My top five favorite political cartoons this week…
by Glenn McCoy at Townhall.com…
by Glenn Foden at Townhall.com…
by Chip Bok at Townhall.com…
by Michael Ramirez at Townhall.com…
by Michael Ramirez at Townhall.com…
… referring to this campaign speech by President Obama on July 23…
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gS5FJR34C5U[/youtube]
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
Awkward moment:
http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/25/obama-for-america-dines-on-chick-fil-a/
It is so frustrating some times, the dishonesty of Presidential elections and sites like these.
Does anybody even know the context of the last clip/cartoon?
Anybody seen what Obama was even talking about?
Anybody?
Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?
We don’t have any Chic-Fil-A’s where I live – have eaten there once in my life and it was a fine experience. I don’t see the big issue with this. The guy believes what he believes – who cares?
I do think it could be a fun plan for those supporting gay marriage – promote that the way for those who support one man-one woman marriage to show their support is to eat at Chic-Fil-A for every meal – as often as they can.
I think I read that a sandwich, fries, and shake there are 1500 calories…so I think it would be a fabulous plan for those wanting to decrease the number of opponents in the debate.
Ex-
You confuse me. In most posts you have intelligent, genuinely pro-life, usually non-hateful things to say, in these last two you sound like one of the “trolls”.
Will the real Ex please stand up?
Hi EGV,
The award for the most rancid hypocrisy of this whole Chick-fil-a situation goes to none other that Mayor Rahm Emanuel of Chicago. He wants to keep CFA out but welcomes racist/anti-semitic Louis Farakkan and his Nation of Islam to quell gang violence in Chicago. I would guess his next selection would be the KKK. But no, who would welcome racist/anti-semites?
Anyway, Louis Farakkan, like the religion of Islam, opposes gay marriage and has criticized Obama’s support of it.
So, Emanuel who is Jewish opposes CFA because the Christian owner opposes gay marriage, but welcomes an anti-semitic Muslim who also opposes gay marriage, and probably doesn’t much like Emanuel either.
Politics does indeed make for strange bedfellows.
Hi current king of dishonesty on this site,
When Obama said “We tried our plan” he said that he copying successful Clinton-era economic policy. Unfortunately Obama has now had 3.5 years for his plan to work, and during two of those years he had a Democrat controlled House and Senate. Yet the economy still sucks. I guess that just goes to show us how hopelessly incompetent Obama is, considering that he’s using a plan that already worked yet he’s a miserable failure.
As for Chick fil A calories, yeah you’ll have a lot if calories if you order three high-caloric items off the menu. Or you can order a salad and diet/unsweetened drink. Damn freedom, allowing us to eat fries and drink milkshakes if we choose. Everyone knows that “choice” means killing kids, not eating fatty food.
Jamie -
The first post was in relation to a snippet, out of context post/cartoon that tries to make it play like Obama is saying his current economic plan is “what worked”.
It isn’t. We are still under the same tax rates passed in the early 2000’s. The comparison was between now and what we had.
On the second post, I was trying to make a bad joke – essentially, that chic-fil-a is bad for you, so showing support by eating more of it is probably a bad way to go.
John L -
Scottie Brown came into office a year after Obama – after that, there was no super-majority in the Senate.
Regardless, going back to all those rates would have a terrible move when the unemployment was hovering around 10. The problem now is there are so many public sector loses that it keeps dragging down the private sector gains. We needed to do what Reagan did which was grow the private and public sector together.
Hi John,
Except of course if you live in NY City where nanny in chief Bloomberg will limit the amount of salt you can use on your fries and the size of your drink if it is sweetened. So, you better order regulation size milkshakes.
As for the economy, it has to be Bush’s fault. Certainly no American president has ever inherited “a mess” from a previous administration so Obama can be excused for his incessant whining and excuse making.
Mary – nobody on this thread other than you have said it is Bush’s fault. Yours marks the first time his name was brought up.
EGV,
There was no supermajority in the senate, but there was a majority so Obama had the House and Senate for two years.
Mary – things don’t get passed in the senate anymore without 60 votes.
Regardless, my next line was “Regardless, going back to all those rates would have a terrible move when the unemployment was hovering around 10. The problem now is there are so many public sector loses that it keeps dragging down the private sector gains. We needed to do what Reagan did which was grow the private and public sector together.”
EGV,
I was making fun of Obama, who if you will recall has whined incessently about the economy being Bush’s fault. It ain’t washing any more though. Obama has to own up to the fact he’s been running things since 2009.
