Support Ted’s Work

Love Trumps Hate…What?

“Love trumps hate.” It’s a cute bumper sticker and a cute T-shirt. But it’s a little rich coming from Hillary Clinton. Whether you support or oppose her, there’s no question that the one thing she doesn’t represent is love. The bombs that she voted to drop on the people of Iraq are not full of love. When she made jokes about watching the deposed dictator of Libya being disemboweled with the bayonet, she didn’t seem to be oozing with love. So what the heck are they talking about?

Ted Rall
Ted Rall is a syndicated political cartoonist for Andrews McMeel Syndication and WhoWhatWhy.org and Counterpoint. He is a contributor to Centerclip and co-host of "The Final Countdown" talk show on Radio Sputnik. He is a graphic novelist and author of many books of art and prose, and an occasional war correspondent. He is, recently, the author of the graphic novel "2024: Revisited."

9 Comments. Leave new

  • mhenriday
    October 19, 2016 2:46 AM

    I submit, Ted, that the problem, is not whether it’s going to be a stupid 4 – 8 years, but whether H sapiens sapiens will be around at the end of it….

    Henri

  • DanD
    October 19, 2016 8:44 AM

    T-rump … Billary ~

    Billary already has a fully functioning war-crimes cabal already hooked into the platitudes of power … Ferret-head would spend his first four years never quite getting up to speed. Upon coronation, Billary WILL punish all those “deplorables” who had caused her so much physical and mental distress during the campaign. To be her target for punishment, you needn’t to have even done anything against her … it’s certain social classes that she truly hates.

    While either choice is deplorable, which one will actually hurt us all the most? The orange-headed rube in the double-wide suit? Or the Kankled war-crook?

    DanD

  • CrazyH
    October 19, 2016 10:22 AM

    Slogans should at least sound like something the candidate would say. But we lost all grip on reality a long time ago. People don’t actually listen to the candidates, instead they project their hopes and fears onto candidates based on their party affiliation.

    Listen to the Trump supporters saying how smart he is, and what a nice guy he is behind closed doors. I was talking to one who is sure that as soon as Hillary is elected, the feds will swoop in and take all his guns. This, in spite of the fact that she’s never said anything of the sort and the obvious fact that nobody makes it to the federal level without the tacit consent of the NRA.

    Hilary has made noises about closing loopholes and keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn’t have them. Here’s a suggestion: anybody who obsesses over the possibility that the feds will take his guns away shouldn’t have them in the first place.

  • michaelwme
    October 19, 2016 1:16 PM

    According to the latest polls, President Clinton will probably have a Senate with 52 Democrats, but the Republicans can still stop all bills and Supreme Court nominations, unless they back down from their current position, where they have promised to do all they can to prevent President Clinton from doing anything. So President Clinton won’t be able to do as much domestically as Obama managed his first half-term when he had a Democrat Congress. Even after the Senate became Republican in ’10, they still confirmed two of Obama’s Supreme Court appointments, but that was then.

    Secretary Clinton has made some very reasonable promises about her domestic policies, promises she cannot keep, and probably would not have kept even if she’d been able to keep them. Bill and Obama promised to go green, but did not, and Bill abolished AFDC, which made life much harder for a LOT of people of both sexes, and he also removed the Glass ceiling on bankers’ profits. And Bill deported very few Hispanics, because he removed far more than any other president under administrative methods that were not technically deportations (including some Hispanics born in the US).

    Secretary Clinton has promised regime change in Syria, and, if Russia objects, regime change in Russia. Her advisers all agree that the Soviet military collapsed with the Soviet Union, and regime in Russia will be as easy as, or easier than, regime change in Libya. And the US president has full sovereignty over foreign policy, since the courts and the Congress have ceded all their authority over foreign affairs (of course, foreign affairs will also be Bill’s responsibility, but I’m sure he’ll also try to have as many American affairs as he can).

You must be logged in to post a comment.
keyboard_arrow_up
css.php