Willis seems to have kept overt politics out of the strip even when talking about Congress, do we need to start a feud in the comments? Remember, Ronnie was a Republican.
Ronnie, today, would be called a Commie Socialist Jew Gay Loving Baby Killer on his best day by the Fox media empire, (and “worse” by the real nutbars)
BURNANATING THE COUNTRY SIDES! BURNANATING ALL THE PEOPLE!!
Love that song!
Didn’t get the link right first time ^_^;;;
Oh you guys <3
*current* Republicans would be more accurate.
The arse-holes deciding to grind all other decision making to a halt untill, say, the rich get a tax cut’s shouldn’t be associated with republicans in general.
Sadly the worst is at the top.
Just to clarify my post there; My objection is not actually the extension of the tax cut itself, but rather that signing a agreement to not do anything else untill it was extended was a “dick move”.
GOGO Scarlet Empress
… or maybe Chejop Kejak
In an attempt to be original, here…
Robin should totally offer to be Leslie’s slave or something until Leslie’s happy again. Or punch a baby. That’s romantic, punching a baby to show someone you love them.
I think she should propose.
You can’t fix things by putting a ring on them.
You’re asking for that relationship for the rest of your life and if that relationship is “so babies” right now, you’re pretty much cursing everyone involved by making that broken state a commitment. That’s the wrong kind of commitment to babies.
Leslie said that Robin was her princess Leia, so she would be offering to be her slave Leia?
Would that make Leslie Jabba?
Jabba the Hot?
When she can focus, Robin excels at the grand romantic gesture (“Here, Leslie, have a house! Okay, I’ll kick out the girl I was crushing on before I met you. And I will look in your eyes and tell you that I love you and won’t leave you for anyone, not even Denzel Washington”). The problem is, she’s created a situation that such gestures won’t solve.
If she’d just slept with a stranger, that might have been fixable. Everyone has moments of weakness, and Leslie’s capacity for forgiveness has been nearly boundless. But first, Robin yelled at Leslie in a way that made Leslie believe Robin wasn’t happy with her, that all her earlier claims of love and contentment were lies– perhaps lies to herself as well as Leslie, but lies just the same. How can she convince Leslie otherwise now?
The YouTube message implies that Robin begged Leslie’s forgiveness after the video was released, and that was when Leslie kicked her out. So begging’s not gonna work. Acting clingy and desperate isn’t a turn-on for anybody, but the grand gestures would just feel like more lies.
I admit, I’m stumped.
By which I mean, there doesn’t seem to be anything Robin can do to improve things with Leslie at the moment. Maybe with time, an opportunity will arise. But this is as good a place to end things as any.
I have said this before, and I will stick to my guns; this will be solved via some sort of time travel mechanic, relating to Robin’s incredible speed; serving as a cautionary tale of what someone can lose.
Or… I was sure of that; I’m a little less certain now that Willis seems to be moving to resolve the World Peace thing through legislation. I suppose it’s just a fervent hope that we see less Sad Robin. She’s adorable, but damn it, it’s breaking my heart! ;.;
I really hope not. As Amber said, actions have consequences and I can’t see David pushing the “magic reset button”. He’s too good a writer for that.
That said, I do hope Robin finds a way to patch things up between her and Leslie.
All the better, I say. She began the relationship with the attitude “Eh, nobody with a penis will ever like me. This will have to do.” If she gets back together with Leslie, it ought to be for a better reason than settling for what she perceives she’s stuck with.
I don’t think it was that, it was more of a realization of who she felt happy and comfortable and caring around. I’m pretty sure Robin is smiling and laughing in the montage seen in the comic when she talks it over with Reagan, not like “eh, my lesbian likes me”. Who loved her was a minor detail if it even was considered.
She definitely cared about Leslie, but it seemed like she concocted the relationship more to make Leslie happy than herself. Tell me this – if she had an attractive, mature man pursuing her at the same time as Leslie, would Robin ever have gotten with Leslie? I suspect she would have dropped her like a bag of rocks.
Robin had some pretty big sexual reservations, which were unhealthy for the relationship. It seems to me that the relationship was founded on very shaky ground. It may be for the best that they both move on.
DO NOT WANT.
Punching babies is totally babies.
Eh, it’s Leslie’s fault the relationship broke apart. I wonder if anyone even knows Robin didn’t cheat on Leslie.
Fact: the relationship was already officially over before the release of the sex vid. Go back, re-read, find enlightenment.
Aye, and it seems as though it were Leslie that broke it off with Robin. Leslie said something along the lines of “Because I loved you, I let you go.” Of course, this isn’t 100% confirmation, but that’s my take on it.
