Tea Party Patriots

While the Tea partiers are throwing America's "hope" overboard, it would also be appropriate if there were a large tsunami approaching in the horizon. Their chants of "take back America" will shortly be drowned-out by the tsunami of dollars from the Supreme Court ruling allowing multi-national corporations and special interest groups to flood the media with whatever agenda or candidate they want to control.

This one was really late being posted... but it was well worth the wait.

Great job, Clay. It's a fantastic drawing, and a terrific cartoon.

More to the point, should be 'drawings' of all the Democrats and Independents who voted for Obama's hopey-dopey "Change" and are now vociferously venting their anger and disgust with him, his lies and his Cronies lack of honesty and "transparency".

Gotta love the dichotomies that the Left-Progressives continually provide the rest of us. Smooth sailin' to 2012 comrades!

Even as Obama has been unmasked as the vapid empty suit that he is, you are putting forth this?

The "tea partiers" are the only ones in the past year that have given our once proud nation any real hope.

The so called 2nd Boston Tea Party has changed everything. The interesting thing to watch over the next couple of years will be to see if Obama lasts his entire 4 years (by this I mean without resigning in disgrace or being impeached).

The only "hope" being tossed is that of the statists whose abdication of personal responsibility in favor of perceived government provided security has reached mind-numbing levels.

A far more accurate depiction would have the crew named "congress".

The first revolution wasn't only about patriots. There were tories too. Many of them abandoned the colonies for a life back in Europe. I'll bet they thought the tea tossed overboard was an abandonment of hope as well. They believed that the government had a perfect right to tax and silence political speech. They had no problem with King George taking money from colonials and giving it to his favored subjects. They couldn't imagine a hard life of freedom and self reliance because of its dangers.

So, if you see independence and self reliance as anathema to your idea of an European socialist utopia on American soil, set sail with the tea. There is hope for you in Europe. Au revoir, arrivederci, Auf wiedersehen and cheerio.

Walden wrote: "The "tea partiers" are the only ones in the past year that have given our once proud nation any real hope."

Now THAT'S true.

I, for one, HOPE that the "tea partiers" will keep up the good work of confusing everyone as to what it is that they stand for from day to day.

After all, it's not as if there is any official spokesperson for the "organization," but instead, there are many who have taken advantage of any opportunity to appear on camera, ignoring the fact that they are being used for entertainment purposes, or as a break for a few moments from reality.

In Florida, there are two organizations within the state that have filed lawsuits to attempt to force the other to change their name, each claiming that they were the first to register the name, "Florida Tea Party" first.

Mention the words "Tea Party" in a social setting and eyeballs roll up and sighs emanate from the lips of those who remember the town hall meetings that were constantly being interrupted by the Birthers and Beckers.

It's hard to remove the imagery emblazoned in one's brain, after having gazed upon signs written by those who spell like third-graders, and after seeing some of the attire so carefully selected for the march on Washington this past summer.

First impressions are indeed, the longest lasting.

Thank you again, Alprova!

When I opened the cartoon I wondered what it was supposed to portray.

I'd hate to think that the Tea Partiers would become organized enough to become a real party. Facism would rule, I guess. UGH!

Alprova you're usually better than this.

"Mention the words "Tea Party" in a social setting and eyeballs roll up and sighs emanate from the lips of those who remember the town hall meetings that were constantly being interrupted by the Birthers and Beckers.

It's hard to remove the imagery emblazoned in one's brain, after having gazed upon signs written by those who spell like third-graders, and after seeing some of the attire so carefully selected for the march on Washington this past summer."

Ahhh yes - the great unwashed. The "citizenry" - I suppose these would be the same ones clinging to their guns and religion eh? Better to be surrounded by elitists in cocktail dresses and suits and ties, Harvard degrees, and lofty postions?

Of course it's disorganized. Most grass roots movements are. And of course there are those, as in Florida, trying to grasp control. Kind of a vicious circle methinks.

Clara - look up the definition of fascism. If you think that's what the tea parties represented, you're sadly mistaken. Dig a little deeper than leftwing talking points.

Brilliant cartoon, Clay!

EaTn, here is a short exchange at SCOTUS re: McCain/Feingold.

Quote

The government lawyer defending the statute was asked: If movies financed by corporations may be banned because they express opinions on candidates, how about books?

"It’s a 500-page book, and at the end it says, 'So vote for X,' the government could ban that?" asked Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. Replied the Justice Department attorney, “Well, if it says ‘vote for X,’ it would be express advocacy and it would be covered by the pre-existing Federal Election Campaign Act provision."

"If the corporation wanted to publish such a book, he continued, “we could prohibit the publication of the book using corporate treasury funds.” We could prohibit the publication of the book.

If corporate advocacy may be forbidden as it was under the law in question, it’s not just Exxon Mobil and Citigroup that are rendered mute. Nonprofit corporations set up merely to advance goals shared by citizens, such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Rifle Association, also have to put a sock in it. So much for the First Amendment goal of fostering debate about public policy.