EGV,
If all senators are present and voting, it takes 51 votes to pass a law, with the VP breaking a tie if necessary. It takes 60 votes to proceed to a vote on a bill when some senators want to debate forever i.e. filibuster.
http://www.fair.org/blog/2009/03/10/how-many-votes-does-it-take-to-pass-a-senate-bill/
Mary -
If you follow the news at all, you’ll have noticed that in recent memory, most votes need 60 because of the filibuster threat.
This Chic-Fil-A thing is the biggest non-story of the week (during an election year, that’s really saying something!). Honestly, who cares what the owners of some fast food restaurant think about same sex marriage? They don’t have Chic-Fil-A where I am, but if they did I can assure everyone that my decision to eat there or not would be completely based on whether or not I like the food.
Amen JDC
EGV,
Fact remains EGV that 60 votes, while good to have, is not essential. Keep in mind the RINOs like Lugar, Snow, and Collins.
Chick Fil-A has only been in malls around where I live, and I stopped going to them years ago. But I understand there’s now a drive-thru nearby. I will be going there now!
I enjoy buy-cotts even more than boycotts. Any tips on good websites to guide me?
EG: It’s hilariously fun seeing the Obama campaign making these elocutionary missteps.
http://goo.gl/k9DFQ
So Obama isn’t claiming that his plan works?
I love, in the speech, where he claims he’ll cut wasteful stuff out of the budget. Tell me — which budget have see seen cuts in? How much lower was the deficit as a consequence?
LOL
Yes. I’m sorry, EGOP. Obama crows about continuing Bush’s stimulus and bailout of GM, and we can argue about how necessary that was. But Stimulus II and the Obamacare sword of Damacles hanging over business’ head is what really didn’t work. And that buck stops right at his desk.
rasqual -
Obama presented a tax plan that is very similar to what was under Clinton. Your quoted “source” is an opinion article using outdated info (take a look at what she uses as her source for estate tax info – another article from herself – and that is using outdated info from a dropped plan).
Regardless – on budget cuts – as a start – here’s federal employee info under the various presidents. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-05-31/federal-workforce-decline-growth/55318944/1
Under Reagan, we added 238K non-military federal employees.
Take a look at public sector rates under Obama - http://www.businessinsider.com/the-private-sector-and-the-public-sector-under-obama-2012-6?op=1
Hans -
As a country, I think we have to decide what we want to fight. Do we want to increase employment and fight the deficit later, or are we all in on the deficit now? This half hearted fight in both areas is not working.
Deficit hawks just might get their wish though – spending cuts and tax increases are t-minus 5 months and a couple of days away – the economy would take another big blow, but the deficit would definitely trim down in a hurry.
The only thing Obama has been cutting lately has been his Wagyu steaks and the various slices when he drives the ball down the fairway…
Meanwhile, climate change is real.
“Koch-funded climate change skeptic reverses course”
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-kochfunded-climate-change-skeptic-reverses-course-20120729,0,7372823.story
mp,
Oh those eeeeeevil Koch brothers strike again.
Well mp, the human race better collectively hold its breath and take its gas-ex before we doom the planet.
Ex-GOP,
I definitely think the way to grow out of deficits is to raise employment. But why you think the public sector is the way to go, I don’t know. Expanding government raises the deficit. Expanding the private sector raises wealth and taxes without costing any more than not taking more money away from it, and waiting for the revenues to naturally flow in.
You don’t lose weight by cutting off body parts. You do it by getting to feel well enough to be active enough to continue feeling better and more active,
I think it’s much the same with the economy. Get it better, do no harm, and it will self-perpetuate growth.
Oh those eeeeeevil Koch brothers strike again.
Oh, and by the way, Atlas Shrugged is becoming required reading.
Enjoy your Kool-Aid.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/07/kochs-cato-john-allison.html
Hans- historically, the public and private sector work in tandem to grow after a recession. Look back at the data from the early 80’s.
In this economy, private sector gains and muted by public sector losses. Take a look at Wisconsin for instance.
Again – you sort of make my point – we need to decide if we’re going to fight unemployment, or fight the deficit. Doing both results in the slow grind that we’re in.
mp 8:25PM
Atlas Shrugged is now becoming required reading?
Oh, now I know we are doomed.
Kool-aid? Never touch the stuff.
The Chik-fil-A company is not so smart. Neither are any companies that take these sort of stands on culture war issues. Look if I owned a business I think I would want everyone’s money! gays, straights, christians, etc…
Atlas Shrugged is now becoming required reading?