Yeah, but that’s not the same as its being Leslie’s FAULT. What was she supposed to say? “Who cares if you’re happy, I won’t let you leave me?”
To your other comment, Robin has basically spent the series grappling with her sexual and relationship issues. After her interactions with Amber, Constance, Leslie, Joe, Ethan, Jacob and Jake, the evidence of her bisexuality is piled like deep-dish pizza. But she doesn’t have Drew’s hard-won laid-back attitude about it. She thought not having slept with a man meant something was wrong with her.
All that said, you’re right that it was a relationship initially born of convenience, and clearly it WAS on shaky ground to be torn down so quickly. Time and action will tell whether it’s to be rebuilt stronger than before, restructured as friendship, or left behind for good.
It would be interesting now to give Robin the OPTION of an attractive and mature man, versus the option of holding out hope for reconciliation, once the worst of her mourning has passed. Surely somebody’s got to be impressed enough by her record to date her at this point. And hey, is Joe single again? He sure acts like it. And he’s not quite “mature,” but he’s like a wealthy Ethan.
It seems to me that Leslie gave up on the relationship pretty quickly. Just because someone isn’t happy in the moment doesn’t mean you should just toss the whole thing away. Too much insecurity there, I think.
This is assuming that Leslie is the one that broke it off, though. My first comment was too presumptuous.
I like the idea with her meeting a compatible man – not sure about Joe though, looks like he still has a some issues to work out what with the librarians in his closet (born from his breakup with Rachel, mayhaps?)
*18 Months Later.* Well… Good call.
why is mike squinting?
He is in mourning, actually. World Peace drains on his Mike-ness, and makes him depressed, in an asshole way. He will be better once World Peace is gone.
Either that, or he’s caught the Faz from sleeping with Amber.
I think he’s just ignoring Robin because he doesn’t care about her or her problems.
Faz is her half-brother, and he creeps her out.
Mike would probably enable Faz to sneak in, in the dark, to just see the look on her face.
This is especially true, if she made him get all smooshy (which seems to be the situation since World Peace broke out).
World peace is the red sun to Mike’s Superman. Too much and he’ll be just the same as the rest of us.
at least she tried i suppose, but i prefer mike’s way of solving this problem: let someone else do it (not what i’d do, but i like it)
I can’t tell if it’s Robin that’s trying to force this “babies” thing into the social vocabulary, or Willis.
The answer is: yes.
It helps if you say it the way Skwizgar says “dildos”.
IT’S ALMOST AS IF WILLIS IS IN CONTROL OF EVERYTHING ROBIN SAYS!
Memes don’t create themselves, you know! At least Willis unpacked “That’s So Babies” for those playing at home. Some of these catchphrases are so inside a doctor’s required to figure them out.
…wait, am I meme-fishing now? I really don’t know.
Forcing babies into anything is cruel.
I guess that settles which party Sidney Yus caucuses with.
H.R. 2 is so babies.
All things politics is babies.
It’s just a bill. Yes, it’s only a bill.
And it’s sitting there on Capitol Hill
I’m an amendment to be, I’m an amendment to be
And I’m hopin’ that they’ll ratify me
There’s a lot of flag-burners who have got too much freedom
I wanna make it legal for policemen to beat ‘em
‘Cause there’s limits to our liberty
Least I hope and pray that there are
‘Cause these liberal freaks go too far
But what if they say you’re not good enough to be in the Constitution?
Then I’ll destroy all opposition to me
And I’ll make Ted Kennedy pay
If he fights back
I’ll say that he’s gay
Job killing? Hah.
I love the parlance of modern political rhetoric. And by love I mean political discourse goes full retard too much.
I guess it’s job-killing to those in the military industrial complex, and possibly the prison industrial complex. =/
Exactly…. With World Peace, the UN is ENTIRELY out of a job, as are all military, police, and technically, government branches… no FBI, CIA, Congress/Parliamentary Offices, Presidential/Prime Minister/etc Offices (who needs further laws… so technically Congress should have been debarred after that last term and Sydney NOT been sworn in…), all over the world… everything non Mercantile is now out of a job.
I can see that pissing a lot of people off and causing another war… therefore World Peace is a technical impossibility studied frequently in Philosophy Classes for that very fact.
Am I the only one who finds Amber’s little statement intensely ironic when said in the presence of Mike, who has practically dedicated his life to doing equally hurtful things to nice people and furthermore doing them with clear malice aforethought and with no purpose beyond his own cruel gratification? “Actions have consequences” my ass. Robin breaks one heart in the process of making world peace, and every one of her friends gives her the stink-eye. Mike is Mike, and he gets a lovely girlfriend who bangs him all day and night. So, yeah, sure, consequences. Just not necessarily rational ones.