Unquote

See http://townhall.com/columnists/SteveChapman/2010/01/24/free_speech_for_corporations?page=full

Please note McCain/Feingold would silence the ACLU -- a rather good idea, incidently.

Here's more from the cited column:

"It is often argued that corporate speech may be banned because corporations enjoy certain privileges afforded by law. But it’s a longstanding constitutional axiom that the government may not require the surrender of constitutional rights in exchange for state-furnished benefits -- say, barring criticism of Congress by residents of public housing.

"Once you grant the government that sort of power, it is bound to expand. Newspapers could be forbidden to make endorsements. Right now, media companies are exempt from the ban. But why should a newspaper be free to spend money urging voters to support a candidate, while other companies are not?

"Critics fear that freed from constraints, giant corporations will burn vast sums to help or hurt politicians. In reality, most business people are not about to plunge into divisive election campaigns, for fear of antagonizing customers."

The "Tea Partiers" are throwing hope overboard? What about when Barak "telepromp" Obama quadrupled the national debt in the name of bailouts and job creation, both unsuccessful so far. Do you think hope may have taken a dive then?

alprova - I never took you for an elitist. A leftist, yes, but an elitist, not until now.

This "cartoon" sums it all so well. Tea Partiers are arguing among themselves and others are profit mongering while millions of Americans lose all hope that health care will be reformed.

The irony of all this is that the Tea Partiers say that they want to go back to the original intent of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, etc. What many that support them don't know about their own history is that our so called freedom came about after John Adams managed to convince an uninterested Continental Congress to come defend his state of Massachusetts from the British. For those of you who don't know, in Massachusetts, they did all kinds of things to anger the British then cried "foul" when England reacted. Most of the members of the CC did not want to have to pay for sending troops to MA. But, in one of the first known acts of government intervention and spending, Adams managed to get the colonies to save Massachusetts by creating a Continental Army...at great cost to what was to become a new nation.

This is what prompted the Declaration of Independence. This is what, in later years, caused the birth of the U.S. Constitution. Yes, it was government intervention and spending! So, if everyone were to support the so called Tea Partiers agenda, we would increase government spending and intervention.

BTW, Clara you are right on in the facism comment.

@larrythelibrarian-Obama wasn't responsible for the bank bailout.

I hope many of you posters watched the Dateline NBC special tonight about how your insurance company won't cover you if you do have a serious illness. If you did, then you would understand the exact meaning of Clay's "cartoon."

This modest change experiment is almost over. Bring on the next participant so we can undermine their ideals and damage their character. After the disrespectful tone taken towards Bush and the total delegitimization of Obama, who ever is next will be "more of the same". The liberal media will pounce on a conservative and Fox will clean the clock of any liberal, and the cycle continues. In the meantime nothing changes. The riches one percent will still control us all, as we grovel over scraps. Corporations will grow and continue to export more jobs overseas and we will continue to be a country of consumers and not producers. I did have hope for the President and wanted to see him succeed, but he never had a change.

Now, being a true American, my focus goes to the health of Brett Favre.

I'm not giving up on the President. I knew coming in that the man had his work cut out for him. The man is turning gray in front of a nation, trying to be the leader he was elected to be.

2010 will be far better for the man that this past year was.

By the end of the year, people will be saying, "What ever happened to those tea partiers?"

I saw. I sobbed.

I suspect the last word of your first para was a slip, SS59...perhaps a Freudian Slip. Slip or deliberate, you are 100% correct...Dear Leader "never had a change." Or a clue.

alprove - all presidents age before our eyes. There is nothing...nothing...that is special about this one. Well, he DOES have that need to bow before foreign kings and a taste for spending tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars on a New York date with his wife -- evidently the first of its kind. DC isn't good enough, I guess.

I don't understand why regular people get such a short shrift from the lefties and righties. Is it that they are just cattle for the grand social experiments of the intelligentsia? Where does the eye rolling and dismissiveness come from? Is it from a deep seated fear of not being special? Is it a case of stepping on others so as to feel superior? Why the need to plan other peoples' retirement, health care, job security, education, etc.? Is it a complete inability to control their own loveless, sarcastic, bitter, but superior lives? Almost without exception of all the far left and far right people I know I'd rather be dumb, poor, dirty, hungry and free than arrogant, prideful and enslaved to some grand plan I had to try and coerce on everyone else. If only we can carry the election in the upper peninsula of Michigan, we might be able to push through the next, newest, grandest legislation that will be a historic landmark that rights the wrong that 50.1 percent of America believes will cure cancer. Paleeeze!

Clay, once again, spot on. Yourself and Mike Luckovich of the Atlanta Journal manage to compress in a single panel cartoon some of the uncomfortable truths of our society. Thanks again.

