New at Reason
Comments to "New at Reason":
Episiarch | October 19, 2007, 8:38am | #
Hey, a Bok cartoon that isn't inscrutible. Niiiice.Pelosi looks like a deer in the headlights partially because her face has been surgically pulled back like Katherine Helmond in Brazil.
Syloson of Samos | October 19, 2007, 9:11am | #
Haven't approval numbers for the Congress traditionally been low? If so, why all the fuss about the current state of affairs?dbust1 | October 19, 2007, 9:18am | #
Recognizing the Armenian genocide? Yeah, that'll accomplish something. How about enacting legislation? How about actually working towards an end to the Iraq war? How about trying to figure out how the Canadian dollar has gained parity with the American dollar? How about doing anything useful as opposed to voting on non-binding resolutions?x,y | October 19, 2007, 9:18am | #
As much as I hate nonbinding resolutions, the less legislation Congress passes, the better.ed | October 19, 2007, 9:31am | #
Next on the agenda: Canadian harp sealocide.We're gonna piss off some hosers big time, eh?
Taktix® | October 19, 2007, 9:37am | #
dbust1,I find that, like x,y said: the less legislating, the better.
In addition, I really don't care a lot about non-binding resolutions, but I was enraged when I saw Glenn Beck denounce the resolution because "it would kill our troops." And I like System of a Down...
How about actually working towards an end to the Iraq war?
Ha! Good luck with that...
How about trying to figure out how the Canadian dollar has gained parity with the American dollar?
It's called economics, and the dollar being worth a little less than it used to is not necessarily a bad thing.
How about doing anything useful as opposed to voting on non-binding resolutions?
Double Ha! This is Congress we're talking about here...
dbust1 | October 19, 2007, 9:55am | #
Taktix®,I guess tongue-in-cheek comments get lost in translation in this forum. So, I'll be blunt:
1) The less legislation from ANY Congress the better, but this Congress seems more willing to expend energy swatting at air instead of useful work (i.e. lower taxes, shrinking gov., etc.)
2) The Armenian resolution wasn't about Armenia at all (as reprehensible as the whole event was that "resolution" was a slap in the face to Armenians). It was less useful than giving every descendant of a slave in America a fiver and saying "Hey, sorry about that whole slavery thing."
3) I know it's called economics smart ass, but how can an economy based upon maple syrup, flannel and moose meat support a currency equal in value to our own?
Finally, I used to like S of a D as well, but I grew out of it. Nothing wrong with liking their music or the music itself, I just don’t like them anymore. I do listen to punk and I’m sure you know that most punk bands are wannabe political activists. I personally hate it when any entertainer (musician, actor, athlete) “takes a stand” on an issue. They have no place in political discourse since all they give off is one sided white noise. They are as useful as a wind up monkey banging cymbals together.
BakedPenguin | October 19, 2007, 10:49am | #
...how can an economy based upon maple syrup, flannel and moose meat support a currency equal in value to our own?You're forgetting beer. Beer! Anyway, it's not necessarily about the economy perse, it's about the (respective) dollars.
With our massive budget deficit, people in other countries (and here as well) see inflation as a real threat. With the impending threat of inflation, they don't want to hold dollars, so it keeps falling, even against a (formerly) pathetic currency like the loonie.
VM | October 19, 2007, 11:12am | #
dbust 1:what's wrong with moose meat?
and what do you think the issues are with the USD and the CAD having parody?
What are the economic (macro and micro) issues supporting your thinking?
dbust1 | October 19, 2007, 11:21am | #
My god, I'll say it again. TONGUE-IN-CHEEK.VM | October 19, 2007, 11:33am | #
MOOSE MEAT???HOW IS THAT TONGUE IN CHEEK?????
plus you have to explain the economics behind your worry of point number three.
dbust1 | October 19, 2007, 11:55am | #
I will not "explain the economics behind (my) worry of point number three" because I have no worry based upon the value of the dollar vis-à-vis the loonie. I was merely pointing out some of the issues* that Congress could address other than non-binding resolutions. If they were truly interested in serving the best interests of the people (which, I know, is a hilarious notion) then they would address those issues in a non-partisan manner.And if you don’t see how stating that the Canadian economy is based upon moose meat is tongue-in-cheek then get your ass away from the computer and start looking for wherever you lost your sense of humor.
*as heard in the media (print, radio or tv)
dbust1 | October 19, 2007, 12:02pm | #
Tongue-in-cheek: spoken with gentle irony and meant as a jokeSynonyms: lighthearted, insincere, ironic, humorous, whimsical and flippant
Antonyms: serious
BakedPenguin | October 19, 2007, 12:07pm | #
dbust1, you must be a newbie here. 'VM' is short for 'Viking Moose'.Can't speak for him, but I'm pretty sure his comment on Moose Meat was a joke.
As for me, I've said it before, I'll say it again: maple-sucking puck slappers. They've been getting uppity ever since they replaced that damn pink queen bill with the loonie coin.
dbust1 | October 19, 2007, 12:12pm | #
Yup, Im a bit new here so I didn't know "VM" was short for 'Viking Moose.' Ummm, so VM Im not saying that cannucks are eating "your kind" or anything... So, now do you see how it was all tongue-in-cheek?dbust1 | October 19, 2007, 12:34pm | #
VM,That's it! I'm stopping on the way home tonight and buying moose meat. I'll post grizzly pics on Monday.
Ben Rushing | October 19, 2007, 3:14pm | #
Good job reason, finaly annother good comic an improvement from the last 4 weeks.Fang | October 21, 2007, 12:29pm | #
Condemn the Spanish Inquistion next. Nobody expects that!