Friday Funnies: U.S. Supreme Court Trademark Decision


Chip Bok—Creators Syndicate

NEXT: Brickbat: But Crossfit Is Still Legal

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Um, this is accurate but not funny. Unless there’s some joke buried in Clarence Thomas weight-lifting…

    1. You are making the crucial-but-common mistake of looking for humor in the Friday Funnies.

      1. no shit…these are some of the worst political “funnies” I have ever seen. I really dont understand why reason publishes these :/

  2. OT.

    I don’t know what’s in Tennessee’s water, but we need more of it. I’m an overnight admirer of Congressman Diane Black.

    “Tuesday Group co-chairman Charlie Dent (R-Pa.) is gathering signatures on a letter asking Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to intervene in House Budget Chairwoman Diane Black’s plan to cut $200 billion in mandatory spending in the GOP budget.”…..get-240114

    1. “While fiscal responsibility and long-term budget stability is essential, requiring hundreds of billions ? as much as $200 billion by some accounts ? in budget savings from mandatory spending programs in the reconciliation package is not practical and will make enacting tax reform even more difficult than it already will be,” the draft letter reads.

      St. Augustine’s prayer updated for the RINO’s. Oh Lord, give me fiscal restraint, but do not give it yet.

      1. One would think that cutting spending would make tax “reform” easier.

        1. agreed…i dont understand stupid people :/

          Most shit spewed out is so devoid of any actual thought it is painful to actually listen to politicians speak.

  3. Too bad free speech is no longer welcome on this site. Most of my sargasms have disappeared down the memory hole.


      1. Wait, he was serious? I thought it was another euphemism.

  4. Yes, you little people are still free to whine about your treatment at the hands of your betters. But you still have no right to privacy, security in your home, to the fruits of your labors.

    But feel free to be as vulgar as you want and complain about your tax bill.

  5. There is no joke here. I’m not saying that the joke sucks, as is usually the case – there is literally no joke here.

    You’d think for a feature called Friday Funnies….

    1. The joke’s punch line will come later, when SCOTUS announces the addendum, “Free speech is still welcome here, BUT, compelled speech is now required with regards to gay weddings, but not Bible verses about how God hates fags. Applies only in Colorado, though… Anywhere else, you hafta come and see us again. Job security, ya know.”

  6. Is this the waiting line for tryouts to play the creepy-ass tricycle doll in the next Saw movie?

    1. Bingo! Yes, it is! However, all 9 members of SCOTUS are most excellently, even perfectly, castable as “… the creepy-ass tricycle doll in the next Saw movie”, as you say. The directors will have one HELL of a time, picking among the nine!

      So please don’t waste your time, applying for “the creepy-ass tricycle doll in the next Saw movie”… The Supremes have it all locked up!

  7. GORSUCH, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

    Just FYI.

  8. …just not on baked goods.

  9. I don’t know how I can feel good about a musical group openly mocking Chinamen.

  10. Upholding a trademark is not a free speech issue, since it’s about the power to exclude others from speaking in certain ways. Some elements of liberty, if vaguely stated, have to yield to others, if liberty overall is to be maximized. Property is a kind of limitation of liberty, and intellectual property is no exception. We gain more freedom on balance when our laws let us stop other people from doing certain things.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.