Well said, anonymight, Walden, Rolando, Sailorman and Larry, well said. You guys make sense out of a sea of nonsense.

Now, more are seeing the true face of the so-called 'compassionate' Left. The true Elitists whose legacy for generations has been to despise the 'masses' while prettily pursing their lips in 'polite' company and fabricating lies about their "work for the poor, the disenfranchised, the minorities, the enslaved. In reality, their work has been to undermine, use, abuse and wreak havoc on those very ones they purport to help. The far, far right in all their anger have never done as much damage as these 'delightful' peons that corrupt our society and our country.

The Tea partiers represent the worst of the masses to these fabricators of deceptive practices. They fear for their cushy, petty little lives. As for me and my household, I would rather dine on a meal of vegetables with the righteous, than feast on delicacies with the evil and the 'elite' ones. It's a no-brainer. Joy or despair?

Rolando..the quote you provided, "Critics fear that freed from constraints, giant corporations will burn vast sums to help or hurt politicians. In reality, most business people are not about to plunge into divisive election campaigns, for fear of antagonizing customers.", is laughable.

First, giant corporation have been burning vast sums for decades to buy support for themselves. Second, these "business people" don't need, and are smart enough not to directly, "plunge into divisive election campaigns". That's what their lobbyists are for. The company just provides the cash to buy the politician.

How many instances to you need to understand how the cozy nature of corporations or interests buying politicians has stifled competitiveness, demeaned the average American, or smeared our system...Standard Oil, JP Morgan, Boss Tweed, Teapot Dome, business trusts, businesses engaged in child labor, unsafe workplaces, unsafe food and drugs, union abuses, minority discrimination, (to keep minorities from competing for jobs), United Fruit scandal, S&L crisis, repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, deregulation in general, and of course our current crisis from giving the financial corporations free rein.

I could name dozens of other scandals resulting from lack of oversight or allowing businesses/unions, etc unfettered power. What the above have in common is the buying of influence by corporations through politicians who fought against any reform of these harmful practices. And we want to give them MORE opportunities to corrupt our system by buying our politicians??

How many times do people need to be screwed before they wake up and study a little history? How much did some of you lose from the value of your home, your 401K, IRA, or stocks from these crooks bought and paid for by the financial institutions to look the other way while the banks engaged in speculation and unsound practices. Look at our unemployment numbers.

This is not a conservative or liberal issue. This is the selling of America to the highest bidder. Our economy has been wrecked by unethical and unregulated scoundrels hiding behind their paid political patsies. This SCOTUS decision puts us well on the path to plutocracy. The sheep will be shorn once again. Baaaaaa

"...faith, hope and love. And the greatest of these is love...." But without hope, what is there left to love or to have faith in??

I have yet to run into any "Tea Partier" who had anything positive to say. All of their collective rhetoric is negatively-based untruths aimed at the current administration and its attempts at bringing about needed change.

I say all that to get to this; in an independent, unscientific poll, conducted by yours truly, I went about asking certain questions of a general sampling of local residents not long ago. I found that barely one-in-ten even understood what the "Tea Partiers" were all about, let alone agreed with what they were doing. The one thing my 'pollees' all agreed upon, however, was that the "Tea Partiers" were always a bit too loud and extremely negative in their ideas and speech patterns.

Now, that is really what the "...people think...."

Here's hoping, hope is not lost, Woody

Walden wrote, "The "tea partiers" are the only ones in the past year that have given our once proud nation any real hope."

Man, Walden, I'm starting to wonder what's in the tea at these parties.

You may have lost pride in our nation in the past year, but I, for one, have never been more proud. Sure, Washington is a mess, but that's not the president's fault. The mental and moral midgets across the aisle have tried or succeeded in thwarting his every effort. But, unlike the Republicans, and the tea party patriots, at least Obama is making an effort to address our problems. At least he's trying to lead.

Your hopes for the president's impeachment certainly shows your true allegiance. Just like every other Obama hater, you long for political gains, even at the expense of the nation's stability. What a fine patriot you are.

You probably wait anxiously for the latest unemployment figures to come out, hoping that the situation has worsened, or like Dick Cheney, you sit in you undisclosed location, longing for the successful terrorist attack that will prove (at least in your eyes) that Barack Obama has left us unprotected.

You are the most pathetic of beings- someone who would rather be right than prosperous. So, go back to your tea, now. Perhaps it will dull the depression caused by any positive news that might come our way, or, at the very least, it might impair your senses enough so you can continue to see the world through your hazy partisan stupor.

How's this for "partisan stupor". Bet most of you Obama worshippers didn't know this was happening behind your backs-behind closed doors and your precious media did not report on it.

(BTW Woody, I'm glad you know what Americans think and believe on the subject. Your poll somewhat biased, you think? Loud Tea Partiers? Good. It's about time some bodies in this country got off their butts and put their collective feet down instead of criticizing those who do).

