Saturday, October 15, 2011

'Dummy Don' --Knows how to Create Jobs; and Save the World!

(1) How to Create Jobs:

Do away with the Capital Gains Taxes. Then close all of the tax loopholes, and raise the taxes on all of those Scrooge McDucks, who spend the time pushing their daily incoming tons of cash around with bulldozers inside their vaults. Since there will be no more Capital Gains taxes, then they will be free to avoid paying those higher Income Taxes by investing their hoards of money in new businesses and creating new jobs; because taxes are made on profits and not on the costs of doing business.

(2) How to Save the World:

We should go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever Jesus has commanded us. (Mat. 28:19-20).

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

"Dummy Don" ...Our National Debt, --Time Warp

"So we have a trillion dollar national debt... we're good for it."


Friday, July 29, 2011

Saturday, July 23, 2011

DUMMY DON --Desperate times for a needy government


...another point from me, DUMMY DON: Am I seeing the world through DUMMY eyes or something? I don't know; maybe I am just getting senile in my golden years. (or wiser?) One post commented just recently, "Who cares what you think?!" (gulp).

Well, here is my latest observation and wonderment about what is being broadcast over the air-ways about Social Security. Invariably, I see and hear the talking heads on TV doing such things as pointing to pie charts, showing how much money from our country's budget pays out to Social Secuity, thusly pointing out how we must make substantial cuts in Social Security. Well, what no one seems to realize is that the money being paid out, from the budget pie chart, is paid from the money COMING IN! If you do away with Social Security, --you also do away with that money COMING IN to create the pie chart in the first place! On top of that, the government often takes that money being paid into Social Security and uses it for other things.

I quote here from the recent Daily Record article, "Seniors; AARP's NEWS YOU CAN USE, Speak now to save Social Security, by Sy Larson, president of AARP New Jersey, who has a doctorate in political science:

"Social Security is financed through payroll contributions from employees and their employers, separate from the rest of the federal budget, and therefore has not contributed to our nation's large deficit.For the next 25 years, Social Security will be able to pay 100 percent of its benefits to all eligible recipients and 75 percent thereafter. This means that at some point, Congress will have to develop a plan to guarantee the long-term solvency of the program.However, Social Security should not be considered as an asset to help balance the nation's budget....... In fact, Social Security is the only source of income for 25 percent of older adults in New Jersey, the majority of whom are women."

Monday, July 18, 2011

Dummy Don ..Should TV be Banned in Courtrooms?

Sorry; it is not about Bill O’Reilly. (I watch his show all the time.) What I am “trying to say (I thought the original post was clear). is that we should NOT ban TV from the courtrooms. When at all possible, we should get our facts first-hand, which having TV in the courtrooms enables us to do. (Not everyone can do that.) The frustration comes about, such as in the Casey Anthony trial, when one has watched the trial from beginning to end –as the jurors do– and then be bombarded with the terrible and frenzied way the media covers the story and degrades our jury system and all the jurors. Then all (not all) these yelling and screaming celebrity talking heads incite the public to ugly hatred and a mob mentality. It is especially nauseating to listen and watch someone like “JUSTICE With Judge Jeanine,” carry on this way. She is a real Judge; and real Judges should be above such behaviour. Personally, I think she should be dis-barred. O’Reilly is entitled to his opinions; that is what his TV show is all about. But usually, he is not such a big “pinhead.” (A name used on his show to judge others). –Dummy Don DUMMY DON …by Don Cole

Dummy Don ...about Flat Tax

Am I missing something here? Everybody would pay the same percentage of tax on their income, no matter what? So, if one person's income is $5,000. per week his income tax would be, say on a 30% tax rate for everybody, --$1,500, which still leaves him with $3,500. per week to invest in forfeited real estate, or whatever, before he eventually has enough money and power to monopolize (like the game of monopoly) and take over our whole country, (or whatever). Compare this with with a senior citizen living on his Social Security checks , of about $200. per week (or less, and with COLAs frozen for three years now). 30% of $200. is $60. leaving the senior citizen with $140. per week to live on. Now the cost of rent, food, gas, heat, and other basic necessities to live being absolutely the same for everyone, who is going to be kicked over the cliff, or pushed out into the ocean currents on a raft to perish? Just because a person works hard all their life is no guarantee that they will never be in need (nor any of their family or loved ones). When things get even worse (and cheer up now, because things could be worse, --and probably will be.), such as in the Depression; should we revert back to businessmen jumping out of high-up skyscraper windows because the stock market collapsed? This ME-MYSELF-and I mentality is a crumbling foundation, or no foundation at all, and will never cure the ills of our nation. -- Dummy Don (ref: my comic strip, "Dummy Don.")

