Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau for July 21, 2013

And then go to the Senate and watch Harry Reid continue to not pass a budget!

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again (until it gets done) the repubs have taken a lesson from the dems playbook. Change things by persistent drips until you weary everyone of their resistance and they go along just to get rid of you. Thrity-three you say, I’m looking forward to the big 100. Now there’s a milestone you can celebrate.

Sometimes it’s more important to kill bad bills than to pass good ones. I think that’s a quote from Socrates…and something about hemlock…but I forget the rest.

No relation, just a life-long fan. I loved his Uncle Scrooge stories back in the 50s when I was just 8 and had no idea who he was. I met a Barks collector in the 70’s who clued me in. I have a big coffee-table book of his stories. My real name is similar, so Barks seemed perfect for my user name for a comics website.

I misspoke creating some confusion. Perhaps I should have said…Sometimes it’s more important to kill bad laws than to pass good ones. I believe that if not for a super majority in both Houses of Congress the original Bill would have been read, debated and would never have passed in it’s present form. If not for Harry Reid the House Bill would be brought to floor and perhaps Senators would lay aside their egos and vote their conscience to repeal or modify the Law to some workable form. The Law, as such, is unaffordable and unmanageable. Of course, such a bill would be vetoed at the Executive level but I suspect in 2016 either of the parties holding that office will see the sanity in approving such legislation.

I’ll betcha none of the folks who comment on the ACA have read it. Am I right? Probably including most of Congress.

“Dueling Agendas” The epitome of progress!Ain’t it great, folks?

They had to read it to know what is in it.

Now they know what is in it. Mostly……

Socialism

Socialism is where you eventually run out of other peoples money. Kind of like Detroit. Although there are more factors.

That’s pretty much who runs. Or they will be after they get in…

How about Dog Barks? And his cousin Tree Braks?

The less the congress does, the better. all its supposed to do is regulate interstate commerce and provide for national defense. Unfortunately for the US it read far to much into that regulate commerce clause.

I like them voting as above!! At least then they are not spending money we don’t have, which is their real job.

An ironic requiem for and outmoded and outdated point of view:

This must be an old cartoon. Since, according to Mr. Boehner, there are currently no other real pressing issues facing the United States, so I’m sure congress has pushed passed the 100th symbolic vote to repeal Obamacare by now! Next on their historic agenda? Well, again according to Mr. Boehner, there is a no more pressing issue than (symbolically) repealing Obamacare!! You go John!!

Personally, I think that congress and the Republican Party should follow Detroit’s lead and declare (Moral) Bankruptcy!! Of course, that symbolic vote won’t garner many “Yea” responses from the Republican side of the aisle. No one in the Republican Party knows what the word “moral” actually means.

All laws should have a mandatory end date – that way bad laws will just fade away. It would also give congress something to do – reinstating the few good laws that go defunct.If we keep them busy, they stay out of mischief.

Of course the republicans never read the ACA; why waste precious fundraising time reading something you know you’re voting against anyway?And the bush tax cuts had an expiration date. How’d that work out?

that is how the checks and balances are supposed to work – give the Dems their head and they would spend us to oblivion. Why pass legislation that the people don’t want? Isn’t that what a republic does – represent the will of the people?

Obviously, since Mr. Trudeau is missing the point, the House should keep on trying to kill the monster.

Quick Constitutional Lesson: It is the responsibility of the House of Representatives to create a fiscal budget with advice and evaluation of the Congressional Budget Office, and send it to the Senate to accept, reject, or send back to the House with suggested changes. The responsibility for initiating the Federal Budget starts with the House Ways and Means Committee, and the Chairman of Ways and Means is de facto and de jure the most important and responsible member of Congress. How many people know the name of the Chairman of House Ways and Means? The House has been derelict in their duty, and maintaining their duties and is responsibility of the Speaker. No, legislation has devolved into another circus to keep us distracted from the Clown Brigade working for the very few. The Senate and President can, and often do, request specific programs funding levels. The Senate Finance Committee also has access to the Congressional Budget Office as the House Ways and Means Committee. The President uses the Office of Management and Budget in a similar manner as the House of Representatives and the Senate have the advise of the Congressional Budget Office.So the real question is why the House will not put together a viable budget acceptable to the Senate and President, that would withstand scrutiny by the Judicial Branch.

41 times now, not 33

Why can’t Reid and Obama pass a budget? 5 years, soon to be six, then seven…I didn’t know utilitarians were against budgets and goal setting.

Watch Congress act again and again……Like Idiots!

I guess it was 33 times that the symbolic vote was taken when this strip was first printed. It has now been 38 times.

I’m not saying it necessarily applies, but sometimes it is better to do nothing than to do a bad thing..Progress isn’t measured by the number of laws passed, but by whether or not those laws did good things or bad..If the question at hand were one of jumping off a cliff,

delay might be the order of the day until sanity be restored..

“Why we should have the right to vote “NO” a negative vote. Lousy candidates should not win by default.”

See? Now this is the Night-Gaunt49 I know and dearly love. -I believe every voter should be empowered to vote “NO” against any candidate that voter considers totally unacceptable. Sometimes either candidate or any of the six running would be acceptable to you. Sometimes all but one would be acceptable. You could still vote for the one you favored but reject up to all the rest if you wished or vote separately to reject each and every one.-If the winner still had a clear majority of the votes, he or she would be elected. If any had a plurality but more than 50% voting “NO”, then their candidacies would be considered rejected and the winner would be the one with the most votes who did not also have more than 50% rejection rate.-If all failed to be acceptable to the majority of the voters, have another election with the previous candidates rejected from running that time.-It would give encouragement to those who refuse to vote because they don’t like any of the candidates and would reduce the election of the “lesser of two evils.” Every vote would count one way or the other..We might even get better public servants

Slow reasoning – badSlow cooking – good:-http://www.deepsouthdish.com/2012/01/slow-cooker-pork-roast-with-vegetables.html?m=1

Mr Trudeau, do have the courage to criticise the assassin in the White House?As per Obamacare, the insurance giants love it. What a boondoggle!

When the rich get richer, the poor get richer as well.

Do they? How?Evidence?

“Food stamps, Section 8 housing, earned income tax credit’.All signs of wealth? So rich people aspire to these things, too? That must be why I saw the Koch Brothers in line at the project.

the more time both parties waste on theater, the less both parties are screwing us over.