Stanek Sunday funnies, “Golfer-in-Chief” edition
Good morning! President Obama’s persistent response to all the crises of the world by turning to his golf game apparently reached critical mass this week and was the subject of several cartoons on both sides of the political spectrum. Be sure to vote for your fav in the poll at the bottom of this post!
We begin with a twofer by Steve Kelley at Townhall.com…
by Chip Bok at Townhall.com…
by Jeff Danziger at GoComics.com…
by Michael Ramirez at Townhall.com…
by Steve Breen at Townhall.com…
by Jack Ohman at GoComics.com…
by Glenn McCoy at GoComics.com…
No one faults a president for wanting to get away from it all now and then. But recall President Obama’s preoccupation with golf in light of candidate Obama’s promise in 2008: “You give me this office and, in turn, my fears, doubts, insecurities, foibles, need for sleep, family life, vacations, leisure is gone. I am giving myself to you”…
[youtube]http://youtu.be/68WS5B19LC4[/youtube]
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’m voting for #6 this week.
Remember, President Obama is Perfect, Omniscient, Omnipotent, can see into our hearts, and is the Messiah, Savior of Mankind, the One, the Lord of the Universe, and we are blessed to walk on the same planet, to be alive in the same time period as He.
We should worship Him perpetually, without rest, with our whole Heart, our whole soul, our entire being, for He is the Highest of the High, and he can do no wrong.
We are so tiny, less than a speck on a microbe compared to Him, and He allows us to live in His self effulgent brilliance, He is so kind.
If you see any wrong in Him, then you are a raaaaaacccccist, a bigot, and a hater, and you are evil, and mean, and stupid.
So there!
If I’m Obama, I’d go golfing even more! We have the worst Republican party in the history of the country – since the Republicans came into existence – it just doesn’t get worse than what we have now. They don’t do anything except fight. When they do agree on something, it’s fringe legislation that has zero chance of passing.
And then when Obama, given their complete lack of action on ANYTHING actually does try to do something, they threaten to sue him!
If I’m Obama, I golf every other day, and I call it my immigration round – and I say that on the last hole, there will be a table, and the legislation passed by the house can be waiting for him to review. And then I’ll get to the last hole, and nothing will be there, and we can all make fun of how the tea party/conservative side has crippled the federal government and turned it into a laughingstock.
So yeah, I’d golf a lot more – it isn’t as if the right wing is giving any substantial views to look at or take into consideration.
Worst.
Group.
Of.
Conservatives.
Ever.
We’re in so much trouble.
We really need to humble ourselves and pray.
EGV,
LOL. I see you are still your beloved Fuehrer’s most loyal apologist.
Well, get used to it.
We got four years of the media’s reminding us every single day about how unpopular GW Bush was.
Obama’s record is worse than Bush’s (from the point of view of the typical American family). Obama’s approval ratings are consistently as bad as GW Bush, even without the daily press reminders.
As pro-lifers, we must not be distracted by the politics. We win, even when we lose…. as long as abortion remains a topic at the front of the campaign. Let Hillary put on the pink running shoes, if she’s willing to own them.
Hi William,
You neglected to mention he can also lower the sea levels and heal the planet. I must admit I was a tad disappointed he didn’t part the waters of the Gulf of Mexico to make it easier to fix that oil leak. Otherwise, you about have it covered.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo-TkzGFe4s
Del –
I would agree with your statement of “Obama’s record is worse than Bush’s” if you agree with the following scenario.
A business has an owner that for years, does decent, but at the end of the owner’s time, his combination of bad ownership and economic factors leads to the near collapse of the business. The next owner comes in and slowly builds it back to what it is during his years as owner.
There have been less painful years under Bush – but the collapse that happened under his watch set the country back a solid decade and has been painful to dig out from.
Well for sure it set us back at least 8 years – definitely long enough for Obama to have zero responsibility for accomplishing anything. No mention, of course, of the fact that Bush also inherited a lot of the policies that led to the collapse. He (rightfully) bears responsibility, but Obama….no never.