Dummy Don Don Cole: Pick, pick, pick

Dummy Don Don Cole

Sunday, July 17, 2011

Watch for my new comic strip, "Dummy Don" Don Cole

Watch for my new comic strip, “Dummy Don,” who is really Super Don in disguise Sometimes it is hard for people to know the difference, and the two characters often become intertwined; but it is easier for those who have eyes that see, and ears that hear. --dc

"Dummy Don" talks about jobs, taxes, and our economy, to an entrepreneur

You are good at replying. Thanks. Now, I am thinking, –why haven’t these politicians, and President Obama, sat down with a large transparent town house meeting, or meetings, with many common entrepreneurs as yourself, –and find out what would work from the people who really ought to know. What is presented could be gone over by those economic “experts,” and if there are flaws to the proposals offered up for consideration, than they could publicly explain why; and then that could be looked at by all, and the cycle would go around until the best solution is met.

Unfortunately, what happens instead, is that Obama travels all around the country giving controlled campaign speeches, which is a bit lame because he has lost most of his credibility, from his earlier campaign speeches –that have not held up to time, honesty or true transparency. I also get frustrated with both partys when they often do not clarify what they are talking about. Such as, “We absolutely will not raise any taxes on the American people!” The public needs to understand exactly what people they are talking about. And when Obama says that he is “giving employers a payroll tax break, holiday” that what is really meant is that he is stopping monies that are normally going into Social Security (and then a short time down the road, he is pointing out how Social Security is running out of money.) As you might have guessed, I am really a dummy in all this, as far as being any expert. However; I have not lost my ability to THINK.

Now, I would be interested in what you think, about my “Bookend Economics” theory. I had been discussing this with some real pros in this field, and I was shocked to get a reply back saying that what I was writing made a lot of sense, saying “Now, if you can only convince the President and Congress…” I say, our Capitalism society is very good, –but we need to place BOOK-ENDS at each end of the spectrum, which can be moved left and right according to the financial health that our economy is in.. That way no deserving citizen is allowed to become too poor, or too rich. However, there would be a good span in-between, and as wide as our country chooses it to be, – from one bookend to the other bookend, a span that is open for adjustment when times, or the future, calls for it. That way, we all have something to work for, personally and as a country as a whole, not controlled by negative powers and forces often seen at play in our lives today. A “me-myself-and-I” people mentality is not a foundation that can last, or allow our freedoms to ring. So, what do you think?

(ps: Watch for my new comic strip, “Dummy Don,” who is really Super Don in disguise Sometimes it is hard for people to know the difference, and the two characters often become intertwined; but it is easier for those who have eyes that see, and ears that hear.) –dc

To Greta; What really happened? Casey Anthony Case

To Greta; What might have really happend in the Casey Anthony CasePosted July 17, 2011 by doncolecartoonsCategories: News, Truth, World for Truth Tags: , , , , , , , ,

What really happened in the Casey Anthony Case? The Full Story.

(This was returned from Bill O’Reilly as Unread.)

Bill O’Reilly, you are the biggest “PINHEAD” of them all, concerning the Casey Anthony trial.No, it is not ”your job“ to educate all us “dummies” out here who don’t buy into your rants and rage, and demeaning of all the “stupid jurors.” No, it is not your job to set yourself up as prosecutor, judge and jury in this case, and hold your own TV trial. No, it is not your job to incite people to mob rage in the streets, without just cause.
Just because we do not have all the answers in this case, does not mean that someone should be executed based on some prosecutor’s conjecture (an opinion not founded on sufficient evidence; a guess; a surmise.)
If one would hold their rage and tantrums long enough to t-h-I-n-k, than (besides a mountain of other holes in the prosecutions testimonies,) one might realize that Casey had no logical motive to murder her daughter, (no baby sitting problems, or whatever) nor was there any evidence in the case that she was not a good mother, but to the contrary. There was nothing to show that Casey was in any kind of rut that would hinder her from going out and partying, finding a baby-sitter, or that she expressed to anyone that she felt tied down or burdened by her two year old daughter. The prosecutor’s theory and evidences did not hold up to logic, nor to any hard evidence, not even to any circumstantial logic. There was reasonable doubt galore! The prosecutor’s story was made-up, without any realistic evidence to back it up. Unfortunately, 2/3 of the people on the street grabbed it up hook-line-and-sinker, just because they are astonishingly judgmental, bloodthirsty, and taking no care to look at and consider the evidences. A modern day lynch mob!

Now, following, is a better theory, my own, as to what might have actually happened, or could have happened. When one applies some reason, they should be able to see that all the bases are covered, from beginning to end, and for-the-life-of-me, I can’t figure out why I seem to be the only one who can see this! ? It is clear! Is it not?
The defense presentation is accurate, in that it was an accident gone bad, although the defense wisely chose to go only as far –as to best show the jury that there was reasonable doubt abound– in the story presented by the prosecution. So the question is WHY? What really happened? Why was there a need to cover up what really happened?
The story of the defense was that the child’s death was an accident gone bad, out of control, and that Casey’s father, George Anthony, proceeded to help cover it up. So, why didn’t Casey just tell the truth? Obviously, because Casey must have done something very stupid, such as using a little chloroform mixture to prompt her daughter Caley to sleep. In so doing, Casey could have caused her daughter’s death, which would be considered murder by the authorities and the courts.