Mike tends to do things that are physically hurtful.
Robin crushed the soul of someone who genuinely loved her.
Go get kicked in the nuts, and then have the love of your life break your heart.
I’m not defending Mike, but one cut is deeper than the other.
…Mike is worse. Seriously. Remember Dina? Dude was freaking brutal to that poor woman. And how about that little “metaphorical crotch kick” he orchestrated to destroy Amber and Ethan’s friendship and demoralize Robin? And, again, he did all of this on purpose, for no purpose. Robin was out of her head, and even so, she did it in the name of world freaking peace. I’d say that earns her a lot of slack. Has anyone thought about how hard this is for her? She’s lost a whole chunk of her memory and has to contend with popping up in a world where she’s suddenly guilty of crimes she can’t even account for. That’s just not fair, shaming someone for that. Granted, she put herself in the crazy juice, but no one could have guessed that something so tragic would be the result. She hasn’t even tried to defend herself, and her circle of friends are just rubbing it in! If Mike gets a free pass for some nebulous reason no one can identify, I say Robin’s earned a pass of her own. And anyway, Leslie’s not dead, y’know? Yeah, she had a raw deal, but time heals wounds. Robin’s going to at least try and make amends, right? Mike is not only unconcerned with atonement, he’s determined to continue attacking the world. So, yeah… he’s worse.
I’m not really disagreeing with you, but reactions vary with expectations.
My cousin is a crackhead. Literally, he smokes crack. He’s been in and out of jail since he was young.
Last year he stole a car and was arrested for carrying a concealed weapon in a shopping mall. The next time he’s a free man I’ll be in my 50′s.
Most of my family reacted with a shrug, and some sad disappointment. They kind of expect this.
My other cousin is a model citizen. Word got out that she missed a power bill. People lost their shit. They honestly acted like the sky was falling.
It may seem unfair, but it’s kind of relative. Not in the moral sense, but in how people react.
Well, I would point out that your cousin going to prison is, in fact, a consequence. Furthermore, his behavior harmed himself more than it harmed the rest of your family (forgive me if I’m mistaken, I’m sure this is a delicate subject and I want to be as respectful as possible). But my point is that Mike is different since he actively attacks those around him and actually rarely suffers any significant consequences whatsoever. But yes, basically, I guess we’re in agreement. It’s just galling to see the range of relative reactions to a negative action run such a wide gamut.
Dudes and Dudettes:
All those wondering how the United States of America passed WORLD PEACE ACT OMFG. NO MAEK SENSE!!!11!!1!!
It is a freaking webcomic. If you have nothing better to do that write an entire dissertation on why a webcomic is slightly illogical, well, that is your problem. Myself? I enjoy the current storyline, since it involves characters I have been invested in, emotionally, for many years. It makes OODLES of sense in relation to the plot.
Except we’re not talking about that, we’re talking about the massive difference in reaction between Robin cheating on Leslie and Mike…well, doing anything, frankly.
But with regards to suspension of disbelief: that’s not how it works. Just because things are strange in this universe doesn’t mean they don’t have to play by certain rules. Shortpacked! can have things like world peace through congress legislation for the same reason it can have things like Cadbury Cream egg cereal causing blackouts followed by wildly unexpected consequences and one store taking over another through the sudden appearance of holy text other crazy things–because the laws of this universe dictate it’s not horribly, horribly implausible.
That doesn’t mean everything gets a free pass and we just have to role with them. The problem with setting up precedent is that you need to follow through, and Shortpacked, generally speaking, has been good about depicting fairly rational and human responses to these occurrences. Which means we expect it to continue doing so, and when it doesn’t we have a right decide we have a right to bitch. Which is why people giving Robin shit over actions she had no control over, didn’t expect to happen, and clearly didn’t want when Mike continually damages people both physically and emotionally and gets a free pass from those around him–well, it just bugs us, and there’s nothing wrong with that.
Don’t get me wrong, I like this storyline too, but I can also see where people are coming from, and I feel your leet-speak mock of complainers is unjustified seeing as people here have been fairly rational with their complaints.
About Dina, I don’t remember her being all that nice. Yes, she was pleasant, although painfully shy with a low self esteem, but she was also rather manipulative. She broke up with Walky on his birthday because she couldn’t make him act like an adult. Then she kept Mike drunk to modify his behaviour (can’t remember how long, but an unhealthy length of time) and basically paraded him in front of everybody. Not that she was the only one at fault, I don’t think anyone was innocent in that situation. The whole thing was a mess.
Hell, what about all the things Amber has yet to receive comeuppance for?
