William

You raised a bunch of questions. Sorry for being slow to get to them.

I ask again, why are they so concerned now? Why didn't they care for the previous 8 years? Where were they, when Bush was erasing the first balanced budget in how many years? Every single time we have this discussion, those on the Teabaggers side come up with excuse after excuse. No more. Answer the question.

My mind fills in "Don't wait for the translation!" each time I read that... I'm not a Tea Partier, nor have I ever taken to the streets to protest, but I can honestly tell you have been concerned about deficit spending for more than 20 years (even while I was still in Canada). Government finances have been an issue here in California for most of this decade. Remember, the Gray Davis recall effort was all about budget issues.

So, why now all this fuss under Obama's watch? A hypothesis: Everyone felt rich while the housing bubble lasted and they used their home equity like an ATM. Then the market softened. Then the market crashed. People looked to the coming election to fix things. Then the bank crash came weeks before the election. Money started flying out the door under Bush, and continued out the door under Obama (as it would have no doubt continued out the door under McCain). State and city budgets started to get tighter. Credit was harder to come by. Mortgages were upside down, People started to default on their loans. Banks stopped lending money. The economy slowed, and unemployment rose. More trillions went out the door by the Federal government to patch things up. More fear and anger.

I have no doubt if McCain was in the White House there would be a similar revolt.

Exactly when did Obama raise taxes?

I didn't say he raised taxes; I said the "not one dime" promise "proved to be little more than empty words." Just yesterday, Mr. Obama said he is now "agnostic" on his pledge of no tax increases on households making $250,000 a year or less. (And frankly, given this mess, no one should reasonably expect that pledge to be honoured.)

On the tax front, let's be fair: There's been about $300 billion in tax relief -- most of it expended in dribs and drabs -- offered by this administration, mainly if you bought a house or bought a car. But a lot of the benefit of those credits willl be clawed back when the Bush tax cuts expire. Moreover, if you look at the major legislation that's been pursued by the current administration, you would be hard pressed to believe it will not ultimately lead to tax increases or greater costs to middle class families. Cap and Trade and Health Care Reform are both budget busters.

Do you honestly expect anyone to believe that the majority of people in the Tea party movement voted for Obama? None of these people were ever on "the hope and change express".

The majority? No. But a significant number? Certainly. Don't you remember hearing the talk before Obama was elected? He's going FIX things. The independents broke his way. A lot of people got invested and believed this was not going to be politics as usual. And a lot of people are disappointed.

Maybe not because the conductor was black.

I'd prefer to think that Obama was the engineer of the hope and change train...

No one could suddenly be that concerned about government spending. Not after the billions wasted during the Bush administration that they said absolutely nothing about.

I wouldn't say there was absolute silence on the Bush spending. There was certainly rage at TARP, and that helped Obama at the ballot box. But let's look at some raw numbers. During his presidency, Bush doubled the size of the debt, from roughly $5 trillion to $10 trillion, including his portions of TARP. Earlier today, the debt ceiling has been raised to $14.2 trillion, which should cover expenditures through early 2011. In short, in just two years in office, Obama will have overspent almost what Bush overspent through eight years. You don't see how that might not hit on some people's emotinoal radar as a bit of a spike, particularly when they're having to take a hatchet to the budget at home?

And, of course, the debt hike doesn't include the potential impacts of Health Care Reform or Cap and Trade when those pieces of legislation get back on track.

Mike Norris,

Do you really want to start playing that game? Personally, I don't have time. I'm not going to mind read, speculate, or judge Mr. Brubaker or Marvel by their intentions. I'm going to judge them by their acts.

And I promise you I will be equally disappointed and disgusted when the underwear-clad Lizard-Obama shows up and we learn his cabinet is under the control of communists. I doubt we'll read that in Captain America, though. More likely sweeps week on the Glenn Beck show...

Andrew Farago wrote "I can't name any Sicilian-American characters (let alone Italian-American) that aren't either mobsters or people who mostly fight mobsters..."

Let's fix that. Take a look:

http://www.amazon.com/Sicilian-Judge-Anthony-Alaimo-American /dp/0881461253

We'll option the movie rights. His life would make one hell of a film.

QUOTE: Mike Norris, Do you really want to start playing that game? Personally, I don't have time. I'm not going to mind read, speculate, or judge Mr. Brubaker or Marvel by their intentions. I'm going to judge them by their acts.

Game? I don't follow your meaning.

Joseph , thanks I missed talking to you. I am fine, just really busy. my son moved to NY city and we have been there 4 times in the last five months, plus I have been mostly posting on facebook. 

___________________________

So that's why you had disappeared . Good to know everything's OK, though.

Andrew,

Gosh, can't you see him appearing in Sgt Fury and the Howlers? And then he gets brought into the current day Marvel Universe as a recurring character in Daredevil? And then the Kingpin gets Bullseye to kill him in a pizza joint as a favour to his Maggia buddies and... Yeah, you're right.

Mike Norris,

What game? The "If we move the captions around does it make it better?" game. It's similar to the situational ethics "How many times before something becomes really wrong?" game. A cheap shot is a cheap shot, period.

QUOTE: Mike Norris, What game? The "If we move the captions around does it make it better?" game. It's similar to the situational ethics "How many times before something becomes really wrong?" game. A cheap shot is a cheap shot, period.

That just it. I don't know how that scene was written and then "pasted up". What bothers folk the most? The angry white folks line being placed on the panel featuring the protesters  or the line by its self? Togther they might be making a statement. Seperately, maybe not. Did Brubaker, the editor or the letter make the call to place that caption in that panel? And why? Also, does Brubaker have the freedom to make that statement? Was it libelous?

Mike Norris,

Of course, Brubaker has the freedom to make that statement, provided it passes muster with his editor. (Corporate always has the final say.) As for libel? The representation certainly conveys an unjustly unfavourable impression, but there would be no way it could be litigated, so that's a moot point.

Your series of questions gave rise to a thought: Let's say a couple of years ago we were writing a Captain America story about a subversive fifth column group of drug runners and gang members that want to bring down the United States. That's good meat for a Captain America story! And, because we want to reflect the real world, we juxtapose our storyline against the mass marches of the illegal immigrants, so the implication is that (at least some) illegal immigrants are working hand in glove with our nasty subversives and part of this insidious plot.

How much holy hell do you think that story would raise? How quickly would we be branded insensitive racists and hate-peddlers? And just how different is that characterization from what Brubaker is engaged in now?

Michael Roberts wrote "...Voters were angry that their energy bills had tripled..."

I shorthanded that as a budget issue because it was coming out of people's wallets and the perception was the government was to blame, but you're quite correct to extract that out as the dominant issue in the recall.

I don't miss that summer of brownouts and blackouts and conservation alerts one bit...