What's Mallard raving about today?
Congress, The Bailout.
Again with the "bailout" in quotes. I really wish Mallard would explain why he thinks this is only a figurative bailout.
Although I suppose if I were a brainwashed ditto-head, I'd already know.
Anyway, if only 134 members of Congress drop dead laughing, there should still be a quorum, right? And the least sympathetic members died of laughter, so all in all, this sounds like a good Opportunity for Small Business to get what they want.
11 comments:
Instead of laughing and/or dying, one might say, "Sure, but millions of people aren't dependent on Harry's Hoagies for business loans."
... Dang, I just gave myself a craving for a hoagie. A chicken torta with hot sauce, to be exact.
But aren't over half of American jobs in small business because the big businesses got tax cuts for moving jobs out of the country?
The comparison isn't very appropriate, in the case of small businesses one or more of them going down won't suddenly permanently remove American ownership of a major product manufacturing section. If American auto manufacturing goes under I don't think it's going to be able to start up again without a lot of help and I am skeptical of us being able to buy out VW, Toyota or another foreign company and make it one of ours. Not to mention that a major industrial sector going under is going to make a damn big ripple in the American economy.
Now, I'll be charitable and assume his complaint is about the fact that those being bailed out have big pockets and have large concentrated voting blocs. Whereas small businesses don't have the multi-billion dollar access for campaigns nor are they a massive united front the way that labor supporters or the auto-manufacturing sector is (where some cities or even states are based heavily on the existence of manufacturing plants). That's a side affect of political reality, if you have a large group of people moving in one direction that tend to vote in similar lines, you want them on your side. And campaign finance laws, which Mallard opposes, means that those with deep pockets are going to wield more power in policy.
It isn't nice, it isn't good, but it's what it is.
I'd love to know how ducky came up with 134 members of congress, and just which ones he envisions as dead.
Scare quotes on 'bailout' ruin the joke. Which, while not particularly good, would have been at least passable. Smooth.
Also, placing the gap before 'laughing'*, instead of after, further emphasizes ducky's lust for death and destruction. I get the feeling that the punchline was added as an afterthought, when ducky was informed that the current version would not be fit to print.
*Which should really read, 'of laughter', not 'laughing'.
I guess Bruce missed where Congress release $350 million to Obama, which plans on using in part FOR SMALL BUSINESS LOANS. Then again, this cartoon was likely drawn in September.
So now Mallard's making jokes about people dying. Classy.
Yesterday's comic should have said, "In this week's comic strip I will threaten 134 elected members of Congress!"
DaveyK, I just noticed there isn't a Walter Williams tag on Duck and Cover. SHAME ON YOU.
Aren't "New Year's Predictions"? supposed to be made before 2009?
What's next? Tinkley's going to predict the outcome of last week's Rose Bowl?
BUT: let's cut him a little slack. Today's strip warns that that up to 25% of a particular population can die laughing. This explains why, as a public service, he is never, ever funny.
Laughter can kill!
In 2009, the mass deaths of American legislators will give the Dems a filibusterproof majority in both houses of Congress, leading to a Bruce Tinsley drunk driving spree.
Good points, all. Conservative Republicans hate unions, and therefore want to replace the native auto industry with non-union Asian transplants. They also have nothing but contempt for small business, which makes the conservafowels cartoon incoherent. But Bruce the Duck is not smart enough to realize that.
Post a Comment