I don’t think we really need to drag that shit up again.
An interesting sentiment coming from you.
But I agree. We really don’t need to have that argument.
Get your jabs in all you want, if it makes you feel good.
Mike gets a Tammy Wynette to stand by him as he’s an abusive and manipulative arse to all around him. Amber becomes a Tammy Wynette despite her Tragic Background with her Abusive Dad, while trying to convince people and herself that she’s Strong and Independent because he’s coerced Mike into a relationship.
…I guess this is a win-win?
Leave it to the politicians (both sides) to destroy World Peace, cause it supposedly kills jobs.
How many men and women do all the branches of the armed services employ? Out of work thanks to world peace. Guarantee they’ll go that route, or at least it’ll be part of it.
Even in peacetime, we have a huge military.
Sure, as a deterrent and to protect our embassies and such. World peace means even those functions are nil.
Uhh, in many countries, armed forces perform humanitarian tasks at peacetime, esp doing disaster relief. Which is not to say that war ending wouldn’t kill jobs in other more complex ways, but I’d say that no child ever dying again in an armed conflict is worth a economical crisis.
Yeah, but only if all the Governments in the world are completely stupid and completely abolish their military. Even during Peace Time, we have an active military, who would constantly training soldier and agents and everything, incase the World Peace would were ever to be threatened again. And then of course there are the smaller threats that police and military still need to handle, as well as natural global disasters and so on. And then there is the fact that while World Peace has been implemented for humanity, there are still those alien threats from the old comics that could pop up at any time which the military and governments have to be ready for.
So, yeah, no I’m pretty sure world peace wouldn’t kill Military employment.
world peace’s job killing would be wide spread and not just affect members of the armed forces. Just think of all the manufacturers that produce items for war, they would be out of business, which would then put a strain on all their suppliers, and so on and so forth. World peace would in fact destroy economies.
Also, think of all the “war correspondents” that would be unemployed.
1/ manufacturers usually produce other items than just weapons. Military researches are just usually way farther technologially speaking than the rest, so the civilian use are cheaper.
2/ manuacturers can still produce weapons for the NRA
If you say that, then you need to consider the job-creation aspects of a situation in which you have world peace. Trade goes up, economies can devote more to activities that generate robust production of goods and services, more nations are able to generate viable strong economies leading to new markets for products.
You have to look at the net balance of loss of certain industries with gains for others. Overall measures are all that matter. If you focus on only specific industries, almost all advancements of any sort are job killing. The existence of the Internet is job killing, the existence of computers are job killing, television is job killing, machines for manufacturing are job killing etc etc. Nevermind that all those things create *more* jobs in net, they still destroy entire industries.
Again, only if the Governments of the world were completely stupid. Just because you have world peace doesn’t mean you abolish your military and weapons programs. World Peace was legislation implimented by Robin. That doesn’t mean its going to apply to all aspects of life. What if the Big Head Aliens come back to Earth? They’re not tied to our planet’s rules and regulations. The Government are still going to have weaponry for such incidents that they know could happen.
And even then, during times of peace, the those same companies who made weapons, can put their efforts into other fields, creating even MORE jobs since, they don’t need to limit themselves solely to the creation of weapons only like before. It would only be if they threw their hands up and gave up that the jobs would go away.
Most companies can adapt to peace time, if they’re smart. If they not…
Nice characterization on Amber here. She’s trying to channel Ethan on his best day, but instead of saying “Leslie’s tougher than she looks, she’ll pull through,” she leads with “Maybe you DID emotionally lobotomize her, but hey…”
True, but the point is she’s trying when she’s shown and admitted that she’s not particularly fond of Robin. There’s something sweet about that.
Uh… for all his jabs at the left, I would say this one’s aimed pretty squarely at the Republicans. “Job-killing” is (tenuously) arguably true in the case of healthcare, in kind of a Ce qu’on voit et ce qu’on ne voit pas way, but even if it were true for world peace (which… well, it absolutely would be…), the idea of using it as a rationale to openly attack world peace after it had been achieved is a blatant stab.
Yeah, it’s a joke at the people who use the phrase.
Meh, I’m still a little fuzzy on how the US is supposed to have achieved world peace all by itself anyway.
Repealing the impossible? Not really as bad as repealing the impractical (and unread.) Course, if prior practice is any indicator, nobody in Congress knows what’s in the World Peace Law Act anyway.
I mean, it probably even has a provision requiring all businesses to fill out 1099s for everything they do, even though that has nothing to do with the bill’s purpose. And a takeover of student loans.
But no. That would be stupid.
And Jake, for that matter.
Per the first strip, Justin Bieber is getting the Nobel Peace Prize instead of Robin and Jake, so presumably he was instrumental.
