Ahhh, the GOP is in the hot seat. Whether you think Republicans are responsible for the election of Donald Trump or the DNC and the Clinton campaign are (or the Russians, or Bernie Sanders), clearly the Republican Party is the only one that can and should make sure there is checks and balances with our new President.
The GOP hatches a plan. Yet it seems to continually backfire. (With apologies to Dr Suess and Horton Hatches an Egg). Last summer when Donald Trump was first running, the GOP figured he was a flash in the pan candidate who would fizzle out. But they figured they could use his celebrity to their advantage and made him pledge that he would support whomever became the Republican nominee and wouldn’t seek a third party run. Six months later, Trump is commanding the lead in the run to the nomination and Republicans are backtracking in droves.
One time candidate Marco Rubio stated “I still at this moment continue to intend to support the Republican nominee, but it’s getting harder every day.”
So will we end up with a brokered convention that could spell the end of the Republican Party as one entity? Will two sub parties emerge? So as the cartoon says, the GOP is holding to the pledge
“I meant what I said,
I said what I meant.
I’ll support Trump’s nomination
one hundred percent….
unless I destroy both of us in the process.”
So I finally decided to update my banner ads that might reflect two of the core areas of focus for Bearman Cartoons. Politics and Pop Culture.
I love how the politics one turned out but not sure if I should have made the pop culture one animated or not. Thoughts?
(BTW this is just the Skyscraper 160×600 but also made a Leaderboard (728×90) and a Banner Ad (468×60) that you can check out on the Banner Ads Page
I have stated on the web months ago that the Tea Party Movement needs to keep in check the fringe element that continues to attend their rallys spurring hatred versus discourse. And with the Republican party leaning heavily on the momentum of the Tea Party, they have not done a good enough job vetting the folks that claim to be a part of it.
Now we have stories of people in Tea Party protests yelling “nigger” as Rep. John Lewis walks by among other things. Before people think I am calling every Tea Party member or every Republican a racist, I am not. I honestly believe there are no more racists in the Republican Party than the Democratic Party. HOWEVER, there has for the past 40 plus years a perception that Republicans are more heavily racist. So they should be extra careful with whom they associate. As for the Tea Party, not only the leadership needs to come out strongly and consistently against this fringe element but the rank and file members need to weed out the haters and the racists.
Why? Because now no one is talking about any potential arguments you may have against the healthcare bill; they are talking about how racist you are. And like in the cartoon, you are letting the fringe element define your agenda and others perception of you.
It is interesting how often political party members get into a tizzy when one of their own doesn’t go along with the party line on every single issue. Not that it ever was a secret but now it is out in the news that Scott Brown, the Republican who won Ted Kennedy’s Senatorial seat, is not a pro-life senator. He believes the government should stay out of the debate (with the exception of late-term abortions) and shouldn’t provide federal funds to support it.
Are Republicans who looked at this guy as a savior now going to backtrack? The problem Republicans are having is their small tent litmus test mentality that says you have to fit into every category to call yourself a Republican. At least on the surface I like the fact that Brown is trying to open the doors of the tent a little wider.
Fiscally I lean to the right and socially to the left. As I have said before I want the Conservatives to stay out of my pants and the liberals to stay out of my wallet.
or help share the post by clicking below…
On this side of the pond, the Supreme Court of the United States is down a judge. When that happens, the President nominates a person to become the new Justice and Congress must approve the nominee. Of course depending on who is in power, the other side will never like the person (even if they do, they have to pound their fist so their constiuents will be proud).
So President Obama has nominated Sonia Sotomayor and charges from the far right are already coming out that she is a racist because of a speech she gave and her part in a ruling. Now I personally don’t care where you come down on whether or not she is or not. But really? This is the best strategy of opposing her??
I hate the political pundits and talking heads on both sides. Used to watch ’em but now I can’t stomach it. But Rachel Maddow from MSNBC had an interesting point. (hat tip to Chris Johnson for the video of it I saw) She said,
The question is why do this? And that’s a calculation about political capital. If you think you spend political capital by attacking the judicial nominee, it doesn’t seem like much use to waste that capital on someone who everybody thinks is going to get confirmed anyway. If on the other hand you think that you build up your political capital…you increase your political power by attacking a nominee then it makes sense to come after a Sonia Sotomayor with both political barrels. And, then it makes sense to ask what kind of Republican party and what kind of Conservative Movement is this fight building?
Personally I think the Conservatives are focusing on the wrong thing. Their best strategy is summed up in my latest editorial cartoon. They should be telling Liberals that they are excited about the nominee and especially the fact that she is Roman Catholic in hopes that she will rule to overturn Roe vs Wade (ie abortion laws). Then watch the far left stumble over themselves to make sure to find out where she stands on abortion.
Follow me via TWITTER updates. or you can…
…just Tweet this post (click the image)