ANOTHER Simple Question For You Teabagger Simpletons

[Quantum Windbag]

She's an advisor. She's not "In Charge" of anything. And that woman walks on water, you should be very glad she's involved in our process.

That woman does not walk on water, and she puts her pants on one leg at a time. The fact that you attempt to defend her by saying otherwise indicates exactly why I should not be glad that she has the job, or is even in government at all.

Warren for President!

Seriously, don't get all bent out of shape, I'm speaking metaphorically here. I'm aware that she doesn't actually walk on water. The woman is above reproach, incorruptible, and exceptionally bright and talented; Unless of course, you can show me otherwise.

No one is above reproach, or incorruptible, and Warren does not appear to be particularly bright. If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against. The direct result of her campaign for reform has resulted in banks canceling free checking for low income customers, has eliminated most of their credit options, and driven them into the arms of alternative credit sources, including loan sharks. The fact that she is not speaking up about it makes her part of the problem not the solution.

http://reason.com/archives/2010/12/01/congress-forces-millions-to-cu

 

[Cuyo]

That woman does not walk on water, and she puts her pants on one leg at a time. The fact that you attempt to defend her by saying otherwise indicates exactly why I should not be glad that she has the job, or is even in government at all.

Warren for President!

Seriously, don't get all bent out of shape, I'm speaking metaphorically here. I'm aware that she doesn't actually walk on water. The woman is above reproach, incorruptible, and exceptionally bright and talented; Unless of course, you can show me otherwise.

No one is above reproach, or incorruptible, and Warren does not appear to be particularly bright. If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against. The direct result of her campaign for reform has resulted in banks canceling free checking for low income customers, has eliminated most of their credit options, and driven them into the arms of alternative credit sources, including loan sharks. The fact that she is not speaking up about it makes her part of the problem not the solution.

Congress Forces Millions to Cut Up Their Credit Cards - Reason Magazine

Even your link, which is to a transparently and proudly right-wing source, notes that credit card companies are backing out of the low income market on their own because said markets are becoming unprofitable.

And Elizabeth Warren is only mentioned in passing.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Warren for President!

Seriously, don't get all bent out of shape, I'm speaking metaphorically here. I'm aware that she doesn't actually walk on water. The woman is above reproach, incorruptible, and exceptionally bright and talented; Unless of course, you can show me otherwise.

No one is above reproach, or incorruptible, and Warren does not appear to be particularly bright. If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against. The direct result of her campaign for reform has resulted in banks canceling free checking for low income customers, has eliminated most of their credit options, and driven them into the arms of alternative credit sources, including loan sharks. The fact that she is not speaking up about it makes her part of the problem not the solution.

Congress Forces Millions to Cut Up Their Credit Cards - Reason Magazine

Even your link, which is to a transparently and proudly right-wing source, notes that credit card companies are backing out of the low income market on their own because said markets are becoming unprofitable.

And Elizabeth Warren is only mentioned in passing.

Just like a cultist, never let the truth interfere with the way the world works.

 

[Oddball]

Now Reason is right-wing?!?!?!?

Whoa, Nellie!

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

Aey KWO freak show.

Didn't you get enough of me destroying you in the last IQ voided thread of yours I graced with my presence?

ALL you did here was spew some insane, jealous, wacko BS rant bout hard workin Americans who are doing better than your mommy's basement dwelling self.

Vulgar, mean ignorance doesn't make up for your total lack of intelligence and debate skills sheep boy.

Try again.

Didn't you get enough of me destroying you in the last IQ voided thread of yours I graced with my presence?

You must have me confused with someone else, you couldn't possibly be talking about your idiotic "Nazi socialist" bullshit because I showed you were full of it, which is why you chickened-out of the debate. If the Nazis were the "liberal" political party in Germany, then who the hell was the "conservative" political party??? The German Communist Party, which the Nazis were at war with in the late 1920's/early 1930's?? You simply can't answer questions such as these because there is no legitimate answer because YOU ARE WRONG.

No legitimate historian agrees with your crap, it's that simple. The whole premise of your argument is based on bullshit, which is why an uninformed, unsophisticated tea bagger idiot such as yourself gravitates towards it.

You are extremist lunatic in an extremist political party -- this is why you actually believe celebrity idiots like Sarah Palin would make a good President. Hence, your political opinions are meaningless.

 

[code1211]

Since none of you dishonest tea bagger simpletons could give a direct, honest answer to this question...

The richest 1% of Americans control 40% of the wealth in this country. This is the highest level since the 1920s & 1930s. Do you tea baggers honestly believe that this has NO negative impact on the other 99% of Americans??