Another theory, I heard a guest on the Geraldo TV show say, is that he thinks Casey had run out of gas, and went to get some gas, in a gas can, and had left Caylee in the car. Evidently, the car got too hot and Casey took longer in getting the gas than she thought she would be. That would explain about the gas can, discussed in the trial.

And I say, when Casey returned, and found Caylee dead, she panicked, placed Calee’s dead body in the trunk of the car and drove home. Casey’s father, George Anthony, found out what had happened, and then he panicked also, or went out of his head. He took Caylee, put her in a bag, and using his duck tape, disposed of her the same way the family had disposed of it’s family pets. Out of mad frenzy, he tossed the body in the swamp. (Also, I even wonder if George himself might have been the father of Caylee?)

Whatever happened, it was enough to cause George Anthony to want to commit suicide. Obviously, George Anthony, loved his grandchild very much, and must have been furious with Casey over this. However; he proceeded to help Casey cover it up. Obviously, it was not Casey who disposed of the body, –but George! All the evidence points to George as being the one who ‘took care’ of the body. Why was the body disposed of, with George’s duct tape, in the same way that George had always disposed of his family pets, with chloroform, a bag, and duct tape? The true evidence shows that the duct tape was not placed over Caylee’s mouth and nose, as contended by the prosecution. In reality, there was a piece of duct tape stuck to Caylee’s hair, not her face, that had drooped down. There was no DNA, or evidence of any facial tissue on the duct tape. Also, the body had been moved around, and poked at by the meter reader who found it, over days. There was also a piece of duct tape, on the ground further away from the body. It is obvious, that duct tape was used to dispose of Caylee’s body, not to murder her. (And even if the tape really had been used to sufficate this two year old little girl, why would the murderer leave it there, to clearly point that a murder had been commited? And would it not be easier to just use a pillow?)

Why was George, after the fact, contemplating suicide? Now, it is easy to understand the anguish that was building up inside George, according to what he himself had done, to help cover-up for Casey, while at the same time loving his grand daughter so much. (You can also observe his personal anguish, on the witness stand). Of course, now that the trial is over; people will surely be taking a closer look at George Anthony, and his part in all of this. Yes; it truly was an accident gone bad! And yes; it truly is a dysfunctional family. So Yes; Bill O’Reilly, –you are a “PINHEAD,” extraordinare!

(PS: I am flabergasted at “Justice With Judge Jeanine.” How can a REAL Judge get away with the way she is publicly behaving about this trial? It seems to me like she should be disbarred! I never saw a Judge behave so crazily, so wild and frenzied, disregarding and degrading the jurors, and our justice system. She comes across like a wild beast with rabies, foaming at the mouth, with blood in her eyes, on the attack! It is really HARD to WATCH, and makes me a little sick.) (gasp) –What if SHE had been the actual judge assigned to the Casey Anthony trial? The thought of that REALLY makes me sick.)

Thank God, we still have Greta, and Geraldo.

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Debt Ceiling Rising?

To The Five: (5-6 pm, FOX News)

Re: Debt Ceiling Rising?

How would cutting tax cuts for the super rich hurt jobs? I don’t see it. Taxes are paid on profits, –not the costs of doing business– so if the super rich want to pay less taxes, all they have to do is invest , expand their business, and hire more people.

In order for this to work, Congress would have to do away with the capital gains tax on businesses, –not increase them, as they are now proposing. If we are serious about wanting to create jobs, why on earth are we putting up barricades that prevent that from ever happening?

To the Republican Party, about jobs...

How would cutting tax cuts for the super rich hurt jobs? I don’t see it. Taxes are paid on profits, –not the costs of doing business– so if the super rich want to pay less taxes, all they have to do is invest , expand their business, and hire more people.

To O'Reilly and Hannity

To O'Reilly and Hannity;
Just because a person works hard all their life, is no guarantee that they will never be in need.
Count your many blessings; name them one by one.
Donald Cole, Dover NJ

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Comic strip gaffes?

Comic page gaffes?

Oh-Oh. Here comes the Storm! Obvious layoffs. First showing up in a syndicated comic strip, and now today with the Daily Record’s Crossword Puzzle! What will be next?

In the HI AND LOIS comic strip of, Feb 3, 2011, the balloon pointer in the last panel (the punch line) is pointing to the wrong person! How could a cartoonist do that, unless he had used an overburdened assistant? Obviously, Dik Browne, plus Brian and Greg Walker (sons of Mort Walker, of Beetle Bailey fame) need more help. (p.s.: I am available.) And now, (sigh) today, Monday, my daily newspaper, The Daily Record of Morris County NJ, has published the very same crossword puzzle that it published in Saturday’s paper! What is this world coming to?!!

Here is a sample I sent to Jim Davis, when he was looking for some help at his studio, Paws Inc., back in my Joe Kubert School of Cartoon and Graphic Art, Dover NJ days.

Will cutting tax cuts for the super rich really hurt jobs?

Will cutting tax cuts for the super rich really hurt jobs? I don't see it. Taxes are paid on profits, --not the costs of doing business-- so if the super rich want to pay less taxes, all they have to do is invest , expand their business, and hire more people.