Violation of the Tenth Amendment: recent Executive Order passed while the rest of you were slipping off in a coma listening to more of the same "hope and change speeches":

THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release January 11, 2010

EXECUTIVE ORDER ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNORS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 1822 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), and in order to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State governments to protect our Nation and its people and property, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Council of Governors.

(a) There is established a Council of Governors (Council).The Council shall consist of 10 State Governors appointed by the President (Members), of whom no more than five shall be of the same political party. The term of service for each Member appointed to serve on the Council shall be 2 years, but a Member may be reappointed for additional terms. (b) The President shall designate two Members, who shall not be members of the same political party, to serve as Co-Chairs of the Council.

Sec. 2. Functions. The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council to exchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism; the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs; the Commander, United States Northern Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such views, information, or advice shall concern:

(a) matters involving the National Guard of the various States; (b) homeland defense; (c) civil support; (d) synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States; and (e) other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities.

Exec. Order cont'd;

Sec. 3. Administration.

(a) The Secretary of Defense shall designate an Executive Director to coordinate the work of the Council. (b) Members shall serve without compensation for their work on the Council. However, Members shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law. (c) Upon the joint request of the Co-Chairs of the Council, the Secretary of Defense shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, provide the Council with administrative support, assignment or detail of personnel, and information as may be necessary for the performance of the Council's functions. (d) The Council may establish subcommittees of the Council. These subcommittees shall consist exclusively of Members of the Council and any designated employees of a Member with authority to act on the Member's behalf, as appropriate to aid the Council in carrying out its functions under this order. (e) The Council may establish a charter that is consistent with the terms of this order to refine further its purpose, scope, and objectives and to allocate duties, as appropriate, among members.

Sec. 4. Definitions. As used in this order:

(a) the term "State" has the meaning provided in paragraph (15) of section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002(6 U.S.C. 101(15)); and (b) the term "Governor" has the meaning provided in paragraph (5) of section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122(5)). (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (1) the authority granted by law to a department, agency, or the head thereof; or (2) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals. (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

Sec. 5. General Provisions.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE, January 11, 2010. ###

hotdiggity

You make some excellent points with which I agree completely. BUT - I place the bulk of the blame not on the corporations but on the politicians. It's hard to fault the corps for gaming a system so easily taken advantage of. The pols give the world's oldest profession a bad name. If they didn't allow themselves to be bought, and advertise they can be, they wouldn't be.

Ollie and friends, haters of all conservatives/Christians, this is for you:

January 14, 2010 – "Erroll Southers, a former FBI agent, has been nominated by President Obama to take over the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), a key post that oversees airport and other security measure in the U.S.

Southers believes that so-called “right-wing extremists” – including pro-lifers pose a serious threat to our national security. His views are available on YouTube.

Southers admitted under oath before a Senate Committee that he had used his power at the FBI to check into the classified records of a man who had become the boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend. Under oath, he claimed that someone else had accessed the records. A day after he was voted favorably out of committee, he sent a memo to key Senators saying his testimony was incorrect. He had accessed the records himself, not someone else"...and the crowd of the dishonest and inept at Obama's side just goes on and on.

Ollie contd': "Sure, Washington is a mess, but that's not the president's fault. The mental and moral midgets across the aisle have tried or succeeded in thwarting his every effort. But, unlike the Republicans, and the tea party patriots, at least Obama is making an effort to address our problems. At least he's trying to lead."

How can the Repubs have "caused the mess" in the last year when they haven't even been allowed to participate or go into the closed door rooms to form a "bipartisan" meeting? Obama making "efforts" and "trying to lead"? You don't try, you LEAD. And his efforts so far have been weak and useless. Copenhagen? Iran? Climate Change? $787 Billion stimulis? Health care? Cap n' Tax? GM? Freddie and Fannie?Town hall campaign meetings ad infnitum that are merely a blustering show of...NOTHING? We know what you guys are drinking and who you're watching and listening to by your ignorant words.

Anyone in America that checks out the facts and still believes this drivel is worse than a "mental midget". And you call this administration "moral"? Slap yourself up side the head dude-real hard. Jiggle those marbles. Man alive, no wonder this country is in a mess.

hotdiggity said, "...Standard Oil, JP Morgan, Boss Tweed, Teapot Dome, business trusts, businesses engaged in child labor, unsafe workplaces, unsafe food and drugs, union abuses, minority discrimination, (to keep minorities from competing for jobs), United Fruit scandal, S&L crisis, repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, deregulation in general, and of course our current crisis from giving the financial corporations free rein."

Only the last two are of modern times impacting current problems, hotdig...with arguable impact. I will admit having to look up the Glass-Steagall Act. My father - who lived through and raised a family for years before and after the last Depression - told a slightly different story surrounding the Crash...and he had no axe to grind, blame to place, nor fingerpointing as did a former head of the SEC.