(Possibly because he has even sillier hats than Congress?)
I think Abjuron said it best. We’re reading too much into it.
But maybe they just declared peace, even though there was none. Kinda like how Bush declared Mission Accomplished before the Iraq war was even half over.
DS, you know what was really stupid?
Instead of using rational discussion to oppose the health care bill, maybe people shouldn’t have went with the whole ZOMG OBAMA’S GONNA KILL MY GRANDMA!!!! argument.
As the opposition, it’s probably not a good idea to let the loudest argument be an outright lie.
Now before you go crazy and say I’m a racist or make some other Ad hominem, know that I don’t disagree with you on the 1099 thing. It’s not the best idea, and it could stand to be tweaked.
We probably don’t see eye to eye on the whole thing, since I don’t think the whole damn thing needs to be repealed.
There were rational arguments both for and against the healthcare bill, but the media prefers simplistic statements aimed at agitating the public. This isn’t limited to either party and sadly, it works all too well at obscuring the real issue at hand.
True, very true, but I wouldn’t lay all the blame on the media.
Also, lol @ your comments lower in the thread.
I don’t think it really needs to be (or can be) repealed either. But there’s a LOT of fixing to be done, and most of the cost could be rendered unnecessary with a few short moves.
Institute Texas-style tort reforms in every state. Instant 15% cut in premiums in the 47 states without tort reform. The only ones hurt are trial lawyers and the congresscritters they bought off. Tough for them.
Allow inter-state purchase of health insurance. This instantly lowers premiums by 20-60% for 85% of Americans. This also solves the problem of those who want to buy insurance but cannot find it as now they can find a state that will sell it to “anyone” (see Texas High Risk Pool). The only ones hurt are the special interest lobbyists who convinced this or that state legislature to mandate junk 98% of people never use (e.g., sex change operations).
There’s even a way to give Liberals the “public option” they desire without forcing it on the rest of us. Allow anyone to buy into Medicaid (no subsidies.) As long as taxpayers don’t have to pay for the public option, I have no problem with it.
The public option is optional. Like seriously, that’s even in the name.
It wouldn’t be “forced” on anyone.
Also, it isn’t just “liberals” who want the public option. Polls consistently showed the public option had massive support, going as high as 80% of the population.
So when anti HC reformers people are complain about Democrats “ignoring the will of the people”, keep that in mind.
But otherwise I agree with some of your points.
Tort reform wouldn’t save as much as you say, but I’m not against doing that.
The same with inter-state sales of insurance. But we might as well give it a go.
It’s not “optional” if I don’t have a choice whether or not to pay for it.
@DS. The reply buttons keep disappearing, So I had to respond to myself.
It was optional. And it wouldn’t even be available unless other forms of insurance were unavailable. Read:
If you’re going to claim it would be “forced”, then you need to explain how. Just don’t say something without backing up your statement.
Whoo yoo! Go Yus!
BURN IT UP! BURN IT UP! BURN IT UP!
I can’t really follow the chronology since robin ate the cadbury’s cereal. Nothing happened right? So somehow she blacked out AGAIN and then fucked the guy and taped it and then taped a message to herself and wiped out her memory again??
Seriously…if someone could just post a concise and easy to follow summary of what the hell happened, this confused reader would really appreciate it….thanks!
She didn’t actually wipe her memory. She was drunk on Cardbury Cereal and doesn’t remember what happened.
This works off the assumption that everything Leslie told Robin is true, and a bit of Occam’s Razor.
1) Robin eats the Cadbury cereal. This cereal puts her in a sort of trance. It increases her mental abilities, but when it wears off, she will remember nothing that happened during the trance.
2) Robin tries to use its power to legislate world peace, but fails, leaving her furious and frustrated. The cereal may have aggravated her emotional state, too: insufficient data there.
3) Robin goes home and digs out her notebook, full of dreams she’s decided she will never achieve. She stares at it, ignoring Leslie’s questions.
4) Robin takes both her short-term and long-term frustration out on Leslie, blaming her for those discarded dreams.
5) Leslie “lets Robin go.” This is a bit ambiguous, but it seems to mean she told Robin something like “If you’re not happy with me, then find what will make you happy.” This fight alone technically breaks their relationship, but if Robin had changed her mind immediately after it, they might have patched things up.
6) Robin goes back, seduces Jake Manley (it doesn’t seem like that’d be difficult), and sleeps with him on camera. Robin’s state of mind about Leslie at this point is uncertain, but she seems to have realized her mistake around the time of the loveless, not-really-life-changing sex act.
