Recent Comments

1. about 16 hours ago on Kevin Necessary Editorial Cartoons

   It’s baffling how “liberals” decry the arguments used in justifying slavery in 1864, but use those same arguments in justifying a woman’s right to kill her offspring, in denial of all scientific information now available.

2. about 19 hours ago on Matt Davies

   But it is inaction by a Democrat controlled Senate, so it doesn’t count./s

3. about 20 hours ago on Steve Kelley

   I guess you haven’t been reading what anyone else has been saying about the fraud charges.

   “An Associated Press analysis of nearly 70 years of civil cases under the law showed that such a penalty has only been imposed a dozen previous times, and Trump’s case stands apart in a significant way: It’s the only big business found that was threatened with a shutdown without a showing of obvious victims and major losses.

   Lawyers for the state in Trump’s months long civil trial have argued that the principles of fair play in business alone are enough to justify a harsh penalty, but even they aren’t calling for the prospect of liquidation of his businesses and properties raised by a judge. And some legal experts worry that if the judge goes out of his way to punish the former president with that worst-case scenario, it could make it easier for courts to wipe out companies in the future.

   “This is a basically a death penalty for a business,” said Columbia University law professor Eric Talley. “Is he getting his just desserts because of the fraud, or because people don’t like him?”

4. 2 days ago on Ted Rall

   Not to mention that in Chicago no blank ballots would be turned in, as certified by the vote counters who filled in the blanks.

5. 2 days ago on Steve Kelley

   You’ve just demonstrated why Trump will probably get acquitted. When the judge(you) thinks it’s murder when the killer cannot run away from the victim fast enough, you know the accusations are phony.

6. 3 days ago on Michael Ramirez

   From CBC on March 5th, 2022

   “As for the current Biden administration, it, too, has been subject to bipartisan criticism for dragging its heels on military aid to Ukraine. In early December, 22 House lawmakers wrote a bipartisan letter to Biden, urging him to immediately provide the military aid requested by Ukraine — including Stinger and Javelin missiles, drones, electronic jamming gear, radars, ammunition and medical supplies.

   In a recent article in The Atlantic, Alexander Vindman, the former director for European Affairs for the U.S. National Security council, criticized the administration for refusing to provide advanced weapon systems to Ukraine, such as Patriot anti-aircraft missiles, because it had determined that Ukraine’s armed forces were not sophisticated enough to handle them.

   “Although Ukraine would have struggled to realize the full potential of these systems, they could nonetheless have affected Russia’s calculus for military operations,” Vindman wrote."

7. 3 days ago on Mike Luckovich

   You mean like they’re resisting his forever war in Ukraine now?

8. 3 days ago on Mike Luckovich

   There you go projecting again! Chamberlain, like you, thought Hitler was much stronger than he actually was, so he sought time through appeasement. If Biden had placed American troops on Ukraine’s side of the border and let Putin know he would also be fighting America it is likely Putin would have huffed and puffed and settled for the ground he had already won from Ukraine. If he still tried to invade, It is likely we would have massacred his troops and convinced his generals to replace him.

9. 3 days ago on Mike Luckovich

   What really diminishes your argument is saying something idiotic, like Putin’s army would suddenly be able to perform the Wehrmact’s blitzkrieg tactics against NATO while bumbling against Ukraine for two years and a half million casualties.

10. 3 days ago on Michael Ramirez

    Biden did not stop him, Biden offered Zelensky an escape plan. Zelensky stopped Putin, and only after that did Biden try to help him against Putin.