As Dad put it, the Crash was essentially, at its basics, caused by the banks/brokers being allowed to sell stocks on 10% margin or less...or loaning 90+ percent of the purchase price. When the stock dropped below that percent in value, the banks/brokers sold it to cover their investment. What began as a mild, routine downturn rapidly became an avalanche. Banks/brokers lost mucho dinero...couldn't cover their deposits, folded and...well, you know the rest since we are again living through it. Only this time the FDIC is there -- with taxpayer/depositors funds -- to save the little guy [if $100,000 deposits are "little"]. Again, this time it wasn't the depositors' funds that were lost -- at least not directly -- the losers were the depositors of the banks forced by the Democrat Congress to lend money to folks absolutely unable to repay it. They are STILL closing, even as we speak. The Congress again covered the banks' losses by having FannieMae/FreddieMac cover the bad loan losses -- again using taxpayer money. The housing bubble, the prime cause this time around, burst and the rest is history. The described process is compacted, simplified, and not necessarily in order, timewise.

All your cited Act did was force the 1930s banks out of the stock trading business and back into consumer affairs...which worked for a while although subsequent Congressional and Presidential interference deepened and extended the recovery...just as it is doing today.

Some time back another Democrat Congress allowed today's banks to again start mixing commercial dealings with consumer ones...imposing their dim-witted wishes to give loans to all and sundry regardless of ability to pay.

All Dear Leader has [legally?? / illegally??] done is override Congressional will [again] through the use of Executive Order and forced his own demonstrably defective opinions on we, the people. He "hopes" to forestall further loss...or at least until 2013 when people will forget about it.

hotdiggity also said, "Rolando..the quote you provided, 'Critics fear that freed from constraints, giant corporations will burn vast sums to help or hurt politicians. In reality, most business people are not about to plunge into divisive election campaigns, for fear of antagonizing customers.', is laughable."

You just laughed at one of your own, hotdig...a more moderate, thoughtful poster who sincerely believes exactly what my first sentence said up there.

My God, canary...the man is totally out of control. Forget about the Congressional and the Judicial Branchs...there is only One.

Maybe I better start calling him Chavez...the dictatorship is almost fully upon us.

And here I was, hoping I could put away the reloading gear. Glad I got that progressive press, after all.

Thanks canary. I always appreciate your support.

OllieH - wishing for Obama to fail in enacting his agenda is patriotism at its finest. Why should anyone want him to achieve his goal of a European style social democracy for America? Ad hominem attacks on me are not very becoming, my friend.

de Nada guys, it's the least I can offer to offset the bilge and the bile of those propagandists. Righteous outrage needs to be the order of the day. Surely we cannot put away the armor either. It's necessary, every ever- lovin' day.

It will be hard to live without my cuppa.

Virginia Banishing Tea (1774) http://books.google.com/books?id=IijXAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA59&dq=%22pernicious+baneful+tea%22&lr=&as_drrb_is=b&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=1700&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=1900&as_brr=1&ei=PstdS-XGBZuQywT9nKX6Bw&client=firefox-a&cd=2#v=onepage&q=%22pernicious%20baneful%20tea%22&f=false

Begone, pernicious, baneful tea, With all Pandora's ills possessed, Hyson, no more beguiled by thee My noble sons shall be oppressed.

To Britain fly, where gold enslaves, And venal men their birth-right sell; Tell North and his bribed clan of knaves, Their bloody acts were made in hell.

In Henry's reign those acts began, Which sacred rules of justice broke North now pursues the hellish plan, To fix on us his slavish yoke.

But we oppose, and will be free, This great good cause we will defend; Nor bribe, nor Gage, nor North's decree, Shall make us "at his feet to bend."

From Anglia's ancient sons we came; Those heros who for freedom fought; In freedom's cause we'll march; their fame, By their example greatly taught.

Our king we love, but North we hate, Nor will to him submission own; If death's our doom, we'll brave our fate, But pay allegiance to the throne.

Then rouse, my sons! from slavery free Your suffering homes; from God's high wrath; Gird on your steel; give liberty To all who follow in our path.

Wasn't it Republican Party that permitted Wall St. to sell stock at 10% margin?

Here's another cartoon of your namesake, canary. Pity you haven't the copywrite...

http://townhall.com/cartoons/2010/01/25/2

I don't believe it was a "permitted" kind of thing, Clara. So far as I know that aspect was essentially unregulated.

Well said, InspectorB...although we have a leader who doth not foresake a bended knee before an oppressor, be it Hanover, Saud or Heisei.

It could be progressive ideology in the boat, with the word "freedom" tossed over the side, or how about the President and Congress in the boat with "fiscal responsibility".

Oh my sensitive eyes, Rolando. I can live without the copyrights and without the roasting/toasting of the Left, but hey, it's a dirty job, and someone's gotta do it.

Here's to the lives of brave coal miners everywhere. My feathered cap off to ya'll, Brave Americans.