Oh, now I know we are doomed.
If the title of the book was Dreams from My Father, you’d being going ballistic.
BWAHAHAHAHA!
The Chik-fil-A company is not so smart. Neither are any companies that take these sort of stands on culture war issues. Look if I owned a business I think I would want everyone’s money! gays, straights, christians, etc…
The guy who runs Chik-fil-A is a dominionist (American Taliban) and that should tell you everything you need to know.
mp he probably is a dominionist. I just don’t get it from a business perspective. Lets just let the power of American capitalism decide. I mean the gay community has hundreds of billions of dollars and if Chik-fil-a doesnt want any…so be it
I just don’t get it from a business perspective.
Intelligence and political savvy is not a prerequisite for making money.
The situation is so bad there that their PR guy died of a heart attack and the CEO has back-pedaled on his rant.
Meanwhile, Malkin says she finds the backlash “chilling,” which makes her living proof that intelligence and political savvy is not a prerequisite for being a media pundit.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-chick-fil-a-20120728,0,765557.story
mp 8:51PM
Yeah sure I would. Whatever.
Also the point of the first cartoon is lost on me. The gay community had to basically shove president obama out of the closet on gay marriage. I can even recall protesters at the DNC in 2008 because of his stance on gay issues.
As a through-and-through capitalist, these types of incidents re-affirm my faith in capitalism.
Marx took it as a given that capitalists always know where their true interests lie.
That assumption was an epic fail. :)
Oh good heavens, we have a Kos Kid here? “American Taliban” indeed. Marcos sycophants? Religiously illiterate paranoiacs?
I just read the dominionist paranoia over at Kos, and it is freaking HILARIOUS. Of course Kos Kids are going to be literate on anything sincerely religious, and this doesn’t disappoint.
“Veggietales is, by the explicit admission of the creator, designed to recruit kids into dominionism as early as the toddler age”
LMAO
Seriously, I’m not cherry-picking. The thing is full of howlers. I’d swear it’s parody — but this is Kos, where the only parody on parade is self-parody.
Good GRIEF.
Man, we are talking about OBSESSIVE paranoia from these people. Fastidious, obsessive crazies: http://goo.gl/azj1U
Ex-GOP,
It seems to me we’ve neither been fighting unemployment nor the deficit. For 3 and a half years and longer than that, for at least the spending side.
Obama’s saying “We tried it our way and it worked” (Paraphrase!) is delusional. Finally even the media is squawking about this pathetic, unprecented “recovery”. And our being on the brink of a depression appears to have been exaggerated. (I know you’ll want me to dig up that reference. I guess I’ll have to google “financial crisis not as dire” or something. Grr.)
Argh. Major typo: ”Of course Kos Kids are going to be literate on anything sincerely religious”
Needless to say, that should have been “illiterate.”
I hate irony sometimes. ;-)
Oh good heavens, we have a Kos Kid here? “American Taliban” indeed. Marcos sycophants? Religiously illiterate paranoiacs?
I’ve never visited Kos, not even once.
Sorry.
So where’d you come up with “American Taliban?” In asking that I’m not expressing doubt with you’re saying that you’ve not visited Kos. But I’m certainly curious what the pedigree of the phrase in your words may be.
It’s a ridiculous phrase to apply.
So where’d you come up with “American Taliban?”
Chick-Fil-A donates a lot of money to Dobson’s Focus on the Family. Now, Dobson’s people I’ve actually spoken with and I specifically remember his position on the cancer vaccine for young women.
His opposition was based solely on the grounds that it would encourage promiscuity. He didn’t question the treatment’s efficacy; he was opposed to it on “moral” grounds. He didn’t hold that position very long. Good, old-fashioned, American outrage forced him to back-pedal.
I remember thinking that the guy reminded me of the Taliban and I’ve thought so ever since. Yeah, American Taliban.
mp, that’s just stupid. The Taliban behead people for sport. They don’t let girls go to school. They stone gays. And they don’t back-pedal at anyone’s outrage.
Seriously, don’t be stupid. Yammering about a chicken restaurant with terms like “American Taliban” is just fatuous.
But it’s nice to see you so quickly distance yourself from any association with Kos. Gotta give you some credit there, I guess.
And our being on the brink of a depression appears to have been exaggerated.
Man, you are a piece of work.