As for the congress, Obama had his chance to run roughshod over the country while the Democrats controlled everything, and he certainly did (though barely with his ‘signature accomplishment’), which is exactly what got him the congress he has now. So you know what he needs to do? His job. Compromise. Lead. It takes two sides to make a stalemate, my friend. The reason the Republican’s legislation has no chance of passing is because Obama is extremely, dogmatically liberal and so are the senate Democrats. I’m not saying there isn’t some fringe legislation in there. But no more fringe than what the Democrats put forth that ALSO has no chance of passing. Not everything can be compromised on, but SOME things can be.
CT – a couple questions/statements
The economic collapse was what I was referring to – how should Obama have responsibility for that? The collapse started in late 3rd Q/early 4Q of 2008, months before Obama took over. Of course we blame the sitting President and not the one who isn’t in office – is that in question?
And on your second paragraph – the GOP can’t even compromise with themselves to give a right wing stance to work with. Who should Obama work with on Immigration – I’m asking a serious question? It went to the house – the house fought about it, and the GOP couldn’t even figure out their stance on it. And this isn’t the first issue this has happened with. So seriously – who should Obama compromise with? The tea party? The moderate Republicans? Who runs the party these days and should be worked with? I don’t think anybody could answer that.
I’d love for some compromises to happen – but that would take the GOP figuring out who they are – and in the mean time, we’re all caught up in their dysfunction.
Vote them all out.
Economically speaking, Obama has been a horrible President. Bush Jr. was too. Clinton was too. (The gov’t didn’t have a “surplus” under Clinton – this is rank silliness and fakey accounting and “off-budget” items, etc.) Bush Sr. was too. Reagan was too, for the last 6 of his 8 years.
The first 2 years, Reagan really did try to slow the growth of federal spending and gov’t. Then, re-election came over the horizon and he not only threw in the towel, he went to a dang Walmart and bought all the towels and launched them.
Carter was horrible as well, so was Ford, and Nixon too. Heh, some “conservative,” Nixon, wage and price controls and trashed the Bretton Woods agreement and removed all the ‘real’ backing from our money, making it a fiat currency. God, what an idiot.
Doug –
But Cheaney taught us all – deficits don’t matter.
Heh, yeah, Ex-GOP. He claimed that Reagan proved it. That (Reagan) was decades back, when we had more economic rope with which to hang the country. Now, we’re much closer to the end of the rope, and the hangman doesn’t need any more anyway.
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
.
This was the boRAT’s first official lie, and he uttered it three times. Three times the charm. The proof is in the pudding. The o’bamaphiles are still hoplessly infatuated in their bromance with the boRAT.
.
.
“You can keep your doctor”…
.
The boRAT’s most calculated lie.
.
.
“I will not rest”….
.
The boRAT’s most repeated lie. The o’bamaphiles have eclipsed Monica Lewinski when it comes to gullability.
I picked #8 because that puts some of the responsibility back on the voters. That sort of a pledge should have been a red flag that he was just sayin’ stuff. I am not interested in a leader who thinks they can magically surrender all the things that make them human.
“You give me this office and, in turn, my fears, doubts, insecurities, foibles, need for sleep, family life, vacations, leisure is gone. I am giving myself to you”
LOL…. Maybe Obama’s sense of accountability will evolve and he could start taking the presidency as seriously as he takes campaigning.
“So yeah, I’d golf a lot more – it isn’t as if the right wing is giving any substantial views to look at or take into consideration.”
Ex-RINO,
Barack Obama and Harry Reid have never compromised since Obama was elected. And Eric Holder is not addressing securing the border.The right wing has been trying to get the rest of congress to pass legislation that secures our border with Mexico and there is consensus that securing the border is the long-term solution to solving our illegal immigration problem. The problem is that Obama, Reid and Holder are obstructionist political lackies willing to disregard the law to suit their agenda instead of placing a priority on protecting citizens of the USA and taking steps to secure the board.
