|
Also here is a Bennett All of Donald Trump's favorite books are sold out, because he has just the best taste in books, believe me. He has all the best books. Authors come up to him on the street and they say "wow, your books are just unbelievable, Donald." A Bad Cartoon.
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
At least Government-by-Datamining would result in more people-friendly administration and legislation than we have in the present Tyrrany-by-Popular-Minority model. That's how far we have fallen. Edit, rephrased: When a guy who would lead by datamining popular opinion may produce a more representative government than the guy who recently won on a faux populist platform, you have hosed up royally. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 15:10 on May 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:08
|
|
2
|
Potato Salad posted:At least Government-by-Datamining would result in more people-friendly administration and legislation than we have in the present Tyrrany-by-Popular-Minority model. President Tay!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
Iron Crowned posted:President Tay! I enthusiastically endorse a man whose position on voting rights is summed up by "chocolate rain."
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:11
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:I enthusiastically endorse a man whose position on voting rights is summed up by "chocolate rain." That one song demonstrates a deeper understanding of modern racial issues than literally any Republican I've ever read about or talked to. I'd vote for him.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
Shangri-Law School posted:Susie Cagle's latest. This comic is going to get a lot of use in this thread, I think.  Starving Wolf posted:I hope I die soon You have a gift! 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:14
|
|
|
Woah that's a spicy burn right there, Tinsley. Take that, KJU.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:23
|
|
2
loquacius posted:So was his collar not drawn or is he just not wearing a shirt under his jacket? (I'd believe either) No shirt. It's a thing he does.
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
tyblazitar posted:I thought Trevor Noah was just one outlier, but seeing a bunch of goons defend a president taking 6-figure bribes from Wall Street is truly mind-blowing. Like I know Obama has a massively inflated image as a "progressive", but I thought people would still be receptive to proof to the contrary.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
Jethro posted:As much as I might wish otherwise right now, Obama is not the president and, as such, cannot be bribed. Furthermore, he is unlikely to ever hold any elected or appointed office ever again, so it's not like this is some sort of "give me cash now and I'll help you out when I get back into power." Obama cannot be corrupt because he no longer has any power. Obama is still hugely influential in American politics and to say he is a non-entity because his term is up is either short-sighted or naive
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
I'll try to remember to feel silly when Obama gives his "Investment banks are great" keynote speech at the next DNC.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
Obama not being the president anymore is a weak argument that this isn't a bad look. The issue a lot of people have is the appearance of a revolving door between government officials and the industries it is supposed to be regulating. Sure Obama is not getting a sack full of cash during his term but that's a very John Roberts way of looking at corruption. Being friendly to an industry during your elected job with the promise of a lucrative job or payments after you leave office is very clearly corruption. I highly doubt that Obama helped out finance for $400,000, especially when he surely knew how lucrative his memoirs would be. However the idea that you can't be corrupted with future benefits is kind of ridiculous. Our presidents shouldn't be getting half a million from their celebrity status for hour speaking gigs regardless of how cool they are anyway, especially from industries where there is a conflict of interest between the stated goals of the party and that industry. Also Obama is 100% still involved with politics even if he can't be elected, and according to Pelosi is still a standard bearer of the Democratic party, so that argument that he has acceded into a post political nirvana doesn't hold water. No one is saying he can't do it (although I say that they shouldn't be able to do this at all, sell your life story if you really are slumming it as an ex-president and need that money so bad) but maybe he shouldn't if most people in this country think it looks bad and Democrats desperately need to polish their image. I'm pretty concerned that the Democrats need to dissociate themselves as the party of Wall Street which is a shameful thing for the supposedly leftist party in America's two party system if they want to win some elections more than I care about Obama getting another $400 grand he doesn't need because "man I would totally take that money from rich guys too!" as if that is anything to base the ethics of a leader on.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Jethro posted:I'll try to remember to feel silly when Obama gives his "Investment banks are great" keynote speech at the next DNC. He basically already did, by signalling to everyone looking up to him that cozying yourself up to investment banks and telling them they're great in exchange for BIG CASH PRIZES is a great thing to do for a little financial boost "how bad can investment banks be, Obama seems to like them well enough"
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
