Stanek Sunday funnies 4-7-13
Following are my top five favorite political cartoons for the week. Be sure to vote for your favorite in the poll at the bottom of the post.
by Glenn McCoy at Townhall.com…
by Gary McCoy at Townhall.com…
by Clay Bennett at GoComics.com, the other side’s spin…
by Mike Luckovich at GoComics.com, more of the other side’s spin…
by Ted Rall at GoComics.com, reminded me of our issue and Ronald Reagan’s famous quote, “I’ve noticed that everyone who is for abortion has already been born”…
Commenting Rules
Do's
- “Criticize ideas, not people.”
- Create one original moniker and stick with it.
- Please use a unique name.
- Be civil and considerate.
- Read fully and consider carefully before responding.
Do Not's
- Blasphemy will not be tolerated.
- No swearing or slandering of others.
- No deliberate inflammatory comments.
- Do not violate another’s privacy.
- Do not threaten fellow commenters or anyone else.
- No personal, racial, ethnic or gender-based insults/slurs.
- Do not post private personal information about yourself or others.(ie addresses, phone #s)
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.
I love #2, it just shows the insanity of abortion perfectly.
JDC, it also shows the insanity of the liberal mind.
Pretty weak bunch this week.
Some more to look at.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/politicalcartoons/ig/Political-Cartoons/
I love the GOP easter egg hunt with Paul Ryan.
http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/politicalcartoons/ig/Political-Cartoons/GOP-Easter-Egg-Hunt.htm
The Sunday wet blanket, right on time.
“weak bunch this week.”
Really? I thought they were pretty good.
Ex-GOP keeps complaining about Ryan’s budget, something about how it favors the rich somehow.
Our current lack-of-budget steals from our children and grandchildren. Our only hope is that some unplanned miracle will save us from financial catastrophe.
I’d really like to give Ryan’s budget a try. It has the hope of creating jobs and to stop robbing the future to finance our present consumption. Some economic hope would be nice.
We aren’t getting any hope from Mr. Hope. He’s busy distracting us with gun-control, now that his war-on-women meme has played out to nothing.
Mrs. Hope isn’t getting much from Mr. Hope either. She now believes she is a single mother.
I like # 1.
Looks like Mr. Hope was eyeballing that good looking lady AG.
Del – I much prefer Simpson Bowles plan – but I’m interested in why you like Ryan’s plan? I only wonder because you seem to be very against any sort of deficit, and Ryan’s plan does run a deficit for at least another decade (depending on whose analysis you read) – so you seem to like a plan that does the opposite of what you want.
So why do you like the Ryan plan? And do you like it better than Simpson Bowles?
Also, just wondering – how old are you?
Ex, do you have a good article that explains the Simpson-Bowles plan in a simple breakdown way? I don’t really understand it.
Jack – here you go – the highlights from the plan.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/19/news/economy/bowles-simpson-deficits/index.html
I thought this was a particularly good batch this week. I gave #1 a slight edge over #2. It’s so true. And it’s funny because they are so obvious about it. It seems as though most of the mainstream media has given up even the pretense of actually reporting news anymore. They would rather spread political propaganda and have life interest stories of vital interest like the latest on the Kardashians or which member of worldwide royalty or Hollywood stardom is getting married or getting a divorce now.
This is why other forms of media including ordinary folks with video cameras are so important. Often the only way to get the truth is to go out and get it ourselves.
Thanks Ex. This plan seems reasonable. I think the Ryan plan is too drastic.
Victor:
Correct on all points! Planned Parenthood advocates for exactly the same approach in dealing with survivors of abortion attempts as did Illinois state senator Barack Obama. Dr. Gosnell butchers babies in a filthy house of horrors and the media runs the other way. There are no lengths to which the main stream media will not go to protect abortion on demand and their hero Obama.
Is the Simpson-Bowles plan the one with the trillion-dollar tax increase?
As opposed to the Ryan plan, which would raise taxes on the middle class while cutting them for the top income tax bracket.
I find it ludicrous that anyone can think we can touch the deficit without raising taxes at all. It’s simply not possible.