“I’d love for some compromises to happen – but that would take the GOP figuring out who they are – and in the mean time, we’re all caught up in their dysfunction.”
Since day 1 in office when the DemocRATs had control of all three branches of government they have been ruthless in never considering compromise. The DemocRATs used the Budget Reconciliation to get around needing a super-majority 60 votes in the Senate to pass Obamacare. Then more recently Harry Reid just changed the longstanding rule in the Senate in order to allow them the ability to appoint federal judges with a smaller number of the senators. They are as ruthless and uncompromising as any politicians I have ever seen.
Ex-RINO, would support impeaching Obama if he granted blanket amnesty to thousands of illegal immigrants?
Ex’s dogged submission to his beloved makes Monica Lewinsky look like a stuck up prude.
If Obama supported amnesty to working immigrants whom we allowed to enter without permission, I would call him courageous — for the very first time.
It would be an act of real leadership. He would have to defend it using moral arguments about justice and care for poor families. He would have to insist upon a reform of our immigration process. He would have to work at it.
He would have to create a solution that reassures Americans that the criminals are not rewarded while the immigrant families are recognized. It wouldn’t be hard to do, but is Obama willing to work that hard?
Probably not. If I were Obama, I would pitch the immigration reform issue to Hillary for her campaign run.
Mary (Aug 17 3:05pm post, and William’s earlier post), you speak as if our president was a narcissist … oh, never mind.
Ken the Birther (Aug 17 10:56 pm post), don’t forget “most transparent administration.”
I read that he FINALLY is taking a break from golfing and going back to the White House. Hmmm . . . Missouri’s burning, Gaza and much of the Middle East is imploding, and God knows what Putin is up to. I say its about time!
It’s been a do-nothing president and Senate much more than a do-nothing congress. How many bills has Harry Reid pigeon-holed? How many times have he and Obama refused to work out a compromise?
The only time even the president and the senate worked together was to jam Obamacare through.
Doug –
You’re pretty good at saying everyone has been horrible – but what specifically (I believe we’ve just talking economically speaking) should have Obama done differently that you feel was in his control to do?
truth –
Two things – first of all, you owe me a response on the Ben Carson statement/thread.
Second – the house GOP fought amongst themselves and couldn’t pass an immigration bill. Nothing went to Obama. The Senate passed a version. The house did nothing and didn’t come up with an alternative.
Eric says: August 18, 2014 at 11:38 am
don’t forget “most transparent administration.”
.
Perdoname, mi amigo. Lo siento.
.
But thank you for taking up the slack where I was remiss.
.
the boRAT lies so early and so often, pointing out the rare occasion when anything sounding remotely akin to the truth passes over his lying lips would require infinitely less effort.
.
Speaking of lips, the eagerness of the o’bamaphiles to swallow anything the boRAT offers up makes Monica Lewinski appear a consummate connoisseur by comparison.
.
That Nobel Prize committee has to be wondering just whose idea it was to gift the Peace Prize to the boRAT before she had even sworn her first false oath of office.
.
The festering wound of racism has been healed, the border is secure, the jew hating jihadists are on the run and peace is bustin out like Hillary Rodham in one of Gennifer Flowers’ string bikinis.
Don’t forget o’bama killed osama.
.
She is still making victory laps and spiking bin Laden’s head in the end zone.
.
aloha snackbar!!!
Ex-GOP: You’re pretty good at saying everyone has been horrible
:: laughing :: Yeah…
– but what specifically (I believe we’re just talking economically speaking) should have Obama done differently that you feel was in his control to do?
In February, 2009, he said he’d cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. Now of course he had to deal with Congress, but it’s his job to propose stuff that has a realistic chance of getting passed, and stuff that was not so back-loaded. He didn’t do it.