"Well said, InspectorB."

I am seriously pondering the economic and political sacrifice that would be necessary to renovate our nation.

Giving up your tea is a good enough idea and emblem.

That said, I am far too ornery by nature to be a Tea Party person. I can't conform and must dissent and cringe at groups.

And I see neither immediate nor long-term hope of change.

Inspector, that sounds an awful lot like a pessimist. Never took you for one of those.

By not conforming you have conformed to the non-conformist. Practically everyone is part a group sometime or another. And I believe it will take a group such as the tea party folks to make some changes.

I too do not expect immediate change, but am HOPEful for future changes.

"Inspector, that sounds an awful lot like a pessimist. Never took you for one of those."

Well, thanks for thinking of me at all, Nurse.

I do not think of myself as a pessimist. I stay happy on a little farm with kids and a wife and some chickens and a good dog. I have my books.

I am, however, wary and careful and watchful--especially of myself.

So much of political life thrives on flattery and self-flattery. Really, every political speaker stokes Pride and Vanity of some sort.

This especially occurs when the speaker pretends to be criticizing the Vanity or Pride or Error of the opposition.

There is usually no Cost or or Self-Criticism or Self-Correction called for on the part of the audience. Instead, we hear politicians who deal in easy platitudes and uncritical flattery.

I cringe at Obama's speeches when he strokes himself or compliments his audience in a way that comforts their vanities.

And as for those who disagree, "You are standing on the wrong side of History" &c. Really?

I hear the other side do the same, but I will not bother filling in with specific names.

Righteousness is off-putting, no matter the source.

Inspector, I think that was well said. I believe these are things we can agree on.

I am glad to see you back on the post. I have enjoyed your take on things in the past.

I used to think Clay was nothing but a fool but now I know he's nothing more than a devious child. When did the Tea Party become a national party able to derail Obama? Oh, that's right. They never did and never will. They are completely powerless to affect anything on a national level. They protested all summer long and what did the House and Senate do? They pushed forward at full steam. So now instead of everyone seeing Clays cartoon for what it is I come to this page to see the usual suspects arguing the joys of Left or Right. This type of polarization is doing just as much to destroy our country as Barry Obama running up our national debt.

Looks like I missed all the fun while I was down in the salt mine.

Larry,

Didja see this one?

http://www.daylife.com/photo/0a7B2Y71ji7IX?q=obama+Graham+falls+church

ROFLMAO!!!

The dummy needs the full TOTUS setup along with him to speak to a group of 6th graders.

I still have lots of hope.

I hope our country survives having such an imbecile at the helm.

I hope Dem Senators and Reps keep peeling off from the imbecile's agenda.

I hope our commanders in the battlefield can overcome the deficiency of being subject to the orders of an imbecile.

I hope the imbecile's overactive ego doesn't swell his head so much as to cause it to explode and dirty up the carpet in the Oval Office with the jello he has in there.

I hope the populace continues to wise up and kicks this imbecile to the curb come 2012.

O.K., I'm done.

I'm glad Jhenry brought up the subject of the national debt. It's another issue that causes "Tea Partiers" to go into panic attacks whenever it is mentioned.

If anyone were to ever take a gander at the facts surrounding the national debt, people who can comprehend what they read in print and what they may see in a graph, would discover that we are nowhere near as deep in debt as this nation once was.

In 1946, the national debt, adjusted of course to reflect the value of the dollar in 2010, was TEN TRILLION dollars and it stood at an astounding 120% of the nation's GDP. The debt declined dramatically right up to the end of Jimmy Carter's Presidency.

Under the tutelage of George HW Bush and Ronald Reagan, the national debt skyrocketed. Under Clinton, it plateaued and then began to decline during the second half of his Presidency. George Walker Bush was elected and 9/11 came to pass. It's been on it's way up ever since.

President Obama did not create the problems that have caused deficit spending to rise. Like it or not, that is a provable fact. The man came into office facing probably the worst of scenarios since the Great Depression.

Again, like it or not, the fact is that while we this nation is not as deep in debt as we once was, our economy is still in far better shape than it was back in 1946 too.

I'm in no way downplaying the misery and the hopelessness that many are experiencing at the moment, but the undeniable fact is that the hole that this nation was once in was far deeper than it is today.

Deficit spending is inevitable until such a time that tax revenues rise when people find employment once again, spend their money, and get back to living their lives as usual.

Pharmaceutical companies are going to boom for sure in the coming months and probably for years to come, due to a rise in sales of drugs manufactured to treat those suffering from debilitating panic attacks.

al,

Take a look at the UNFUNDED LIABILITIES.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

That is 107 Trillion.

That would be SS, Medicare, and the Drug Bennie.

This number does not include the other 55 Trillion in debt.

The debt DID NOT decrease under WJC. This is a lie.

You aren't paying attention.