Well, I just happen to think people like to buy things, and people buying things creates employment for more people, which creates more taxpayers to create more revenue for the country, and if more people who buy more things (for instance, “wealthy business owners” have to buy a lot of things for their businesses) were allowed to keep more of their money initially, they’d have more to spend on things to start that cycle.
But if you think your way will work, you’re always welcome to look at France:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-09-27/news/ct-edit-hollande-20120927_1_french-president-francois-hollande-france-risks-air-france-klm
Chasing away their upper-earners and business owners has been catastrophic for them.
But naw, I’m sure it’ll work over here.
Just like we chased all our businesses away in the fifties through the eighties, what with our terribly high tax rates for the poor top earners lol. America just collapsed during that time. ;)
I actually agree with you that if you raise them too much you retard economic growth. But idiocy like lowering the top tax rate to 28% when it’s already at a record low (because more of the same thing is intelligent?) isn’t going to help the economy.
Jack says:
I find it ludicrous that anyone can think we can touch the deficit without raising taxes at all. It’s simply not possible.
Well, you may say it is ludricous. It takes a combination of growth and spending discipline to tackle the deficit in any meaningful way.
But in one respect you may be right. As a matter of principle I do not agree with raising taxes but there is another consideration that was brought to my attention when listening to an interview of David Stockman, former Reagan whiz kid. The jist of the interview is that we do not have the political will to follow up growth spurts in the economy that accompany tax cuts/incentives with the necessary discipline to keep spending in check. We are constantly adding on and pushing forward with more and bigger programs. For example now we have Obamacare and the trillions of additional taxes and obligations it imposes on the taxpayers. The sales job that accompanied the push for Obamacare had people convinced they were going to get something for less or for nothing—a sure winner when it comes to trolling for popular support!
It seems that no matter what we do we just keep merrily spending our way into financial oblivion. Maybe the time has come for everyone to pay…across the board, no exceptions. If people never learn that there are painful consequences to their constantly voting in tax and spender politicians they will never stop doing so. The answer may be that they have to learn the hard way. The people who keep voting in the tax and spenders have no reason not to vote them in (or so they think) because many of them don’t have to pay taxes anyway, so it is imperative that everyone has some skin in the game.
Ex-GOP says:
April 7, 2013 at 7:07 pm
Del – I much prefer Simpson Bowles plan – but I’m interested in why you like Ryan’s plan? I only wonder because you seem to be very against any sort of deficit, and Ryan’s plan does run a deficit for at least another decade (depending on whose analysis you read) – so you seem to like a plan that does the opposite of what you want. So why do you like the Ryan plan? And do you like it better than Simpson Bowles?Also, just wondering – how old are you?
I am 52.
I had not heard of the Simpson-Bowles plan before.
Basically, our choices were the Ryan Plan and the No Plan. Ryan’s plan was doomed anyway…. it was never going to get past the Senate. During the election, we selected No Plan.
I believe that Any Plan is better than No Plan. I’m just as happy to give Simpson-Bowles a chance, if it realistically hopes to get our budget balanced and then reduce our debt.
It really doesn’t matter what we do about tax increases. We probably need some, and we cannot avoid increasing taxes on the Middle Class. If tax-cuts to the wealthy will grow jobs and economic growth, then these are necessary for overall balance to our national health. I am not the least bit concerned with class-war rhetoric. Just show us what’s going to work.
But our only real hope is in cutting spending — everywhere. Everyone’s sacred cow has to be gored. We cannot balance the budget with tax increases alone. It is probably prudent to phase in taxes and cuts over something like a ten-year span.
xalisae -
Seems to be the right balance was the tax rates under Reagan and Clinton – seems like economic growth was pretty good during those years.
Del –
Yes, between no plan and Ryan’s plan, that is simple. But there are other plans out there, including Simpson Bowles which has gotten a LOT of press over the past couple of years because it was a joint plan from the two parties.
I agree with the need for tax increases and spending cuts – I don’t agree with spending cuts everywhere, because some areas, if we cut back, we end up simply spending more down the road. But the basic balanced approach that you seem to advocate (that is completely opposite of Ryan’s plan) is the best way forward.
