Weekend Cartoons

It's been a pretty eventful week (when is it not in an election year?), so of course the political cartoonists were using plenty of ink this week as well. Here are the best of the best from this week, with my comments.

As time goes on, it's pretty tough to not be worried about the looming financial crisis that our country faces, especially the housing and mortgage crisis, arguable one of the worst since the Great Depression. Something tells me that by the time this is all over, this will make the Savings & Loan Bailout of the late 1980s and early 1990s look like a drop in the bucket. What's worse, this crisis is happening when we have about $9 trillion on debt.

Just wondering - what would happen if other countries who are letting us borrow this money decided to pull out? I'll tell you what - a financial crisis the likes of which this country has never seen.

And the inconvenient truth for anyone running for higher office this year is that there is going to have to be a tax increase, and probably a significant one, to pay the bill for these past eight years. Our federal government has spent entirely too much, to be sure, and there's plenty of blame to go around. But, what did NOT have to happen is the massive tax cuts rammed through by the Bush White House. I've written it many times before, and it's worth mentioning again - in many ways, this is exactly what the Republicans wanted. The debt skyrockets, and Democrats reason that an increase in revenues is needed to stem the red ink. Before long, Republicans are running around screaming about "tax and spend" liberals.

But hey, thank GOD we are spending $170 billion to mail rebate checks to everyone! (Not to mention that it's all borrowed money.)

It goes without saying that deposed NY Governor Eliot Spitzer is an unqualified disgrace. When will politicians and the American public learn? Whenever a scandal like this erupts, it's usually the guy who claims to have some sort of moral authority, and this tendency has affected Democrats and Republicans alike since the founding of our country, but it's become especially prominent in the last 10-15 years.

Isn't this so painfully spot on? Of course, we shouldn't blame high oil prices on an administration with direct ties to Big Oil; for invading Iraq to obtain cheap oil "bring Democracy to the Middle East,"; and for having no discernible energy policy that involves conservation and alternative energy sources, right? Nah, it's not Bush's fault.

[See above comments]

I found the Clintons' motives disgraceful last weekend for floating Obama's name as Hillary's running mate. What a joke. I'll vote for Hillary if she's the nominee, but any talk of either candidate naming a running mate right now is simply foolish, since neither one has a lock on the nomination.

However, I don't buy into the conventional wisdom in the media that Hillary and Obama could not run on the same ticket. Sure, some wounds would have to be healed, but that's been done before - in 1980, George H.W. Bush called President Reagan's economic plan "voodoo economics"; in 1960, Lyndon Johnson, then Senate Majority Leader, gave up that powerful slot to run with Kennedy, and Johnson was no friend of the Kennedys, even after becoming vice president upon JFK's victory in '60. It seems to me that the media is aggravated that it can't predict the outcome of these primaries and contests.

Good.

Elections shouldn't be decided by the media, nor should running mates, despite what Fox News would have you believe.

This is the absolute truth, isn't it? All presidential administrations are secretive to one degree or another, but President Bush has taken it to a whole new level, signing into law bills that will allow him to keep his presidential documents secret basically for as long as he likes (as well as his father's). He also has failed to disclose who his presidential library donors are, and how much they are giving. Call me crazy, but how is this good for America? Congress ought to pass a law right now that requires any president, including Bush, to disclose the names of all donors, as well as how much they give. In addition, there should be a limit to how much can be donated, just like there is for campaigns. Short of this, there is simply too much room for buying political favors, not that I would ever expect such a thing to happen under this administration, though.

DNC Chairman Howard Dean has done many things right during his tenure, but when his time is done as the Democratic Party chair, I'm quite sure he'll look back with regret how he stripped Florida and Michigan of their delegates, all because they moved their primaries forward to early dates. The million dollar question I have is, why were just these two states penalized?

I guess Dean, along with just about everyone else in the party, thought the nominee selection process would long be over by now (many thought Super Tuesday would decide it), and he never could have guessed this was going to happen. Well, it has, and it's making the party's leaders, namely Dean, resemble the party's mascot. In today's New York Times, it's reported that both Michigan and Florida have still not resolved this issue. They've better do it soon - many prominent fund raisers who have raised thousands for the party are becoming very angry, and some have even asked for their money back.

My take - hold a re-vote for both states. Splitting the delegates 50/50 hardly seems fair to either candidate, but especially Hillary since she won both states. The Democratic Party, which has made a great deal of hay out of voter suppression by Republicans over the last eight years (and rightfully so), and ill-afford appearing like many of their voters, millions, in fact, will not have their voices heard in a very tight primary year.

It bears repeating, for those who have been living under a rock since the 2000 election - your vote really does matter, and I'm seeing that up close and personal since I live in Philadelphia. Pennsylvania's roads will be plenty the worse for wear, especially in Philly and Pittsburgh, by the time the April 22 primary arrives.

Can the Democrats do it? is the question on all voters' minds this year. Certainly, they've been given the White House in a silver platter by this tragically inept administration. But, this also happened in 2000 & 2004, and the party failed to deliver, sticking us with Our National Embarrassment for the last eight years. (I will go to my grave, however, believing that both elections were stolen by Republicans.)

The bottom line is this - if Hillary or Obama can't beat McCain, the Democrats might very well be the minority party for many years to come. It seems like this gets said in every election, but there really is so much at stake in this election - the war(s), the budget & deficit, health care, our infrastructure, the Supreme Court, etc. - I shudder to think what a third Bush term under McCain would do to this country.

The revelation that our water supply is polluted with trace amounts of pharmaceuticals should surprise no one. I recently heard Bill Maher sagely state that the U.S. Government "is a wholly owned subsidiary of the pharmaceutical industry," and it's true. In addition, Bush has not made the environment any sort of priority, and in fact has rolled back much of the progress made under the Clinton administration regarding our air and water. The question is, what will be done about this crap in our water? Probably nothing, at least while Bush is in office. If history holds serve based on recent developments, Bush will spend the next nine months debating on whether there is even a problem.

However, maybe the government could put some anti-depressive drugs in our water supply - considering all of the bad news coming out of Washington these days, it would probably be money well spent.

This one was too funny not to share.

Considering the latest estimates for the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it must be time for another tax cut! It's patently absurd that McCain is now calling for all of the Bush tax cuts to become permanent, which, by the way, is a 180 degree reversal of his earlier position on them early in Bush's first term. McCain's position is financially irresponsible at best, and a threat to our national security at worst, and that's not an overstatement.

Regardless if it's Hillary or Obama, the Democratic nominee should justifiably rake McCain over the coals for his position on tax cuts. And, of course, the more often you can mention "Bush" and "McCain" in the same sentence, the better, and there will be lots of opportunities to do just that when you examine McCain's record.

This one speaks for itself. What do you want to bet that the oil companies will have record profits again this year? Of course, there will be the political grandstanding before the cameras, saying that high gas prices "will be thoroughly investigated," and nothing will happen. Big Oil has its claws dug to deep in both parties for anything to be done (but much more for the GOP than for Democrats). However, it doesn't take a genius that Big Oil will hedge its bets - they no doubt will give plenty of cash to whomever the Democratic nominee is, just in case that candidate wins.

Amen!

Amen, Part II. However, I long ago gave up on the idea that the Democratically controlled Congress will do much to hold Bush responsible, for anything. All the more reason to become involved at state and local levels for Democratic candidates like Anne Dicker for Philadelphia's First District. Today's state Democrats are tomorrow's national ones.

This one hits the mark, too - one has to search in today's newspapers to find much good news, other than that we will have a new president in 310 days, and counting.