Per the Flow of Funds Accounts of the United States
Household Sector, Financial Assets, p. 75, Line 1, Total Financial Assets
End of Year 2007 = $52,156.8 Billion
End of Year 2008 = $42,861.1 Billion
For those of you who can do arithmetic, the difference is: $9,295.7 Billion
That’s $9.3 Trillion in assets gone. POOF!
http://federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/Current/z1.pdf
mp, that’s just stupid. The Taliban behead people for sport. They don’t let girls go to school. They stone gays. And they don’t back-pedal at anyone’s outrage.
You may think it perfectly acceptable to allow a young woman to die of cancer, even though she might not have been promiscuous, and even though a preventative treatment was available, simply because she happened to marry the “wrong” partner.
Someone who just happened to carry the virus.
I don’t think that’s moral.
It’s Taliban thinking. Dobson may just as well have dropped the hammer on her himself.
So, rasqual, skilled debater that you are, address the question.
Is it “moral” to deny young women access to a cancer vaccine?
And please, don’t give me arguments centering on efficacy, economics, or any basis other than “moral,” which was Dobson’s argument.
And explain to me how Dobson’s position doesn’t conflict with about, oh, 200 years of medical ethics.
Yeah, American Taliban. It works for me.
mp,
In case you haven’t kept yourself informed, the cancer vaccine for young women has been found to have serious side effects, including neurological damage. Also some interesting information on cervical cancer and its occurence in the US.
http://www.whale.to/vaccines/lobato.html
BTW, did the guy who runs chick-fil-a read “Atlas Shrugged”?
mp: Please name a young woman who developed cancer because of any person you impugn as a “Taliban.” Just one.
You’re simply being an idiot for comparing the morality of arguing the merits of an innoculation to the FREAKING TALIBAN. Put a pea on a teeter totter and the weight of the Taliban’s inhumanity on the other end.
Personally, I’ll just provisionally conclude (barring contrary evidence) that you’re as bigoted and ignorant as Markos and his ilk. I don’t need to defend Dobson to say that. Yammering bilge like “American Taliban,” and piping up with the paranoid “Dominionist” label — about a chicken joint! — earns you my doubt of your sanity, it really does.
mp says: “Is it “moral” to deny young women access to a cancer vaccine?”
Since when does not wanting a vaccine mandatory for school entry = denying that vaccine to anyone that wants it? Do you have a link or screenshot or anything that supports your assertion that Dobson wanted no one to get the vaccine?
Seriously, for those unfamiliar with the meaning of “Dominionist” and “American Taliban” in the discourse of anti-religious paranoia in the country, these terms represent an attitude of paranoia comparable to 9/11 trutherism.
“A chicken joint wants to replace the Constitution with the Bible!”
The links I posted above suffice as timely examples of the wack paranoia that motivate the fastidious rants these loons take seriously. From a rational standpoint, they’re the equivalent of John Nash’s “clues and strings,” depicted in A Beautiful Mind. The depiction exaggerated his exploits. Insanely, that exaggeration may understate the craziness of the “American Taliban” “Dominionist” paranoiacs.
“Wait, no! Really! You just haven’t seen the evidence! Here, I’ll explain…”
No. Go hang out with the “we didn’t go to the moon” moonbats. Please.
In case you haven’t kept yourself informed, the cancer vaccine for young women has been found to have serious side effects, including neurological damage. Also some interesting information on cervical cancer and its occurence in the US.
You’re missing the point. Dobson wasn’t interested in the vaccine’s efficacy; he didn’t care, it made no difference to him.
His opposition to it was based solely on moral grounds. So, please, explain that one for me.
Ex-GOP says:
Again – you sort of make my point – we need to decide if we’re going to fight unemployment, or fight the deficit. Doing both results in the slow grind that we’re in.
Actually, doing neither has been the status quo.
The “slow grind” that we are in is due to a lot of uncertainty among large and small business investors. Biggest item is fear of the high cost of Obamacare, along with a widespread lack of trust in its effectiveness.
You’re simply being an idiot for comparing the morality of arguing the merits of an innoculation to the FREAKING TALIBAN. Put a pea on a teeter totter and the weight of the Taliban’s inhumanity on the other end.
Rasqual, it’s pretty obvious to me that you don’t want to address the question.
Well, I understand why.
Meanwhile, you accuse me of being “stupid,” an “idiot” for comparing Dobson to the Taliban, and “paranoid.” These are all diversions, to say the very least. Well, we could also talk about manners and I could accuse some folks here of idiocy for comparing Obama to the Anti-Christ, but I haven’t done that.
So, repeating: you’ve failed to address the question.
Yeah, American Taliban. It works for me.
Why do you “understand why” I “don’t want to address the question”, MP? Please divulge. Infer as you wish from anything I’ve said — or just lay out whatever gratuitious intuition you’re relying on. Can’t wait to hear what you know about why I’m not saying something you apparently imagine I’m obliged to say.
Yes, I will accuse you of being stupid for comparing Dobson with the Taliban, and of invoking Dominionism with respect to a chicken restaurant.
You’re talking precisely like a bigot who doesn’t want religious people to have a franchise in public policy. It doesn’t matter WHAT a person’s reasons are for wanting a particular policy, in this Republic they have a franchise and are entitled to speak it, and influence their representatives however they may. A religious pedigree for an idea does not, itself, suffice to disqualify an idea from consideration in public policy.
But since loons like you can’t resort to tyrannical modes of suppressing religious influence, you have to stoop to using newspeak to impugn by some effort of deft connotation. Demonizing by resorting to the epithet du jour, whatever group happens to be the most loathed at the moment will do as a label to tar those you wish to suppress.
Unless . . . unless . . . good heavens. An alternative to your insincere use of such verbiage in merely manipulative ways is that you actually believe the paranoid stuff.
Rasqual, address the question.
Is it “moral” to deny young women access to a cancer preventative simply because you believe that providing it to them encourages promiscuity?
That was Dobson’s position.
mp says:
You’re missing the point. Dobson wasn’t interested in the vaccine’s efficacy; he didn’t care, it made no difference to him.
His opposition to it was based solely on moral grounds. So, please, explain that one for me.
Who cares? Here’s what their position paper says: “Focus on the Family supports universal availability of HPV vaccines but opposed government-mandated HPV vaccinations for entry to public school.”
http://www.focusonthefamily.com/topicinfo/Position_Statement-Human_Papillomavirus_Vaccine.pdf
So how is this “denying young women access to a cancer vaccine”?
So how is this “denying young women access to a cancer vaccine”?
That was not his initial position. I’ve already explained that he back-pedaled his position and why he did so.
Who cares? A lot of people care.
Please provide some proof of his “initial position” please. So far, there’s only hysterical ranting from you that he wants to deny young women a cancer vaccine and a two-page position paper that contradicts your claim.
Haven’t read his position, mp. Can you cite what you deem a fair representation of it? Primary source material, perhaps? I’ll parse it and let you know what I think.
Whenever someone starts issuing imperatives like “Rasqual, address the question,” things are bound to get interesting.
Will you play upon this pipe? … Look you, these are the stops.
I only have one request to those of you sporting tin-foil hats: please use recycled foil. Thank you.
mp 11:21am
Its called freedom of expression. The man can oppose it for any reason he wants. Any direct quotes as to safety and efficacy making “no difference” to him?
I also oppose this vaccine on moral grounds. Do you assume that means I have no concern for safety and efficacy?
Does mp stand for “morning poster”?
Chick-Fil-A didn’t take a stand as a company on gay “marriage”, I believe the founder was asked his personal opinion. However, I’m going to go eat “hateful sandwiches” with my kids and a group of friends tomorrow to make a point. XD
I’m beginning to fear the chicken people may have spirited mp away to some cave in Coloradostan, beyond the reach of the drones.
Del -
Sorry – missed your post.
I completely disagree – most companies will see very little change.
I’ve also worked at multiple businesses – if a company needs to hire, they need to hire. Not many people wanting to grow a business hesitate because they fear what future taxes might be.
Hello,
I believe that abortions are a woman’s choice. Let’s consider the positives of abortions. #1 Population Control. The world’s population is already getting out of hand as it is. #2 Raped Victims/Jeopardized Health of Mothers. It should absolutely be the choice of the person who is carrying the fetus to decide if they want to keep it or not. Say there is a mother of 4 who’s health is in jeopardy because of the pregnancy, it should be up to her to choose to risk her life for her baby and stay alive for her 4 other children. Raped victims as well deserve the choice of keeping a child that was forced upon them by sadistic men. #3 Children who are not wanted. You cannot force people to love their child or want to keep it, so in most cases someone who wanted to get an abortion will only have resentment towards the child and this will hurt the child emotional state.
These are just 3 reasons of the many for why I believe abortions should be legal.
Um, check out the number of times you used the word “child”, then look in a mirror and say the same things about a three-year-old child, and see if you have any tell-tale twitches as you say it. Because unless you’re talking about forcing someone to certainly risk their life, you should not be at all comfortable with what you’re saying.