“Maybe the time has come for everyone to pay…across the board, no exceptions. If people never learn that there are painful consequences to their constantly voting in tax and spender politicians they will never stop doing so. The answer may be that they have to learn the hard way. The people who keep voting in the tax and spenders have no reason not to vote them in (or so they think) because many of them don’t have to pay taxes anyway, so it is imperative that everyone has some skin in the game.”
Stop pretending that poor people don’t pay taxes. All of us except for the completely unemployed and on 100% government assistance (an extremely small percentage of the country, and mostly elderly or disabled people are in this demographic) pay taxes in some way. I’ve always made below the poverty line for federal income taxes but I pay gas taxes, sales tax, taxes on cigarettes and alcohol (the rare times I can actually afford to indulge), and other taxes. These taxes affect me (as a percentage of my income) way more than someone who makes more money than me. Plus, poor people are disproportionately affected by prices raising on necessities such as electricity and food. Don’t pretend that poor people don’t feel the effects of tax hikes even if it’s not on their particular demographic.
Is it seriously that difficult to admit that there are plenty of people, poor and wealthy, who simply think progressive economic policies are better? You don’t have to agree, but it’s honestly pretty sad to act as though those who don’t agree with you are automatically inferior or don’t have proper motivations like you do. I know it feels better to be all high and mighty and think everyone else is a hanger-on who’s just voting for free stuff for themselves, but it’s not reality in many cases, and if conservatives actually wanted to appeal to some demographics better they should knock that song and dance off right quick.
Jack -
I think it says a lot about a person’s soul when they have a much greater concern about a poor person not paying a few bucks in taxes, but never seem to call out the multi-millionaires who don’t pay taxes.
Thoughts Jerry? What makes you angrier? From your statements here, it seems like the poor who don’t pay taxes makes you madder than the rich that exploit loopholes. Is that a wrong judgment call I’m making?
” I think it says a lot about a person’s soul when they have a much greater concern about a poor person not paying a few bucks in taxes, but never seem to call out the multi-millionaires who don’t pay taxes.”
Oh but Ex, you know those are the job creators right? People like good ol Bernie Madoff? We can’t possibly ask them to pay their fair share, it’s much more important that me and my kids eat nothing but navy beans for two weeks instead of one at the end of the month. Just to make sure we’re paying our fair share.
Ha – yes Jack…it’s funny as well how people long for the good ole’ days. Maybe the tax rates of the 60s? Economy seemed good then. Top tax rates in the 60s was 70+%, and capital gains was mid 20s.
Do we hear much talk of crazy socialists then? The top rate in some years of the 60’s was 91%. 91%!
And the economy today is socialistic?
Lol that’s what I always say! The particular subset of conservatives that longs for the fifties doesn’t seem to want their tax rates back!
I do think it’s galling how they want to blame this all on the lower classes, it seems like they don’t understand cause and effect. If you tax someone at a higher rate at my income level it’s just going to put me on food stamps. I literally won’t have a choice. And if someone says churches would feed my family I’m going to scream, a lot of the churches down here have “we don’t help the homeless” signs, I’m not going to look to them for charity. Not really blaming them, times are tough, but it’s ridiculous to think that churches can pick up all the need.
The poor we will always have with us. And the Democrats will make sure of it. They leech off their votes while pointing fingers at anyone who does better. The old bait and switch.
These words of the Iron Lady will never rust. R.I.P.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rv5t6rC6yvg#!
Hans, what’s your opinion on people vilifying the lower income levels? Do you think that I should be taxed more because it’s “fair” while we drop taxes on higher income levels? I know you aren’t unreasonable and I would like your opinion.
Heck, Jack. I just don’t see this great demand for the poor to pay more taxes. Sure, it would be nice if everyone paid 10% – a truly fair share. But that can’t happen till better times.
Few are really clamoring for the rich to get more tax cuts yet, either. Corporate taxes, yes. That’s where the jobs come from. Companies don’t bury their money in the back yard. They invest it, and everyone benefits.
Also, unfair taxes like estate taxes. Talk about interfering in families.
We shouldn’t feed trolls, and we especially should “feed the beast” less. And by that, I mean the government.
From your statements here, it seems like the poor who don’t pay taxes makes you madder than the rich that exploit loopholes.