...I've come up with a new question that might be a little easier for you intellectually challenged idiots --

In 1980, CEOs only made 30 times as much as the average American. Now, CEOs make over 300 times as much as the average Americans. Have CEOs "earned" a 1000% pay raise over the past 30 years?? Think long and hard on this one, tea bagger simpletons! Don't forget that it is your PEASANT DUTY to protect the wealth of rich Repugs!! They are your moral and intellectual superiors, after all.

Anybody who is paid anything by somebody else is "earning" that pay if it is rendered in exchange for a product or service in pre-arranged terms.

If they are able to get it, then they should recieve it.

Is Bernard Barian a better reciever than Hall of Fame Recievers from 1980 John Stallworth or Lynn Swann? More important to his team? Why does he make more money? Why does he make incrementally more than the average working man?

I realize that you just hate so many people so intensely that you think you are making a point. I'm not sure that you realize that when you start hating this intensely, you stop thinking altogether. The world has changed since 1980. You would do well to look around you with some awareness.

Seeing things as they are clears up allot of questions.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

No I didn't, you dishonest dimwit. However, you rejected the truth that 1% of Americans controlling 40% of the nation's wealth is pure unadulterated greed and bad for our democracy.

One reason the American colonists rebelled against England is that they disliked privileged aristocrats. However, you strangely embrace them, despite your lack of wealth. You aren't a patriotic "tea bagger" -- if you lived 230 years ago, you would have been a loyalist to England.

You are an impoveshed peasant sucker who continues to vote against your best economic interest year after year. That is just how you tea bagger losers roll...

Yes you did, just like you reject the truth that you have accumulated more real wealth than any of those privileged aristocrats you think the Founding Fathers did not like. (A really interesting interpretation of history considering that many of them were essentially privileged aristocrats themselves.)

The strangest thing about your whole position is you still have not asked the simple question I asked, how exactly is the concentration of wealth bad for me? All you have done is spout easily disproved facts and claimed to be intellectually superior to everyone else. If you were hapf as smart as you think you are you would be able to explain and support your position, the fact that you cannot is what leads me to reject it, not any inherent bias on my part.

Yes you did, just like you reject the truth that you have accumulated more real wealth than any of those privileged aristocrats you think the Founding Fathers did not like.

??? I have no idea what this tea bagger gibberish means. I'm pretty sure virtually all of the Founding Fathers were wealthier than me, lightweight.

And the common American colonist did not like aristocrats. You are a very, very common man who not only likes aristocrats, but defends their right to screw you. Hence, you are anything but a representative of that time period.

All you have done is spout easily disproved facts and claimed to be intellectually superior to everyone else.

Really, lightweight?? Then disprove what I've said. I'll be waiting a long time.

If you were hapf as smart as you think you are you would be able to explain and support your position, the fact that you cannot is what leads me to reject it, not any inherent bias on my part.

Whatever, I don't care if you agree with me or not. The smarter conservatives on here like Intense agree with me that the richest 1% have accumulated too much wealth. Trying to prove something to a simpleton like you is a futile effort, I'm just here to illustrate how stupid tea bagger sucker peasants such as yourself are.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

That woman does not walk on water, and she puts her pants on one leg at a time. The fact that you attempt to defend her by saying otherwise indicates exactly why I should not be glad that she has the job, or is even in government at all.

Warren for President!

Seriously, don't get all bent out of shape, I'm speaking metaphorically here. I'm aware that she doesn't actually walk on water. The woman is above reproach, incorruptible, and exceptionally bright and talented; Unless of course, you can show me otherwise.

No one is above reproach, or incorruptible, and Warren does not appear to be particularly bright. If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against. The direct result of her campaign for reform has resulted in banks canceling free checking for low income customers, has eliminated most of their credit options, and driven them into the arms of alternative credit sources, including loan sharks. The fact that she is not speaking up about it makes her part of the problem not the solution.

Congress Forces Millions to Cut Up Their Credit Cards - Reason Magazine

If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against.

And of course, you can prove this? Didn't think so, lightweight.

You're such a shameless rich Repug ass-kisser, you probably don't even feel credit card reform was needed. Elizabeth Warren is trying to help impovershed tea bagger idiots such as yourself, only you're way too stupid to ever realize that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

??? I have no idea what this tea bagger gibberish means. I'm pretty sure virtually all of the Founding Fathers were wealthier than me, lightweight.

And the common American colonist did not like aristocrats. You are a very, very common man who not only likes aristocrats, but defends their right to screw you. Hence, you are anything but a representative of that time period.

Were they? How many of them had the means to communicate around the world instantly? How many of them had unlimited access to the vast knowledge available to you though the internet? How many of them could go down to the grocery store and choose from more food than they saw in their entire lives? How many of them had indoor plumbing? How many of them

Just because you are too ignorant to realize just how rich you are in comparison to them does not change the fact that your wealth accumulation exceeds theirs. As I have repeatedly said, wealth is not a limited resource, and it can increase over time without making everyone else poorer.

