Brewster Rockit by Tim Rickard for November 01, 2010

Throw out the Demosocialists. Just have Republicans, Libertarians and a few independents.

(Nah, I don’t really believe that – I’m just trying to bring some balance …)

For once Cliff actually makes sense. All politicians are the same no matter what party they are with; they say whatever it takes to get into office and once there, they do what they wanted to do in the first place, despite what the people want.

Let’s fix it. Let’s vote The Rent’s Too bleeep High party!

Government is too important to leave to the vagaries of a popularity contest.

End political advertising. Candidates submit a resume, criminal background check, previous year’s tax returns, and a thesis on the current problems and how they plan to fix them.

The thesis for Incumbents should be on why they didn’t fix the problems they noted in their first thesis.

Oh, yes. And a drug test.

I am voting for NebulousRikulau

Don’t vote. It only encourages them.

(Lazarus Long, a creation of Robert A. Heinlein)

Heard an interview last weekend with a Brit; they purportedly don’t allow political advertising, and only six weeks of campaign. (I must assume debates - among all parties who wish to be heard - are covered as news. Remember news?)

With Nebulous’ screening, we might be onto something… And the drugs should be tested for purity, efficacy, and safety as well!

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Peter Townsend.

Pete Townshend’s the new boss??

I’m also with NebulousRikulau, though I might add a tweak:

Since I don’t believe any incumbent can ever solve the problems they intend to confront, I suggest the “Incumbent Essay” be a meditation on what they feel they have done, where they have failed, as well as what changes to their goals and/or strategies they would make.

And I would suggest all essays be banned from referencing their opponents at all.

The strip makes even more sense if you take the British interpretation of “bums”.

I bet Dirk Raider wins this time

Thank god this election is nearly over!

The problem with political jokes, is that once elected they almost impossible to get rid of.

if you don´t vote you have no right to complain over the result.

But one does still retain the right to laugh at the result.

It amazes me that people are interested in politicians tax returns. A much more relevant document would be their college transcripts. I would think that anyone with a GPA under 3.5 is totally unqualified to hold any political office.

Nebulous has the right of it.

The other quote that comes to mind was the one where we should make every effort to ensure that our lawyers are gainfully employed. Unemployed lawyers have a tendency to become politicians….

Tuesday is the Big Day in the U.S.A. SO EVERYONE GET OUT THERE and

I agree with Nebulous with one more thing added….

TERM LIMITS! We have them for POTUS, why not everyone else who’s making a career out of their position?

But Nebulous is only scratching the surface of the problem. If you really want to change politics you have to get at what really drives politicians: their deep rooted sexual urges. Power will always bring out the worst no matter how hidden it is. In Canada we got a guy called Russell Williams who proves that. If that sicko hadn’t got caught he would have gone on to politics eventually. How are you going to screen out sexual deviants from politics?

To Nelly55:

We already have a system of term limits in place. It’s called voting. Unfortunately, we live in a country where more people vote for American Idol and Dancing With the Stars than for positions that really matter.

What Nebulous is proposing is a system known in old science-fiction as “Meritocracy.”

The basic idea is that a political candidate would have to pass many tests with a suitably high score in order to gain office. Once in office he or she would have to submit to regular reviews/audits and pass new tests every so many years in order to keep the office.

At any time a suitable number of the populace could require re-testing and/or review.

Of course, the very idea of having capable and competent persons in office is abhorrent to both parties…

The reason people in power all act alike is they’re all facing the same problems, the same basic options, the same resources, and the same political landscape. For instance, in dealing with the economy, the difference between a McCain administration and an Obama administration would have largely been window dressing. Their biggest problems are unreasonable expectations and demands from a public that wants instant gratification. In the words of that great political philosopher Pogo, “We have met the enemy and they are us.”

Throw EVERYONE out. Choose a crusty old curmudgeon with a successful marriage and a successful small business to be king of the USA, and let HIM work it out.

You people keep looking at the trees and not seeing the forest.

Multinational corporations run our government. They pay to get the politicians elected, and when elected, lobby them them relentlessly to vote for the corporate interests.

That’s why “Washington is broken”, why “nothing changes”, why “all politicians suck”.

We need serious campaign finance reform - but the corporations won’t allow this, of course.

We need to start voting with our wallets - patronizing good corporations (Costco, for instance) and boycotting bad one (Exxon-Mobil).

I wonder if Bucky the Robot has any dirty laundry to be aired?

(This joke only works if you remember what Bucky really is.)

corzak, what you seem not to notice is that it’s not just corporations that pump millions or billions of dollars into the political process. If it were just “corporate” donations, do you think that the Democrats would be getting more money in every one of the categories listed in the link below?

http://www.opensecrets.org/parties/index.php

Note that the “Democratic Party” has raised half again as much as the “Republican Party.”

And in this link, check out the skew of “heavy hitters” and who the biggest hitters lean toward.

http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

I’m starting to think we need to have a basic civics exam before anyone could register to vote or file as a candidate. I dislike the fact that someone who doesn’t even have a clue about how the government works can vote and cancel a more informed vote. If each voter could name the 3 branches of government, and the powers alloted to each branch, as a bare minimum, I think we would end up with better office holders. I’m of the opinion that if a person can’t be bothered to study up on the issues and candidates, they shouldn’t be voting.

pdchapin, you are so right.

Heck with it - kill the bums - and is her glasses always fogged up?

MisngNOLA, apparently you haven’t been paying attention.

The Supreme Court’s Citizens United case 9 months ago allows unlimited and anonymous donations from corporations.

The Open Secrets website doesn’t reflect the 100s of millions in corporate donations that have come into the Chamber of Commerce, or Karl Rove’s “American Crossroads” group … because they are not OPEN secrets, they’re just plain secret.

We may never know which companies - or countries - donated to the Republican party this election. Nor how much.

corzak, so the unions will stop donating anonymously or otherwise because corporations can now donate as well? seriously, look at the top 20 in the heavy hitters on that list. how many of those are unions? they’re just going to redouble their efforts. it’s a never- ending spiral. unlike corporations, unions don’t have to earn a profit to continue to operate, they can just raise the dues their members pay, and also can accept anonymous donations from outside sources.