I see an increasingly predatory gov’t that is more interested in transfering wealth from people to other people, versus having people increase their productivity and wealth creation. I don’t lay all this at Obama’s feet, but he is presiding over a gov’t that IMO has been over-eager to allow people to go on Disability, long-term Unemployment, one form of the dole or another…. Are we headed for the Cloward Piven strategy? Sometimes I wonder.
Almost 50 million people on food stamps. 44% of people in the US pay no federal income tax. There really aren’t “food stamps,” any more – now, the gov’t sends a debit card right to people’s mailbox. Easy, convenient, hidden from others. I realize this sounds like a rant, but I don’t see Obama doing anything to discourage the way this tide is flowing – we have a large portion of the population who feels the gov’t owes them a living and more, for doing nothing.
Ugh – posted right as the site crashed.
Anyway, in short – I’ve just not seen evidence that supports the thought that during a massive recession, the thing to do is to cut things like food stamps. And what, raise taxes for all (to plug the gap of people that don’t pay taxes? – do you want to eliminate the child tax credit or something?)? I just haven’t see much evidence suggesting that in terrible economic times, the thing we need to do is cut off programs to motivate people to look harder for jobs that aren’t there.
I might be looking into your response a bit too much – but given previous responses, I’m just a little surprised. You seem to fully acknowledge in previous posts that a huge issue in the country is problems like the banking industry. And furthermore, our tax policies leave a heck of a lot of large companies not paying taxes at all. But yet the issue is with the poor – those on food stamps or not paying federal income taxes?
I do agree with you 100% – encourage people to make a living. But I think we’d be much better off reforming education and giving real opportunity than to cut people off from assistance, and just figure that then they’ll be good to go. I suppose I just don’t know a lot of IT professionals sitting around saying “I know how to code in .net, but I’m going to sit around because these food stamps are so awesome”. I just don’t see it.
I do agree though that promises shouldn’t be made that can’t be kept. I’ll be happy to vote out Scott Walker for doing the same thing (though he’s done a heck of a lot more that I don’t like…and I voted for the guy).
” But I think we’d be much better off reforming education and giving real opportunity than to cut people off from assistance, and just figure that then they’ll be good to go”
Ex-RINO, Then you must like Dr. Ben Carson for president. He is all about education being the solution.
Ex-GOP: Anyway, in short – I’ve just not seen evidence that supports the thought that during a massive recession, the thing to do is to cut things like food stamps. And what, raise taxes for all (to plug the gap of people that don’t pay taxes? – do you want to eliminate the child tax credit or something?)? I just haven’t see much evidence suggesting that in terrible economic times, the thing we need to do is cut off programs to motivate people to look harder for jobs that aren’t there.
Okay Ex-G.- if it were up to me – I do not know what I would do. We are so far gone, economically…. If there’s an orphan, I am not saying let it starve. If a soldier gets killed in war, I’m not saying a surviving spouse shouldn’t get the military pension. Also do not really have anything good to say, here, overall, and thus in a way I don’t think much matters, here.
I am 100% sure that no real action will be taken on our country’s finances before the time when a crisis or collapse occurs that drastically impacts the lives of most people in this country.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
One could perhaps argue that some of the numbers, there, are not exactly accurate. Regardless, the overall thrust is on-target. Look at the very bottom: Unfunded Liabilities and Liability per Taxpayer. Over a million bucks per taxpayer.
We cannot make significant progress on even just our yearly deficits, let alone the national debt or the mountain of liabilities the federal gov’t faces. We cannot even stem the tide of “it’s getting worse.”
Most of us have a huge “normalcy bias” where we expect things to be basically “okay” and like what we are used to. Not many people alive any more who remember the Depression of the 1930s. Early 1980s were rough, so were early 1990s. Yeah, we went “down” from 2000 to 2002/2003, and from 2006 to 2008/2009, but those were not big in the grand scheme of things.
It may be decades in the future (I hope it is), but we are facing much worse than the Depression of the 1930s. For now, things are “manageable” as far as the debt only being such-and-such percentage of GDP, as far as that we have willing countries around the world (notably China and Japan) who will buy our debt, even though it’s a bad deal for them – our debt securities are denominated in Dollars, and as our currency loses value, so do their holdings – but they’re willing to do it to prop us up, and keep us going as their biggest customer.