Believe it or not, your ignorance has nothing to do with my political beliefs, whatever they might be.

Really, lightweight?? Then disprove what I've said. I'll be waiting a long time.

Like I just did your insistence that the founding Fathers were all richer than you? Or did you have some other specific stupid statement you have made you think is true?

Whatever, I don't care if you agree with me or not. The smarter conservatives on here like Intense agree with me that the richest 1% have accumulated too much wealth. Trying to prove something to a simpleton like you is a futile effort, I'm just here to illustrate how stupid tea bagger sucker peasants such as yourself are.

And I am asking you to explain what the problem is, and all you can do is point to people who agree there could be a problem. Believe it or not, that does not prove you know what you are talking about, even if it proves they do. Citing authority is not defending your position, and only proves that you can read.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Warren for President!

Seriously, don't get all bent out of shape, I'm speaking metaphorically here. I'm aware that she doesn't actually walk on water. The woman is above reproach, incorruptible, and exceptionally bright and talented; Unless of course, you can show me otherwise.

No one is above reproach, or incorruptible, and Warren does not appear to be particularly bright. If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against. The direct result of her campaign for reform has resulted in banks canceling free checking for low income customers, has eliminated most of their credit options, and driven them into the arms of alternative credit sources, including loan sharks. The fact that she is not speaking up about it makes her part of the problem not the solution.

Congress Forces Millions to Cut Up Their Credit Cards - Reason Magazine

If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against.

And of course, you can prove this? Didn't think so, lightweight.

You're such a shameless rich Repug ass-kisser, you probably don't even feel credit card reform was needed. Elizabeth Warren is trying to help impovershed tea bagger idiots such as yourself, only you're way too stupid to ever realize that.

Prove what? That what she is trying to do is doing more harm than good? I just did.

 

[California Girl]

Now Reason is right-wing?!?!?!?

Whoa, Nellie!

Oh good. It wasn't just me who ed at that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Since none of you dishonest tea bagger simpletons could give a direct, honest answer to this question...

The richest 1% of Americans control 40% of the wealth in this country. This is the highest level since the 1920s & 1930s. Do you tea baggers honestly believe that this has NO negative impact on the other 99% of Americans??

...I've come up with a new question that might be a little easier for you intellectually challenged idiots --

In 1980, CEOs only made 30 times as much as the average American. Now, CEOs make over 300 times as much as the average Americans. Have CEOs "earned" a 1000% pay raise over the past 30 years??

Think long and hard on this one, tea bagger simpletons! Don't forget that it is your PEASANT DUTY to protect the wealth of rich Repugs!! They are your moral and intellectual superiors, after all.

The love of money is the root of all evil, according to Christian teachings.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

No one is above reproach, or incorruptible, and Warren does not appear to be particularly bright. If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against. The direct result of her campaign for reform has resulted in banks canceling free checking for low income customers, has eliminated most of their credit options, and driven them into the arms of alternative credit sources, including loan sharks. The fact that she is not speaking up about it makes her part of the problem not the solution.

Congress Forces Millions to Cut Up Their Credit Cards - Reason Magazine

Even your link, which is to a transparently and proudly right-wing source, notes that credit card companies are backing out of the low income market on their own because said markets are becoming unprofitable.

And Elizabeth Warren is only mentioned in passing.

Just like a cultist, never let the truth interfere with the way the world works.

Just like a cultist, never let the truth interfere with the way the world works.

In other words, Cuyo just ripped you a new asshole, and this weak ass shit is the best you can come up with.

How pathetic -- an impovershed peasant like you ACTUALLY DEFENDING credit card companies and their obscene practices. What a sucker.

However, it's not your fault -- it is your trailer trash tea bagger duty to protect the wealth of the rich. They are your moral and intellectual superiors, after all.

 

[Revere]

Who benefits when everyone gets credit cards they can't make payments on?

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

Since none of you dishonest tea bagger simpletons could give a direct, honest answer to this question...

The richest 1% of Americans control 40% of the wealth in this country. This is the highest level since the 1920s & 1930s. Do you tea baggers honestly believe that this has NO negative impact on the other 99% of Americans??

...I've come up with a new question that might be a little easier for you intellectually challenged idiots --

In 1980, CEOs only made 30 times as much as the average American. Now, CEOs make over 300 times as much as the average Americans. Have CEOs "earned" a 1000% pay raise over the past 30 years?? Think long and hard on this one, tea bagger simpletons! Don't forget that it is your PEASANT DUTY to protect the wealth of rich Repugs!! They are your moral and intellectual superiors, after all.