7) Robin saves the video for her future self, so she’ll know she had sex with a dude, and more or less what it was like (i.e., fun and all, but not really that special).
8) Robin mistakenly sets the video to “public” on YouTube.
9) It goes viral before Robin even gets back home. If Leslie doesn’t see it herself, she certainly learns about it.
10) By now, Robin has definitely realized she’s made horrible mistakes, and still can’t seem to solve the world peace problem.
11) When Robin gets back home, there is a second fight that ends in Robin being kicked out. Roz takes Leslie’s side in it. No word on exactly what was said. What is known is that Leslie changes the locks not long after that. (Remember: Robin bought the house, but Leslie owns it.)
12) Having lost everything important to her, Robin at last figures out the world peace problem. She apparently spends a bit more time with Jake Manley, enough to draft the Desanto/Manley Act. It’s uncertain where she’s living at this point. Perhaps with Jake?
13) Two events happen in uncertain order: Robin’s term of office expires, and she gives her final speech to the U.N.
14) Robin ends up sleeping in a cardboard box in Times Square.
15) The few-weeks-long Cadbury rush ends, and Robin wakes, remembering nothing from the moment she took her first bite of the first egg, back at the beginning of this sequence.
12½. Robin goes back to her SEMME clothing and records a private Youtube message to her future self.
Eep, good catch.
That 8) appeared in basically the best possible place.
Thank you, awesome job of summarizing.
Now, can you please explain the last three years of FAANS?
(just kidding ^_^ )
How did she keep wiping out her memory like that?
When you eat Cadbury cereal, you can do all sorts of weird shit until it wears off. Once it wears off, your memory of everything you did in between eating the cereal and the effect wearing off disappears.
Specifically, when Robin eats Cadbury cereal. I get the impression that the effect is due to the reaction of Robin’s super-speed powers and ADHD to a massive dose of sugar. If you or I ate it we would probably just get a tummy-ache.
She used to work with immune-to-mindwipes Walky. Maybe she picked up a few tricks.
Wow. What freaks me out is that this general scenario (seemingly impossible life-changing legislation being potentially repealed) is actually playing out right now, where I live. If I didn’t know Willis was in Ohio, I would actually wonder if this wasn’t an ironic reference.
It’s happening at a federal level right now. This is specifically a reference to the ‘Bill to Repeal the Job-Killing Health Care Law’.
Dun dun DUNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!
I like that Amber is being a bit of the friend Robin needs right now. (Slightly forced, but at least she’s sticking around.)
I get it. They’ve formed a club of cast members who have toys/statues of themselves.
OH MAN are you taking a POLITICAL STAND? And um hey if just a breakup totally reduces Leslie to an empty shell she SHOULD NOT DATE. Let alone spend a lot of time convincing someone to date her. Geez.
Good thing Leslie only dated Robin. Imagine if they built a whole life together!
You mean, like buying a house and all?
That would be terrible.
Better to have loved and been reduced to an empty shell than to have never loved at all, I believe is how the phrase goes.
All hail Discordia.
People tend to overlook how damaging this bill probably is. It may be utopia for some people, but i’m sure it bites alot of people in the ass. For one thing, pony farmers are being forced to close down because the bill enacts regulations that make them have to sell their stock at next to nothing just so toy companies can give them away for free. Couple that with who knows how many other ‘Common Sense’ reforms that probably DO kill alot of jobs all in the name of ‘greater good’.
Yeah, I find this reference to RL a bit of a slap in the face because of the actual problems with the HC bill. But I try not to let it get too much because Willis needs an excuse to undo the crap Robin caused, and this is a good way to return to mostly status quo. The only problem I have is that it equates the HC bill to ‘global peace’, when it is far from. But hey, it’s just a webcomic… I’ll be a bit miffed through this part likely, but once he gets away from politics again, i’ll be laughing and enjoying once more.
Yeah, the HC bill isn’t perfect. It should have included the Public Option.
But it’s a step in the right direction.
Samuel, of course the HC bill isn’t perfect. It wasn’t even a step in the right direction. You don’t put together 2000+ pages on a simple bill that lowers costs.
That bill was a massive bureaucratic overhaul that raises prices on everyone. They could have just given the current bureaucracy better tools to fight fraud, and allow sales of insurance across state lines, as long as such sales meet state-mandated requirements would’ve dropped costs. Improving tort reform to reduce frivolous law suits which drive up medical malpractice insurance would’ve dropped costs too.
“That bill was a massive bureaucratic overhaul that raises prices on everyone. ”
See, this is the problem with the whole HC debate. You just preface your argument with some factually unsupported hyperbole. This leads me to believe having a rational discussion with you is fruitless.
