And Let the Bad Guys Win?

Progressives and leftists who protested Bush’s policies stopped complaining after Obama took office. Now they’re being urged to fight for his reelection–even though his policies are similar.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+Share on RedditDigg thisShare on StumbleUponEmail this to someone

21 thoughts on “And Let the Bad Guys Win?

  1. Turn to page 125 of “Attitude”: Matt Wuerker’s “The Codependocrats” shows a bunch of core Dem supporters listing the ways Clinton had betrayed them and concluding, “But how could we possibly vote for anyone else?” Same sh*t, different millennium … [by “sh*t” I mean the Clinton/Obama hypocrisies, not the cartoons – it’s tiresome having to spell things out, but this is the Internet]

  2. Albert. Do you really believe that it is different? I don’t know, seems the same to me, but to each their own belief. I guess your right in a way though, you probably wouldn’t want to let the bad guys win. I remember republicans used the same excuse for Bush don’t let the bad guy dems win. I guess people really are all the same, gonna protect their team no matter how evil.

  3. Pingback: And Let the Bad Guys Win? | A New Worlds in Birth

  4. That is different. They were the same subject, but they were completely different stories or a different detail of the same story that you made a cartoon on each time. The ones about how the left was duped by Obama and that they don’t protest him are basically the same story each time. There is nothing new, just the same old talking point.

  5. What happened to Nixon could happen again. Nixon did scandolous things (such as wiretapping) to insiders and people with money, power, and influence. Any time you screw with people who have money, power, and influence you stand to loose big no matter who you are. Wiretaping little people has always been okay, even durring the time of nixon. Go look at things like cointelpro and others.

  6. What happened to Nixon won’t happen again. . . they learn, Ted. Just think about what the NCAA did to SMU football in the late 80s….they actually punished them for breaking the rules, and it destroyed the SWAC and cost corporate college football at large millions…..and the NCAA hasn’t seriously punished any other program since…..even with what Nixon did, we had a republican back in in ’80…With Clinton, Democrats learned the game too, and they perfected it with Obama.

    Nothing else to do but crack open a cold one and watch the pageantry of a decaying system, kinda like the British watch royal weddings….then titillate over the royal divorces in the tabloids.

    • No, it won’t happen again. Back in 1974, they said “the system works.”

      The system is broken now. Lack of accountability for those who break the system’s own rules is one symptom of collapse.

  7. So….who’s being repetitive?

    The politicians? Or the peons that keep electing the same ones over and over again and expecting different results?

    Maybe once voters “get it” Ted can move on. In the meantime it needs to be said, as often as necessary.

  8. Um, no offense to you Ted, but to Albert… Ted’s cartoons were repetitive when Bush was in power too basically every comic was Bush in a military outfit talking about how fun killing was… Somehow I suspect you weren’t complaining about repetitive behavior then… I still don’t understand how liberals and conservatives, who even when they are far a part can either one support what the current gov’t is up to.

  9. You should post this at democraticunderground.com. However, it will no be there long. The cheerleaders, overdosed on Hopium, will take it down.

  10. I still think that an unelectable third party is the way to go. It does not cost anything more to set up if we use students who already participate in debating teams. All you need to do is set up the competitions to deal with real political issues and have the winning students participate in the political debates. High School students could debate local politicians while the college/graduate students could debate statewide and national candidates. The students would propose real issues and they would not allow candidates to evade providing real solutions rather than the simple answers to complex problems that currently decide elections. The benefits is a real political education for students and increased interest for parents who watch the debates and learn about real issues. If a candidate who wins an election does not follow through on his promises, students would make that an issue the next time he runs. Politicians would hate it and try to evade it but once started, the public would eat it up and the nice part is that anyone can get it started somewhere and let it snowball.

  11. It seems half of your cartoons recently have been basically “Bush was awful, but so is Obama and Democrats and liberals aren’t protesting him, so they are hypocrites.” That might be a fair message, but it’s really repetitive.

  12. If voting could change anything….

    Direct democracy anyone? Like why do we still need “representitives” anyhow huh? It ain’t the 18th Century anymore when communications could take weeks or months. They just figure we’re too stoopid to be able to know to vote on any issue that comes up? Or maybe they just want to hold on to power and the perks, and the money of course. I’d like to see some lobby group try to bribe hundreds of millions of us instead of a handful of politicians.

Leave a Reply