The mortgage-backed-security crisis 6 or 7 years ago showed us how vulnerable our system is; we are so terribly hooked on short-term credit issuance that we practically cannot function without it. The day-to-day running of our economy is predicated upon debt. Good grief….
That little ripple came and went, and things seem smoothed-over now. Well, there is a mountainous wave of deflation out there, and not even the gov’t can stop it, in the long run. We’ve run the course as far as lowering interest rates, and eventually China and Japan et al will see that it’s no longer in their best interest to prop us up.
In trying to be responsive to what you said, I agree that cutting food stamps in a recession isn’t all that good. In terms of a few years, if nothing else then better to do it when a recession is not in force.
Where I disagree with recent gov’t policy, it was trying to “maintain” things during the recession. In the 1930s, wages were allowed to fall to the point where it paid to put people back to work. Now, “gov’t intervention” is seen as something that can make up for market forces, and even turn economic reality on its back (but that ain’t happenin,’ Homie).
Not saying “raise taxes,” either. Cutting spending is the thing. But that ship sailed, long ago.
Child tax credit, mortgage deduction – why should we have these things? You want to have a kid, go right ahead, but don’t expect the gov’t to subsidize it, and the same for your house. Here too, though, too late for this to be a “real deal” as far as the long-term fate of the US.
Ex-GOP: I might be looking into your response a bit too much – but given previous responses, I’m just a little surprised. You seem to fully acknowledge in previous posts that a huge issue in the country is problems like the banking industry. And furthermore, our tax policies leave a heck of a lot of large companies not paying taxes at all. But yet the issue is with the poor – those on food stamps or not paying federal income taxes?
The links and connections and friendliness between the major banking players and the White House goes back over 100 years, and it’s profound and ongoing. The Federal Reserve Board was created to give increased power and wealth to the big banks/big bankers in the country, that’s really it. It doesn’t prevent depressions or recessions, it can’t overcome market forces, and supposedly it’s supposed to defend the value of our currency. If a Dollar was worth a Dollar when the Fed began, the Dollar is now worth about 4 cents. How’d they do?
We do have enormous “problems at the top” – crony capitalism, incredible inequities in access to politicians for the super-rich, etc.
Of course not all the issue is with the poor. Yet if there is hope to meaningfully extend the “normal” times for our country, then fairly drastic action is needed across the board.
Corporate taxes, yeah – there are some loopholes that I think should go away. My dad worked for the IRS for 33 years, and in his office he had the Tax Code of the United States. It was in a dozens of volumes and took up 2 or 3 shelves. For the tax year 2013, it was 73,954 pages long.
Our corporate tax rate is 35%, I think, which is pretty high among developed countries. Granted that some shenanigans go on that lowers it for some firms, but I also look at it like companies really don’t “pay” taxes, they just collect them from their customers.
Truthseeker: Dr. Ben Carson
He reminds me of Herman Cain, and my forecast is that he says/does something nutty enough that he gets dismissed as a serious candidate.
Doug, we shall see if he slips up; but I look forward to his campaign and his being a part of the debate. I think he is a serious candidate but nobody will really know until his stance on things is vetted more broadly. What is it about Dr. Carson that reminds you of Herman Cain?
Truthseeker, I think Carson is simplistic and often hyperbolic.
That said, it wouldn’t necessarily be a bad thing. Herman Cain was an “outsider” as far as the normal goings-on in Washington D.C., and he certainly had some fairly radical ideas, some of which I liked.
Cain lost the steam in his campaign when a bunch of women said he had sexually harassed them, and one woman claimed she’d had a long-term affair with him, right? I don’t know how that all ended up, i.e. true or false, but that sure seemed to end his deal in the election.
I think Carson has to walk a tightrope, so to speak, trying to be a “hero” to some sort of conservatism, but at the same time not sounding like a mean-spirited nutcase.