Also, one more thing:
“They could have just given the current bureaucracy better tools to fight fraud”
I always wonder why people bring up the length of the bill as a negative. Did we just need a single page that said “MAKE FIX” and expect that to work?
Here: http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf Download and look at the actual bill. Very little information is on each page, due to the need to format it for easy reading and review. BUT OH NOES TOO LONGS CAN’T READS MEANS BAD
When a bill is too long for people to even read before voting on it, that becomes a problem for it’s length. Couple with that that much of the length is composed of additional regulations which will only further hinder corporations and discourage business growth, complicate health care with the addition of mindless bureaucratic legislation that most doctors agree will only make health care service worse.
It’s not a fix. It was never intended as a fix. It’s a spread of Government control into a large part of the American economy, instituting additional legislation and unconstitutional requirements upon the American people. If they had been looking for a fix, they could have worked with the republican party and gotten something with bits of good from both sides. Instead, it was a one sided bill from the beginning, that had to be chipped down and loaded with earmarks and payoffs to even get enough democrats to vote for it.
The problem is, we’ve seen how government involvement results. In Social Security, in Medicare. Our current economic crisis has a large portion to blame on the government regulating banks and forcing them to make bad decisions, and now they’re going to do the same with our health care.
Now, all the republicans are doing is calling to get it shut down before we get everything in worse shape, so they can work on fixing the bill and passing something more agreeable. They agree there are good parts in the bill, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t more damaging parts that need to be prevented.
Heck, businesses already are being allowed to not have this law applied to them because they prove its going to hurt jobs. Shouldn’t that alone be evidence that something is wrong? Why do some people get saddled with it, while others don’t? Who decides who gets punished, and who gets a free by?
I remember when child labor laws were “a spread of government control into a large part of the American economy, instituting additional legislation and unconstitutional requirements upon the American people.” Explain to me why any government control is automatically considered bad by default, especially when the alternative is corporate control.
Do you know why the health care bill is “job-killing”? Not because it actually kills jobs, but because people won’t have to work as many hours to be able to afford their healthcare. It’s a decrease in labor, not a decrease in jobs: http://factcheck.org/2011/01/a-job-killing-law/
“they could have worked with the republican party ”
umm…they did, for a year.
Just because the republicans keep saying this doesnt make it true. The bill took an insanely long time due to constant compromise’s made to try to get the republicans on board.
Job-killing is a lie too.
“was a large portion to blame on the government regulating banks and forcing them to make bad decisions,”
The economic problems is to do with loans being sold for miss-represented values, as well as more complex systems of slight of hand with money.
To blame it on too much regulation and to claim they were “forced” is just nuts.
Banks were making money from nothing, put simply, and of course it wouldnt last.
They’re just trying to poison the well. That’s a lot easier than actually debating the merits of the bill.
Besides, 2000 pages isn’t that long. If I was a congressman with a full time staff, and it was my job to know what was in the bill, I could work through the bill over the weekend.
What was funny was the republican complaining that the bill was too long to read, then complaining about specific provisions of the bill. Which kind of implies they read the frickin’ bill.
Also, two things about these comment boards. It doesn’t let us respond enough. It’s irritating to not be able to come back with counter arguements to a dishonest statement. Second. It doesn’t let us respond too much (in this case a good thing). XD It’s just a comic, and not a place to get into a heated political debate.
:3 sorry, just wanted to comment on how this is both an extremely annoying aspect, and an extremely ingenious aspect.
Sorry Malcolm, your argument is too long for me to read, therefore I reject it.
If anyone really wants to have this conversation in a pseudo-acceptable forum, there’s a great little underappreciated Facebook group by the name “I’m All For Obama’s Death Panels Provided They’re Run By Quintessons” which should suffice.
Im sorry.. But when were child labor laws a spread of government control? Seriously, Willis. I had alot of respect for you until you pulled that. Then again, who am I? Just some random guy off the internet so you don’t have to have (or probably even care about having) my respect, but its a personal issue.
Congratulations, no more commenting from me.
Child labor laws were a spread of government control because the GOVERNMENT MADE IT ILLEGAL TO HIRE CHILDREN. They imposed restrictions on businesses. They expanded their control to who businesses can and can not hire.
It’s very simple.
Just because salt is essential for life. it doesn’t mean that you should swallow it by the spoonful.
It seems likely to me that the bill went the simple route of outlawing scarcity (and possibly the second law of thermodynamics, though I’m not sure about that). Absent scarcity, there is no shortage of ponies, and any people who raise ponies don’t need payment for them at all because they already have everything they need. See? Simple.
That actually does make more sense.
If people remember, Robin cured cancer by making it illegal
Oh my god, I hate that smiley
I don’t think the cancer ban passed.