World Famous W posted:My hot take: it bad for anyone to earn 400K for a single job no matter who they is. Hell, no-one should earn close to half a million in a year. Kill and eat the rich. Set up the guillotine. Death is our only escape, abandon all hope, yada yada, etc a hot take for this forum would be something like "capitalism is good and good on obama for engaging in it" my actual stance is "gently caress if I care"
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Oh snap https://twitter.com/badnetworker/status/855119350243753984
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:24
|
|
3
|
Obama's speech will sit alongside Dodd-Frank in the chapter on his failed financial legacy. For the record, I would not have bothered with the hassle of agreeing to the speech. But given that our Oval Office is occupied by a rapacious, contractor-stiffing slumlord, I feel like the action matters less than the surrounding chatter. At this point it would be more damaging for Obama to apologize or cancel.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:32
|
|
|
Jethro posted:As much as I might wish otherwise right now, Obama is not the president and, as such, cannot be bribed. Furthermore, he is unlikely to ever hold any elected or appointed office ever again, so it's not like this is some sort of "give me cash now and I'll help you out when I get back into power." Obama cannot be corrupt because he no longer has any power. The order of events is not always bribe then help. It's possible that a friendly politician gets his "reward" after he leaves office in the form of lucrative speaking deals. You don't even have to have explicit bribery. Nobody from Wall Street ever sat down with Obama and said "don't gently caress with us and we will give you speaking deals when you retire". There was no quid pro quo. Industries are just friendly to politians that were friendly to them. It's a systemic problem.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
D.N. Nation posted:Woah that's a spicy burn right there, Tinsley. Take that, KJU. If it's a new cartoon, it's also really late. That study was a year or two ago IIRC.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:42
|
|
|
It's Tuesday!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
TheBigAristotle posted:It's Tuesday! Kelly with the finger on Americas pulse as always 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Erenthal posted:Kelly with the finger on Americas pulse as always But only because of the court order.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
Bishounen Bonanza posted:The order of events is not always bribe then help. It's possible that a friendly politician gets his "reward" after he leaves office in the form of lucrative speaking deals. You don't even have to have explicit bribery. Nobody from Wall Street ever sat down with Obama and said "don't gently caress with us and we will give you speaking deals when you retire". There was no quid pro quo. Industries are just friendly to politians that were friendly to them. It's a systemic problem. I mean he's a great speaker and popular former president who saw the financial industry through some dark times while in charge, the scale of speaking fees being a bit nuts is certainly a thing but it makes sense that they would want him as a speaker just in general.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
TheBigAristotle posted:It's Tuesday! Is this supposed to be in support of the executions?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
santanotreal posted:Is this supposed to be in support of the executions? It's in support of honest hard-working executioners
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
santanotreal posted:Is this supposed to be in support of the executions? It's Kelly my bro
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Kelly is the satircal alter-ego of cartoonist Ward Sutton, and he is published by The Onion. Or whatever the rubric was.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:At least Government-by-Datamining would result in more people-friendly administration and legislation than we have in the present Tyrrany-by-Popular-Minority model. It wouldn't
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
Go squeeze a boob, Zelda, god drat.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
santanotreal posted:Is this supposed to be in support of the executions? 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
TheBigAristotle posted:It's Tuesday! Getting a custom tailored suit that says CCLU Thug is my new life goal.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
DreamShipWrecked posted:It's Kelly my bro It's also crossing the line IMO.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
quote:
Been a while since we had a pigman posted here.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
 1Typical Obama, always blaming Bush for- wait a minute...  2
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
Internet Webguy posted:
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 18:52
|
|
|
Somfin posted:At least our unscrupulous profit-driven corporate overlords come through on undocumented monetary promises Not having to make such promises is the point of a business-friendly regulatory culture. The regulators who don't cause any trouble for business then just happen to get paid well by the businesses after they retire. No explicit bribes required. Obama had an opportunity to not propagate that culture. Maybe it is totes innocuous in his case. Yet it still shows that money will be available to government people businesses like enough. And that even a president takes them up on the offer.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 19:01
|
|
|
Ah yes, the Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House, but it's the DEMOCRATS' fault that Trump couldn't get anything he wanted on the spending bill.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
 Hello, patriarchy!
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2017 19:11
|
|