Gosh. I could swear that last election, someone was campaigning on closing tax loopholes, but I can’t remember for the life of me who it was…hmmm….
Who are all these rich people who don’t pay taxes?
Oh and Jack, please send me the names of the churches around you who have the “we don’t help the homeless”? I have some people to call, then.
Specific churches may not be equipped to help individual homeless people, but that doesn’t mean they don’t financially support the organizations that do. Duplication of services can be a bad thing at times.
If you ever have difficulty feeding your family, Jack, you have places to turn to for help. I don’t know where in Florida you live, but:
http://www.cflcc.org/emergency/home
http://ccnwfl.org/
http://www.catholiccharitiesdov.org/services.html
http://www.ccdosp.org/
http://www.ccbjax.org/
and many other places.
Regarding taxes, it makes no sense to tax lower income levels to the point where those individuals/families need to seek out public assistance. That requires bureaucratic infrastructure (and all the associated costs) that dilute the benefits for all.
Mods, I posted a comment with quite a few links, awaiting moderation.
Courtnay, it’s usually small churches that are completely overwhelmed with the needs of the poor, I never saw stuff like this before like 2008 or so when the recession hit. And thank you Lrning, Catholic Charities is a great organization, I think they have one of the best records for percentage of donations actually going to help people rather than overhead. I think I may have misstated my point, I wasn’t saying that churches are being mean and uncharitable. It’s just that there is a lot of need, and I think it’s ridiculous to expect churches (which are made up of people, their funds come from people, people who are affected by the recession and economic problems) to be able to pick up the slack. Especially if we go the Jerry route and teach poor people a lesson because some of them are voting the way he doesn’t like.
And I do think it’s ridiculous to think you can tax lower income levels to the point that they have to get public assistance, it just perpetuates what Jerry’s complaining about.
Hi Jack 11:21PM
Bernie Madoff? Jack, he’s a scam artist that ripped off millions. Hardly your legitimate successful businessman. Also, the IRS carefully notes any discrepancy between income and life style so how do you know old Bernie wasn’t very careful about paying taxes? Also, any idea what he paid?
BTW, I noticed the Dear Leader certainly enjoys the “corporate” lifestyle, you know, vacations and lavish parties at OUR expense. Just check out Drudge report for news on the latest White House extravaganza. BTW, when was the last time your children vacationed at The Atlantis in the Bahamas? I wonder how much people such as yourself would benefit from the money the Obamas lavish on themselves.
The Madoff crack was sarcastic Mary.
Why would I need to go to the Bahamas when I live a short drive from the Keys? ;)
If you want my opinion on whether public servants in political positions such as Congress or the Executive office should spend that much money on galas and vacations I’ll tell you, I think it’s ridiculous. Exactly as ridiculous as when some people in Congress complain about their 174K salaries. It’s not relevant to what I was complaining about, however. I was complaining about Jerry’s ridiculous assertion that poor people don’t feel the effects of tax hikes (demonstrably untrue) and his vindictiveness.
Hi Jack,
Well, I would still be willing to wager old Bernie paid his taxes very religiously! :)
BTW I have been to the Atlantis, but I, and not you, paid for it. Been to the keys too!
IMO tax hikes benefit no one. I agree with Dr. Ben Carson on tithing, but good sense isn’t going to rule the day anytime soon.
I do view the Obamas’ extravagances as giving the American taxpayer the finger.
Jack,
Reading Jerry’s comment again, I see nothing harsh in it. The Bush policy that may have damaged the GOP’s future much more than either war was his employing “compassionate conservatism” to take the bottom 40% off the income tax books.
What credit did they give him? They’re still voting 90% Democrat.
By the way, if you want examples of rich people not paying taxes, how about Obama buddies like Facebook and the recent GE /NBC.
I was thrilled to open today’s paper and see Mr. McCoy’s top cartoon (about “covering” the big stories) on the editorial page. Now to sit back and wait for the whiny “we’re just misunderstood” letters to the editor from local Planned Parenthood officials. They almost never disappoint.
xalisae –
That would have been Obama. I don’t believe Romney ever named a single loophole that he would close.