DAMN YOU WILLIS!
The horrible thing is, peace probably would be seen as unprofitable for many.
Unprofitable and unfulfilling. Since this world peace is very vague, we don’t know how it came about. ‘World Peace’ in this case could actually be very hurtful to people, or only beneficial to some while a hindrance on many others.
Just gonna have to see how this plays out.
Or…maybe it’s just a plot device in a by-and-large character-based webcomic?
That said, the discussion here is at least less insane than the one on genocide and torture here http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=146041
That’s pretty much what this comic is right now. I think it should be on TVTropes at this point actually.
It’s going to get even worse.
Weirdly, I was reading this last night:
I’m praying that Robin doesn’t end up as an example of that; though in her case it would be self-inflicted.
Janette, the Walkyverse has its own TV tropes page.
And I recently split SP! off onto it’s own page:
Well, I just spent a good half hour reading through that…
There was an era referred to by some historians as the Pax Americana. It ran from just after the Civil War to just before our entrance into WWI.
One particularly appropriate paragraph:
“The modern Pax Americana may be seen as similar to the period of peace in Rome, Pax Romana. In both situations, the period of peace was ‘relative peace’. During both Pax Romana and Pax Americana wars continued to occur, but it was still a prosperous time for both Western and Roman civilizations. It is important to note that during these periods, and most other times of relative tranquility, the peace that is referred to does not mean complete peace. Rather, it simply means that the civilization prospered in their military, agriculture, trade, and manufacturing.”
Look I’m sorry but everything that’s ever been accused of being “job-killing” has been guilty of it. Even the democrats agree, they just think starvation is a more important issue than unemployment. Then again, the democrats I talk to think Obama’s a socialist and they -like him for that-, so maybe I shouldn’t use them as examples..
On one hand I’m thinking you can’t possibly be serious.
On the other absurdity seems to be the status quo these days.
You just broke my sarcasm detector.
I’d keep that link handy. You might have to repeat it a few more times by Monday.
Now it’s time for beer for me.
Nice rebuttal at the end.
FactCheck.Org and the other proponents of the law are assuming that it will save money because of the expected massive cuts to Medicaid and Medicare.
Since I pay for my own health care, I am not currently on enough drugs to allow me to believe that those cuts are ACTUALLY going to happen.
A. Factcheck is not a proponent of the law.
B. Do you know how I know you didn’t read the article? It says what you said at the end.
1. The objective journalist is a myth. That said… yeah, I gramar failed.
2. I’m repeating it, because everybody else is taking the Ostrich approach, and ignoring that salient fact. The plan will not save money, because it makes clearly incorrect economic assumptions. (Like when Democrats claim that Clinton left Bush with a “surplus” that only existed if you assumed perpetual rosy economic growth. Which never happens.)
The surplus claim wasn’t based on speculation. It was based on historical data.
DS, I may not agree with all of what you say, but up to this point you have conducted yourself in a way I can respect.
I’m going to assume you were mistaken rather than blatantly making something up.
Also, since this thread is a few days old, I will be moving on after this post. Also, this work week will be busy for me, so I won’t have a lot of time to respond.
Feel free to respond, but I probably won’t be checking for updates most likely. However, despite our differences, I appreciate the way you conducted yourself during this discussion. Usually internet debates just turn into bitter flamewars. Thank you for helping to keep things away from the playground mentality that dominates most current discourse.
This is not self pity, but I am probably the *least* popular person who comments here, next to that guy who rapes dogs. So thank you for sticking to the debate rather than resorting to name calling.
I’ll stop fellating you now. See you around.
EVERYTHING puts SOMEONE out of a job…. The question comes to the point of ‘who’s job should ideally not even exist?’
No one’s been able to answer it without pissing off a majority yet.
Sad thing is you’re totes right.
I really hate seeing people having huge butthurt arguments about hypotheticals, though. How often does everyone have to be wrong before we give up trying to predict the future or reconstruct the past?
Also I just said totes. I’m gonna go die now.
How’s there even still a government if there’s world peace? I mean everyone knows those things are nothing but trouble and would screw it up.
Always nice to be reminded how even the very misinformed read this comic.
Still, they could be worst, at least we haven’t seen any “Birther” arguments…
Nice job breaking it, hero.
Now a Trope.
Mike’s face- “She’s learning!”
Sometimes, just a hug will do.
Oh, hey, consequences!
Everybody take a–
…that doesn’t really work here, does it.
NAME — Get a Gravatar
NOTE - You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
©2005-2013 David Willis | Powered by WordPress with ComicPress
| Subscribe: RSS
| Back to Top ↑