Hope and Desire are not related. You have to take action to fulfill your desires. Hope is the worst of evils because it torments people. Hope never changes anything. Hope is an excuse for NOT TRYING.

Here's one for the Inspector, I owe him: (some will stand and fight, maidens too, some will whisper poems while shedding tears, and all will see where the winds blow, through the hourglass of history and the sands of time)

Here a new sight Aeneas' hopes upraised, And fear was softened, and his heart was mann'd. For while, the queen awaiting, round he gazed, And marvelled at the happy town, and scanned The rival labours of each craftsman's hand, Behold, Troy's battles on the walls appear, The war, since noised through many a distant land, There Priam and th' Atridae twain, and here Achilles, fierce to both, still ruthless and severe.

Pensive he stood, and with a rising tear, "What lands, Achates, on the earth, but know Our labours? See our Priam! Even here Worth wins her due, and there are tears to flow, And human hearts to feel for human woe. Fear not," he cries, "Troy's glory yet shall gain Some safety." Thus upon the empty show He feeds his soul, while ever and again Deeply he sighs, and tears run down his cheeks like rain.

He sees, how, fighting round the Trojan wall, Here fled the Greeks, the Trojan youth pursue, Here fled the Phrygians, and, with helmet tall, Achilles in his chariot stormed and slew. Not far, with tears, the snowy tents he knew Of Rhesus, where Tydides, bathed in blood, Broke in at midnight with his murderous crew, And drove the hot steeds campward, ere the food Of Trojan plains they browsed, or drank the Xanthian flood.

There, reft of arms, poor Troilus, rash to dare Achilles, by his horses dragged amain, Hangs from his empty chariot. Neck and hair Trail on the ground; his hand still grasps the rein; The spear inverted scores the dusty plain. Meanwhile, with beaten breasts and streaming hair, The Trojan dames, a sad and suppliant train...

Thrice had Achilles round the Trojan wall Dragged Hector; there the slayer sells the slain. Sighing he sees him, chariot, arms and all, And Priam, spreading helpless hands in vain. Himself he knows among the Greeks again, Black Memnon's arms, and all his Eastern clan, Penthesilea's Amazonian train With moony shields. Bare-breasted, in the van, Girt with a golden zone, the maiden fights with man.

(From Virgil's "Aeneid, Book I", [A grove stood in the city]

Thanks, Canary.

I may be tired at present and not seeing what is right there--did you have a Tea Party analogy in mind, or is this just great words as a gift?

Of course, that is an awkward, paradoxical moment for Aeneas.

Aeneas's arrival in North Africa means that he must inevitably depart for Italy in order to found what will someday become Rome, abandoning Dido and sealing the doom of Carthage.

Flames on Ilium. Flames on Carthage. Between Juno and Venus--argh.

I most treasure Aeneid Book II -- the Fall of Troy, Hector's Ghost, the Disastrous Defense, Priam's Death, Aeneas carrying old Anchises and guiding little Ascanius, the ghost of lost Creusa. . . .

Virgil has a great sense for the fatal, no doubt.

You're welcome Inspector. It's both, maybe a little of what transpired in the past and what transpires in our country and overseas today.

Also, you are in there, I think and some of us, if not all of humanity portrayed in a sublime work of art.

I love the Georgics and will delve into that more. Yet, in the end, I find Virgil's world that of an existential wasteland that parallels man's inner void. I believe that's because he, as Rome did, worshipped the stone and marble gods that time and earthquakes crumble into dust. When Rome disappeared, as well as the once powerful Greek civilization, their gods disappeared too, leaving an empty tomb of sorts.

Scott wrote: al,

Take a look at the UNFUNDED LIABILITIES.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

That is 107 Trillion."

C'mon....107 trillion dollars? Does that really make sense to you?

Tax revenues offset deficit spending during 2009 to the tune of only $1.5 trillion that was added to the national debt during 2009. We are NOT drowning in debt like some people would have us believe.

Here's another thing. 80% of the national debt is being carried by the Federal Reserve. It is not all owned by foreign countries, as some would have us believe.

All arguments aside, as long as those Government checks are accepted and cashed by the banks, funded or otherwise, there is no such thing as an "unfunded liability." A Government check is as good as gold.

We all deal with "unfunded liabilities" as Americans, every time we pull out a credit card to pay for something that we don't necessarily have the cash to pay for at the moment.

Those who carry balances on those credit cards pay them down over time. Some pay those balances off every month when the bill comes in. I'm sure that it would be far better if our Government were to be in a position to carry a zero balance at the end of each month, but...

For a lack of a better way to put it, our Government is carrying a big balance on their credit card. They will pay it down as they can, just as they have done for the past century. Right now, the Government is experiencing a cash crunch. When the cash starts flowing again, they will tackle the balance on that credit card.

"The debt DID NOT decrease under WJC. This is a lie."

