start your own blog where you can agree with yourself all day long.

On July 19th, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Kevin Sandefur said:

On behalf of Confederate slave owners everywhere, I must object.

On July 19th, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Narc said:

However, I won't stand for the broad paintbrush of racism applied to Republicans.

Yeah, I can't imagine why people would think that. It's certainly not because of comments like this:

This has been a country built basically by white folks.

That was Pat Buchanan on MSNBC last week.

On July 19th, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Keith_Hays said:

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Mike Lane - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Bob Englehart - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

See Cartoons by Cartoon by John Darkow - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

Well, the courageous No Name has invited me to leave. My offense is apparently that I express an opinion contrary to his too often and with too much vigor. He invites me to find my own place where I no one disagrees with me, no one expresses a contrary opinion on any subject, where all is an heterogenious oleo of bland agreement.

What a sterile environment he would assign me to. I would not wish that for even the courageous No Name who would send me there.

I shan't be leaving any time soon.

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 19th, 2009 at 12:34 PM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

This has been a country built basically by white folks.

Less offensive than just completely and utter wrong.

On July 19th, 2009 at 03:50 PM, Corben Rice said:

Unfortunately the reaction has been to react rather than to think, attacking me for posting an "over the top" and "offensive" cartoon or trying to paint any liberal or Democrat they can find with a racist label.

1. I never attacked you

2. I am not the one trying to label a whole group of people racist.

I simply stated that I personally thought the cartoon was over the line.

That is, of course, the whole point of political cartooning - to go over the top and evoke a strong reaction.-On July 18th, 2009 at 12:28 PM, Keith_Hays

If you must utter hateful speech you are free to do so. Don't expect me to remain silent when you do!-On March 1st, 2009 at 02:10 PM, Keith_Hays

Do only certian groups qualify for your outrage at hate speach?

Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for.-Obama

On July 19th, 2009 at 06:26 PM, Keith_Hays said:

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Adam Zyglis - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

Here Corbin, Zyglis makes the point better than I ever could.

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 19th, 2009 at 07:25 PM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

Keith Hays = white racist

On July 19th, 2009 at 10:03 PM, Dan Fielding said:

Opposing Sonia Sotomayor: racism
Opposing Miguel Estrada: courage
Opposing Janice Rogers Brown: courage
Opposing Clarence Thomas: courage

And a par-tridge in a pear tree

On July 19th, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Arvid said:

Opposing Sonia Sotomayor: racism
Opposing Miguel Estrada: courage
Opposing Janice Rogers Brown: courage
Opposing Clarence Thomas: courage

Meanwhile, back in reality....

-----
This last post conclusively proves that Arvid is in fact Laurel Prussing. Sad. - Anonymous on 2009-06-22 @ 9:30am

On July 19th, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Keith_Hays said:

See Cartoons by Cartoon by John Darkow - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Mike Lane - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 19th, 2009 at 11:55 PM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

I'm confused by what consists of "hate speech".

On July 20th, 2009 at 07:02 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

"Meanwhile, back in reality...."

Meanwhile, back in reality....

On July 20th, 2009 at 08:32 AM, Keith_Hays said:

And here is another over the top offensive cartoon from Pat Bagley ***

See Cartoons by Cartoon by Pat Bagley - Courtesy of Politicalcartoons.com - Email this Cartoon

AND an equally over the top and offensive cartoon from Matt Bors ***

3 Score + 10

Keith Hays

On July 20th, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Anonymous (not verified) said:

That cartoon is funny Keith. Reminds me of when Senate Democrats kept calling Justice Thomas a N*****. And when Obama Called Hillary a dumb b****.

Well, yeah, I mean those things didn't really happen, but in my mind they probably did - they would be consistent with my views of Democrats, and therefore would be really funny and interesting to me if presented in cartoon form.

But I think I do remember something from "reality" regarding Democrats very concerned about a certain conservative Latino judge. I guess that would kind of be a real example of the fake portrayal of the Republicans in your cartoon. Ha, now that's funny.

On July 20th, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Keith_Hays said: