Here are my top 5 political cartoon picks for the week…
by (liberal) Signe Wilkinson at GoComics.com…
by (liberal) Nick Anderson at GoComics.com…
by Chip Bok at Townhall.com…
by Dana Summers at Townhall.com…
And yes, Roseanne Barr really said that.
Finally, by Glenn McCoy at GoComics.com…
And yes, Obama really did that.
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.
“And yes, Obama really did that.”
Sorry, but facts and context are difficult things.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201110030013
It’s fairly obvious–or should be–that Breitbart is a gadfly and and a fabricator.
Yes, Media Matters is a great, unbiased source.
Yes, Media Matters is a great, unbiased source.
And Breitbart isn’t?
November 2012 should take care of all that.
What I enjoyed about the Roseanne Barr comment is how a Fox commentator said something along the lines of “why do we even listen to famous people and their views on politices anyway.” (I could find the exact quote if anyone is interested…)
Then, an hour later, on Fox “and here to talk about the 2012 GOP field, Hank Williams Jr”…and that was the interview in which Williams lost of a lot of future revenue!
Pretty funny stuff.
And for actual funny political cartoons this week:
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/politicalcartoons/ig/Political-Cartoons/
Not sure which one is funnier – the first one about prison (protesters vs bankers), or the one with the eye chart and the GOP field.
In his rambling, Soviet style news conference last week Obama defended his friend the gun runner and leftist/race favoring fellow traveler, Eric Holder, saying he had complete confidence in the attorney general. What else was he going to say…like, “dude, I had no idea Eric was so stupid”?
This is the same Eric Holder who has politicized the Department of Justice to the point of ridicule and the dropping of charges against the racist and voter intimidating New Black Panthers.
mp: The George Soros funded Media Matters is a shill for the Obama admin. It is interesting how often the creepy Geroge Soros is mentioned. The latest is his role in helping to fund the Wall Street protesters. It seems these protesters, who are there mainly for fun, have nothing to do with their lives thanks in large part to Obama’s bungling of the economy and the loss of millions of jobs under his watch.
Yet again I am off-topic but there is a follow-up to the Grey’s Anatomy abortion story – the woman in charge of the show gave an interview about it. http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2011/09/shonda_rhimes_talks_about_grey.html
I thought some people here might find this part interesting:
“I don’t think it’s about the agenda. I think it’s important [that] I try to do what’s right for the characters. In Private Practice, we had a character, Naomi, [who] was staunchly anti-choice, staunchly pro-life. Viciously so, in a lot of ways, in a way that I thought was really kind of beautiful and religious and different from the way I think at all. What I also thought was that her point of view is valid, has merits, and should be portrayed and portrayed strongly. I feel you have to portray all different sides of who people can be if you’re going to create a world. And I feel like Cristina’s choice to give up a child, to have an abortion, is her choice. Meredith would never have had an abortion, I don’t think — I’m not saying she’s not pro-choice — but she would never have had one for herself because she wants a child so badly. I like that we’re portraying all of the different sides. It’s not a political agenda as much as me trying to make the world as full and round and as complete with peoples’ opinions as possible.”
Public teachers unions protestings capitalism. The height of idiocy. Do they not realize that public union jobs exist only because of the capitalists who pay taxes?
Do they not realize that public union jobs exist only because of the capitalists who pay taxes?
Union members pay taxes too, you know.
And here I am, a businessman, defending union members.
Anyway, democracy is a messy business. Donald Rumsfeld said so.
Full disclosure: I think Obama is a terrible president, but I don’t believe in media lynchings.
“The George Soros funded Media Matters is a shill for the Obama admin. It is interesting how often the creepy Geroge Soros is mentioned.”
____________________________________________________
You mean “Spooky Dude?” Yes, I know who funds Media Matters. I also know who funds Breitbart.
Union members pay taxes too, you know.
Public union employees do lots of different things with their paychecks but that does not change the fact that every penny a public employee union memeber gets paid is money that came from the hard work of a capitalist and comes out of a capitalists pocket. Without capitalists to support/sustain them our public employees jobs/lifestyles would not exist to begin with. Including the money our government borrows from China to pay public unions on the backs of capitalists children and against the faith and credit of our capitalistic children’s futures.
Who’s not a capitalist? I’m a capitalist.
Anyway, to the matter at hand, Breitbart has absolutely zero credibility with me, not after the stupid comment concerning “we have the numbers and the guns,” followed by “the military has our backs.”
Breitbart is being Breitbart. Again.
Breitbart is for entertainment value, just like Glenn Beck, a self-confessed “entertainer.” They push peoples’ “hot buttons” to get a rise out of them and confirm their biases. “Truth” has nothing to do with it.
They also make a lot of money in the process, which is great; democracy is a messy thing.
Hi ts,
Let’s not forget the multimillionaire Michael Moore who just loathes capitalism, but not enough to give up his millions in, according to him, ill gotten gains. I wonder if he would consider turning his Manhattan penthouse over to a homeless family?
Michael Moore is definitely a gadfly, just like Breitbart, just like Maddow, just like Beck, just like Limbaugh. They make millions doing it and laugh all the way to the bank.
You see, it works like this:
Red Team = Blue Team = Tea Team
It’s all about keeping people stupid, fired up and pointing fingers at each other.
well, what then do YOU suggest, in your infinite wisdom, as an alternative?
well, what then do YOU suggest, in your infinite wisdom, as an alternative?
Your use of the phrase “in your infinite wisdom” is combative.
If you ask in a civil manner, I’ll give you a civil response.
Who’s not a capitalist? I’m a capitalist.
I am assuming that the public unions and the rest of the ‘occupy wall st’ protesters do not consider themselves capitalists cause they carry signs that say down with capitalism etc… I posted
Public teachers unions protestings capitalism. The height of idiocy. Do they not realize that public union jobs exist only because of the capitalists who pay taxes?
And your response to me was to say: “Union members pay taxes too, you know.”
I would have thought the idiocy of these demonstrators in associating themselves with protesting the capitalists who pay their salaries would be apparent to you.
Alexandra, that show has done like two other minor story lines on abortion. In one, the woman aborted a child and it devastated the father who really wanted the baby, and she ended up sterile. In the other, a woman who was HIV positive wanted to abort, but the doctor convinced her that with the right meds the baby could be born healthy, so she chose life. Those story lines were way more realistic than the Cristina one. And I swear I am not a teenage girl, it’s my wife’s fault I know so much about Grey’s.
I would have thought the idiocy of these demonstrators in associating themselves with protesting the capitalists who pay their salaries would be apparent to you.
The only thing “apparent” to me is that democracy is a messy business.
I believe strongly in capitalism and democracy, though when people behave badly they can be corrupt. But corruption has existed in all systems throughout human history. What worries me is that we can see from the events of the last 100 years that communism (government-enforced “redistribution of wealth”) has always been horrific, brutal, bloody, corrupt, and a disease to both human beings and their culture. The unfocused people making the news right now have no idea what has really gone on around the world. They think we should all become star-bellied sneetches and that after we destroy ourselves, we’ll still have our ipods, our half-decaf cappuccinos, and our netflix movies. Sure we will. Those Soviet bread lines and the forced abortions in China must only be distant myths, right?
The only thing “apparent” to me is that democracy is a messy business.
Messy? lol. How irrational does someone have to be before their behaviour goes from messy to idiocy?
That’s interesting, Jack! I am not really too familiar with the show.
How irrational does someone have to be before their behaviour goes from messy to idiocy?
You’ve phrased your question in such a way that, regardless of my answer, I’ll simply confirm your bias, so why bother asking?
How timely: Catholic Online has this article about “Warning to the West” which was written in the 70’s but highly relevant today:
http://www.catholic.org/ae/books/review.php?id=43161
Voluntary charitable giving is the only fair way to “redistribute wealth.” When we give to whom we wish then those entities that flourish will truly be chosen by the people. When we lie down and show the government our bellies, and let them decide for us, then we end up with more of our money being taken from us and used for causes that we don’t support. Subsidiarity takes the idea further: giving our own money to local organizations solves the problems right in our own communities.
For example, if you are pro-abortion, you should fund your deathmongering with your own money, not my tax dollars.
Democracy and capitalism can work very well. But it doesn’t work well combined with moral relativism and rampant materialism. Communism can never work. It is not a natural system, it can only be maintained by force and oppression because it goes against every fiber of our human nature.
Many people don’t know the difference between voluntary charity and socialism. Many people mistakenly think that Jesus was a socialist. He certainly was not.
“Many people don’t know the difference between voluntary charity and socialism. Many people mistakenly think that Jesus was a socialist. He certainly was not.”
Exactly ninek. I have said this on another post — based on Scripture, the government has no moral obligation to take care of widows and orphans. It cannot be sentenced to death as the wages of sin, nor can Christ’s death save it from the flames of Hell.
Democracy and capitalism can work very well. But it doesn’t work well combined with moral relativism and rampant materialism. Communism can never work. It is not a natural system, it can only be maintained by force and oppression because it goes against every fiber of our human nature.
Many people don’t know the difference between voluntary charity and socialism. Many people mistakenly think that Jesus was a socialist. He certainly was not.
Wow, this is great.
Many people mistakenly think that Jesus was a socialist. He certainly was not.
He wasn’t a pure “capitalist” either. He did, after all, throw the money changers out of the temple.
“Jesus cleansed the temple of the money-changers and sellers of merchandise because of His disgust at what they had made of God’s house of prayer and His zeal to purify it from the abuse of ungodly men. Judea was under the rule of the Romans, and the money in current use was Roman coin. However, the Jewish law required that every man should pay a tribute to the service of the sanctuary of “half a shekel” (Exodus 30:11-16), a Jewish coin. It became, therefore, a matter of convenience to have a place where the Roman coin could be exchanged for the Jewish half shekel. The money-changers provided this convenience, but would demand a small sum for the exchange. Because so many thousands came up to the great feasts, changing money was a very profitable business and one that resulted in fraud and oppression of the poor.
Similarly, according to the Law, two doves or pigeons were required to be offered in sacrifice (Leviticus 14:22; Luke 2:24). Yet it was difficult to bring them from the distant parts of Judea, so a lucrative business selling the birds sprang up, with the sellers gouging the faithful by charging exorbitant prices. There were other merchants selling cattle and sheep for the temple sacrifices as well. Because of these sellers who preyed on the poor, and because of His passion for the purity of His Father’s house, Jesus was filled with righteous indignation. As He overturned the tables of the money-changers, He condemned them for having turned God’s house of prayer into “a den of thieves” (Matthew 21:13). As He did so, His disciples remembered Psalm 69:9, “zeal for your house consumes me, and the insults of those who insult you fall on me.” Jesus was deeply wounded by the reproaches on God by those who would bring shame upon the temple.” http://www.gotquestions.org/temple-cleanse.html
The money traders weren’t guilty of “capitalism,” rather they were too close to the temple and at the same time they were cheating people by charging too much for the exchange of currency (foreign currency wasn’t accepted at the temple and many travellers bought their lambs and calves in Jerusalem rather than bring a yearling with them all the way from home.)
The hustle-bustle of the market was too close to the temple, too noisy and disruptive. People didn’t approach the temple area in prayerful reverence in that situation.
It’s funny, when I went on my pilgrimage, our guide led us along the Via Dolorosa very, very early in the morning. He explained, the evening before ”It’s the ten stations of the cross, not the ten stations of the market.” Lol!
Oppressing the poor so that they could not make the necessary sin sacrifice has nothing to do with capitalism/socialism. It has to do with the breaking of God’s law and the religious leadership putting in manmade roadblocks so that not everyone could make the sacrifice (the poor who were getting shafted by the money changers exchanging at unfair rates), and therefore, at that time, could not have received forgiveness if they didn’t have $$ to buy the required animal. Your use of this example as “anti-capitalist” is really ignorant.
The hustle-bustle of the market was too close to the temple, too noisy and disruptive. People didn’t approach the temple area in prayerful reverence in that situation.
Very true.
Kel, wow, your reply puts mine to shame! I also use this passage to explain to people that Jesus wasn’t a wimp.
Your use of this example as “anti-capitalist” is really ignorant.
Who said Jesus was “anti-capitalist?” I certainly did not.
One thing, however, is clear. You’re engaging in selective reading of what I’m writing, thereby confirming your own bias.
One thing, however, is clear. You’re engaging in selective reading of what I’m writing, thereby confirming your own bias.
Oh, ok. But mp’s the only one without a bias. The only one who never actually says what he really believes – just comes here to pick fights.
Jesus Christ was God in the flesh, neither capitalist, nor socialist. He is the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, and all things are subject to him. There’s my bias for ya.
OH, and btw – to be biased against a failed system like communism isn’t exactly a bad thing.
mp: He wasn’t a pure “capitalist” either. He did, after all, throw the money changers out of the temple.
Me: Your use of this example as “anti-capitalist” is really ignorant.
Please explain to me where I said anything about Jesus himself being anti- or pro-capitalist. Guess I didn’t, and you have selective reading issues, too.
I stated your use of this example to prove your point was ignorant.
And guess what? It still is.
To be fair to mp, the misunderstanding about why Jesus turned over the tables is very common. It’s probably one of the top 3 misunderstood passages. It proves that it is important when reading scripture to ask oneself: what is the cultural and historical setting of this writing?
Please explain to me where I said anything about Jesus himself being anti- or pro-capitalist.
You didn’t. You implied that I was attributing “anti-capitalism” as the motive for throwing the money changers out of the temple. Nowhere–hear that!–nowhere did I say it was “anti-capitalist.”
While you re-read what I wrote in my 2:05 and what you wrote in your 2:33, I’ll add “ignorant” to the list of names I’ve been called on this alleged Christian site.
Ignorant is only an insult if you’re unwilling to learn the truth.
So, you come here and insult people left and right (I see the threads, so I know), and now you’re crying about being called names? Wow, mp. You really do have some nerve.
You stated Jesus wasn’t a capitalist – which I agree with – but then proceeded to use the money changers as an example of that – which it isn’t. Your statement was true, but the example you used was invalid and made in ignorance of what the passage signifies.
How irrational does someone have to be before their behaviour goes from messy to idiocy?
You’ve phrased your question in such a way that, regardless of my answer, I’ll simply confirm your bias, so why bother asking?
mp, why do you have such an aversion to responding honestly to questions when your response confirms another persons point of view?
How irrational does someone have to be before their behaviour goes from messy to idiocy?
Your question is phrased in such a way that, regardless of how I answer it, it will confirm your bias that the people in question are irrational.
The question is in the same vein as “When did you stop beating your wife?”
You stated Jesus wasn’t a capitalist – which I agree with – but then proceeded to use the money changers as an example of that – which it isn’t.
If Jesus was a pure capitalist he wouldn’t have thrown the money changers out of the temple.
He would have raised the rent.
So, you come here and insult people left and right …
I’ve insulted you? If so, you have my sincere apology.
Jesus cared about the souls of man – I think it is silly to argue about his views on economic systems. My guess is he’d want us to work hard and take care of the vulnerable in society. How we do that probably doesn’t matter – but it seems pretty clear that it is commanded as such.
If Jesus was a pure capitalist he wouldn’t have thrown the money changers out of the temple.
He would have raised the rent.
AGAIN, the scripture passage has NOTHING TO DO with this topic. Try another example, perhaps, because this one is flawed, and you’re not getting it.
So, you come here and insult people left and right …
I’ve insulted you? If so, you have my sincere apology.
I never said you insulted me. I said you’ve insulted people left and right on the threads on this message board recently.
OK, now I see that you may deliberately provoking without reason. Jesus wasn’t a member of the Sanhedrin nor did he formally serve in the temple. He would not have been in a position to charge rent to anyone for anything.
Also, if you had a knowledge of history, you would know that capitalism evolved after the feudal system and in the first century, there wasn’t a feudal system yet.
Many people who don’t really know about Jesus make arguments about him based on what they’ve heard or on their own speculation. I would refer such individuals to study the Gospel, where you can read for yourself what he said and what he did. Yes, Jesus told a rich man that he should sell his possessions and give all he had to the poor. That doesn’t make him a socialist or a communist. If Jesus were a modern day communist or socialist, he would have told the Romans to confiscate the rich man’s property and give it to their own government.
Proof of how dismally incorrect Marx and Lenin were is all around us: no culture, no country, no community EVER evolved into communism. In each and every case it was forced on the people by bloody and brutal oppression and remains in place only by bloody and brutal force.
Jesus cared about the souls of man – I think it is silly to argue about his views on economic systems.
Oh, I absolutely agree.
I said you’ve insulted people left and right on the threads on this message board recently.
Really? If so, is it not possible that I gave as good as I got?
well, what then do YOU suggest, in your infinite wisdom, as an alternative?
Your use of the phrase “in your infinite wisdom” is combative.
If you ask in a civil manner, I’ll give you a civil response.
That’s the beauty of me. I don’t ask in a civil manner and I don’t expect a civil response-but I’ll still answer any provided, civil or otherwise. I think it speaks to the content of my message and my character that I don’t let myself get hung up on pleasantries or the lack thereof when standing up for what is right.
People who know me know my religious affiliation and thus I have been provoked by tons of friends and acquaintences at social gatherings. Some of them are just uneducated on the subject (which doesn’t stop them from arguing!) and others are trying to get a rise out of me for entertainment. Lol!
But the most common misunderstanding can be summed up: “Jesus was a wimpy hippy who never judged, criticized, or said boo to anyone.” to which I usually say, “You’ve confused him with who you think Buddha is and you’re wrong about both of them.”
Your question is phrased in such a way that, regardless of how I answer it, it will confirm your bias that the people in question are irrational.
mp, The analogy to you make to the “are you still beating your wife” phrase infers that you think the basis of my premise is false to begin with. If I were to follow your logic then I would have to determine that you are saying you think it is rational for public employess/unions who depend entirely upon capitalists for every penny in their salary to join protests railing against the unfairness of capitalism? Is that what you are saying?
Mp, with all due respect: it’s disingenuous of you, at very least, to stride into a conversation with brashness and bluster, throw your opinions down like a gauntlet, and then (virtually) scrunch up your face in affected distaste for the supposedly “ill-mannered” responses you received. Had you approached the matter with humility and friendliness (despite any possible differences of opinion), I assure you that you would have received far more gentle replies. As it is, I can only shake my head in near-amazement when you turn up your nose at (and otherwise decry) “combative” replies to your undeniably combative offerings… and it makes your own complaints ring rather hollow, friend.
Care to dismount from your exceedingly tall steed, and try again?