He had a disastrous interview on Fox, where he compared supporters of marriage equality to NAMBLA and “those who believe in bestiality.” That right there, alone, is at least strike one.
Ex-GOP: I do agree with you 100% – encourage people to make a living. But I think we’d be much better off reforming education and giving real opportunity than to cut people off from assistance, and just figure that then they’ll be good to go. I suppose I just don’t know a lot of IT professionals sitting around saying “I know how to code in .net, but I’m going to sit around because these food stamps are so awesome”. I just don’t see it.
Never really finished up here, Ex-GOP.
First, I do think there is no hope of really “turning things around,” balancing the budget, beginning to pay off the national debt, etc. I see the federal gov’t as becoming the adversary of most Americans, rather than any good thing of the people, by the people, and for the people. The gov’t is first and foremost aimed at maintaining its own position and power, and everything else is secondary. The gov’t is doing the worst thing for the most amount of people, in the long run, by insuring a catastrophic crash, eventually, be it hyperinflationary or deflationary.
Yet, I think we have years or decades left of relative “normalcy,” and so all the questions about “what to do,” still apply.
“Reforming education,” well – right here there is much that has already been done and more that’s been said about “debt forgiveness” for student loans. Well what the heck? People borrow money and they pay it back. No big secret. The interest rates on those loans are low – my wife had one that we paid off a few years ago; 2.8%. People going to college can be expected to make more money, so good grief – let them pay their loans off. Don’t take our tax money and subsidize them. This is just one more case of attempted vote-buying, using the public dole to try and get re-elected, etc. It’s people taking from the system rather than contributing to it.
I think our students should be schooled in economic reality, rather than the nebulous claims of both major parties.
Whether or not somebody is a programmer, etc., I think they need to work. In the 1930s, wages fell to the point where it paid to put people back to work. Now, that sounds like anathema, and there are endless cases of people “not wanting to do that job. Yeah, I sound hardcore, but we are well past the “niceties,” here, even with just an eye to keeping things going for another 30 or 40 years. If people were faced with starvation or standing in a soup line, versus sitting at home and waiting for the electronic debit card to come in the mail around the first of the month, you’d see a far larger workforce employed.
Doug,
He did not equate gays to NAMBLA; he just said that marriage should be defined as a relationship between a man and a woman and nobody should be able to change that. Of course the left is going to try and twist his meanings. I think he can take the heat. We shall see.
Doug/Truth – I’ll respond to your other posts (mostly Doug’s) later in the weekend – but I wanted to say I agree with you on Carson’s chances. I don’t think that a political outsider, nor a nazi, nor a fascist will get into the white house anytime soon.
Ex-GOP, this thread has already gone off the “Latest Posts” list, i.e. you have to go through the Archives or otherwise have a link to it, to get to it, so feel free to leap-frog to a newer thread (perhaps one of the ‘Pro-life blog buzz’ ones) or tomorrow’s Sunday Funnies.
Truthseeker: He did not equate gays to NAMBLA; he just said that marriage should be defined as a relationship between a man and a woman and nobody should be able to change that. Of course the left is going to try and twist his meanings. I think he can take the heat. We shall see.
Well, TS, I didn’t say “equate,” and here’s the direct quote:
BC: Marriage is between a man and a woman. No group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are. They don’t get to change the definition.
If somebody said something similar, i.e. “It doesn’t matter if somebody is a pro-lifer, a Nazi, an Islamic terrorist head-chopper-offer…” then there would be people raising Cain over it…
I give him zero chance of being a top-tier candidate who has staying power, but you are right – we will see. The guy is undeniably smart, and I would not mind at all to see things really get shaken up in the federal gov’t.
He needs to avoid making people roll their eyes at him, to start with. He also has a very tough problem with demographics. There are lots of conservatives who won’t suppport him, just because he is black. Among those who would most support black candidates – liberals – he’s lost most of their votes from the get-go.