Consider this evidence and the correct calculations used that prove that debt did indeed dip during the Clinton years:

http://zfacts.com/p/55.html

It was not a strong decline by no means, but the ND dipped during his second term, right up to the point that we invaded Iraq.

"You aren't paying attention."

Yes I am, but to sources that are take a breath or two now and then, rather than to those sources out there that are spending each waking minute trying to scare people to death.

al,

Didja look at what the "informed" people at your link have to say about AGW? Peddlers of boloney can never be trusted.

So which one of these numbers gets smaller when moving from earlier WJC years, to later WJC years? . 09/30/2000----- 5,674,178,209,886.86 09/30/1999----- 5,656,270,901,615.43 09/30/1998----- 5,526,193,008,897.62 09/30/1997----- 5,413,146,011,397.34 09/30/1996----- 5,224,810,939,135.73 09/29/1995----- 4,973,982,900,709.39 09/30/1994----- 4,692,749,910,013.32 09/30/1993----- 4,411,488,883,139.38 .

Can you find it? No? Because your assertion is NOT TRUE. The debt NEVER decreased during those years. You need to go all the way back to the '50s to find an instance of what you assert.

These numbers are directly from http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm

You might want to rethink your information sources.

Al cont,

As for the 107 Trillion, you did see that those are UNFUNDED LIABILITIES for SS, Medicare, and Drug Bennies, yes?

These are estimated costs to pay the American people what they are owed under the current programs. These numbers include the SS, Medicare, and Drug Bennies owed to you and me and every other citizen of this nation. These items, collectively, dwarf every other portion of the national budget, including Defense.

Are you willing to give up the benefits you've been paying for since you began working?

If you and everyone else who covers their eyes and plugs their ears about the huge amount of money it will swallow gives up their benefits, then it will indeed shrink to a size that we can handle. Are you willing to do that?

Oh wait ya'll want to add more in the form of FREE healthcare for everyone.

Do you see the problem?

Scott, we'll never agree on this one. We never have when the two of us have discussed it. You think this nation is in over it's head, and I simply do not see it the same way.

We can agree on one thing. The days of writing blank checks need to come to a halt and the debt needs to be tackled, but right now is not the time. Too many people across the nation are in a bad way and they need a lifeline to help them get through this mess. That means dollars are going to have to be doled out like candy.

When people get back to work and business returns to normal levels, and those dollars start flowing back into the Government, then that's the time to talk about tackling the debt.

There isn't any other way, unless you are comfortable with men, women, and children dying in our streets due to a lack of housing and food.

I'd like to know why tea-partiers aren't up in arms over the tab being run up by our military over in the Middle East. The last time I checked, that spending accounted for about a bout a million dollars PER DAY.

But you never read or hear that issue being touted as a reason for deficit spending by tea-partiers.

And finally, I posted some months ago, the proof that every last person in this country could be provided 100% Government paid health care, if every working American gave up 5.5% of their gross income to fund it. In fact, there would be money left over at that rate. And that was with no pricing controls to the providers as well.

It's simple mathematics.

Those WJC numbers look a heck of lot better than these GWB numbers (from SCOTTYM'S website:

09/30/2008.....10,024,724,896,912.49 09/30/2007......9,007,653,372,262.48 09/30/2006......8,506,973,899,215.23 09/30/2005......7,932,709,661,723.50 09/30/2004......7,379,052,696,330.32 09/30/2003......6,783,231,062,743.62 09/30/2002......6,228,235,965,597.16 09/30/2001......5,807,463,412,200.06 09/30/2000......5,674,178,209,886.86

And, now, here we are...

alprova wrote, "I'd like to know why tea-partiers aren't up in arms over the tab being run up by our military over in the Middle East."

Umm, engaging the enemy on their turf instead of ours, thus fulfilling the Federal Government's central Constitutional mandate of defending the nation?

"...100% (taxPAYER FUNDED) health care, if every working American gave up 5.5% of their gross income to fund it"

Pure socialist B.S. Why should I have to pay multiples of my own healthcare costs to the government so that those who do not plan their lives more carefully, and do not bust their butts the same as me, can enjoy the same benefits. No thanks.

SavartiTN,

I agree, we've been spending way too much for way too long.

In billions...

93-94+282Too much 94-95+281Still too much 95-96+251Slight improvement 96-97+188Better 97-98+113Better 98-99+130Oops 99-00+18_Much better, but NOT a surplus 00-01+133Wrong direction 01-02+4219/11? 02-03+555Holy he## 03-04+596Oh, chest pains 04-05+554Correct direction 05-06+574Noooo 06-07+501Correct direction 07-08+1,017WTF! 08-09__+1,885AAAHHHH!!!! 09-10+I can't count that high!!

Yes here we are. One year and we've tripled the highest number from the GWB years, with this year looking to be even higher. There's some change I can do without.

(BTW, It's your website as well, if you pay fed taxes.)