Anybody who is paid anything by somebody else is "earning" that pay if it is rendered in exchange for a product or service in pre-arranged terms.

If they are able to get it, then they should recieve it.

Is Bernard Barian a better reciever than Hall of Fame Recievers from 1980 John Stallworth or Lynn Swann? More important to his team? Why does he make more money? Why does he make incrementally more than the average working man?

I realize that you just hate so many people so intensely that you think you are making a point. I'm not sure that you realize that when you start hating this intensely, you stop thinking altogether. The world has changed since 1980. You would do well to look around you with some awareness.

Seeing things as they are clears up allot of questions.

Anybody who is paid anything by somebody else is "earning" that pay if it is rendered in exchange for a product or service in pre-arranged terms.

If they are able to get it, then they should recieve it.

Of course you are correct, "greed" simply doesn't exist in your idiot Repug world. How silly of me to forget. The CEOs of Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs "earned" their multi-million dollar bonuses last year, even after they needed billions of dollars from the federal government to stay afloat. My bad.

The world has changed since 1980.

Whoa!! Them profound words, simpleton! Greed is just more acceptable now than it was in 1980, I get it!

I realize that you just hate so many people so intensely that you think you are making a point.

On the contrary, you're simply an unsophisticated, uninformed twit who thinks unadulterated greed is acceptable. Typical tea bagger dipshit logic -- pointing out social inequality and social injustice means you "hate".

However, I can't blame you -- It is your trailer trash tea bagger duty to protect the wealth of your rich superiors. That's just how you tea baggers roll.

 

[Revere]

You want free credit cards someone else pays for?

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

No one is above reproach, or incorruptible, and Warren does not appear to be particularly bright. If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against. The direct result of her campaign for reform has resulted in banks canceling free checking for low income customers, has eliminated most of their credit options, and driven them into the arms of alternative credit sources, including loan sharks. The fact that she is not speaking up about it makes her part of the problem not the solution.

Congress Forces Millions to Cut Up Their Credit Cards - Reason Magazine

If whe were bright she would see that the reforms she is championing are doing more harm to the poor than the practices she is fighting against.

And of course, you can prove this? Didn't think so, lightweight.

You're such a shameless rich Repug ass-kisser, you probably don't even feel credit card reform was needed. Elizabeth Warren is trying to help impovershed tea bagger idiots such as yourself, only you're way too stupid to ever realize that.

Prove what? That what she is trying to do is doing more harm than good? I just did.

Nah, you didn't. Quoting an unremarkable right wing hacker who barely mentions Warren doesn't prove shit, dumb ass.

 

[Kerry Won Ohio]

??? I have no idea what this tea bagger gibberish means. I'm pretty sure virtually all of the Founding Fathers were wealthier than me, lightweight.

And the common American colonist did not like aristocrats. You are a very, very common man who not only likes aristocrats, but defends their right to screw you. Hence, you are anything but a representative of that time period.

Were they? How many of them had the means to communicate around the world instantly? How many of them had unlimited access to the vast knowledge available to you though the internet? How many of them could go down to the grocery store and choose from more food than they saw in their entire lives? How many of them had indoor plumbing? How many of them

Just because you are too ignorant to realize just how rich you are in comparison to them does not change the fact that your wealth accumulation exceeds theirs. As I have repeatedly said, wealth is not a limited resource, and it can increase over time without making everyone else poorer.

Believe it or not, your ignorance has nothing to do with my political beliefs, whatever they might be.

Really, lightweight?? Then disprove what I've said. I'll be waiting a long time.

Like I just did your insistence that the founding Fathers were all richer than you? Or did you have some other specific stupid statement you have made you think is true?

Whatever, I don't care if you agree with me or not. The smarter conservatives on here like Intense agree with me that the richest 1% have accumulated too much wealth. Trying to prove something to a simpleton like you is a futile effort, I'm just here to illustrate how stupid tea bagger sucker peasants such as yourself are.

And I am asking you to explain what the problem is, and all you can do is point to people who agree there could be a problem. Believe it or not, that does not prove you know what you are talking about, even if it proves they do. Citing authority is not defending your position, and only proves that you can read.

Were they? How many of them had the means to communicate around the world instantly? How many of them had unlimited access to the vast knowledge available to you though the internet? How many of them could go down to the grocery store and choose from more food than they saw in their entire lives? How many of them had indoor plumbing? How many of them

??? This has nothing to do with wealth, simpleton. It's called ADVANCES IN TECHNOLOGY. What a whack job.

Just because you are too ignorant to realize just how rich you are in comparison to them does not change the fact that your wealth accumulation exceeds theirs. As I have repeatedly said, wealth is not a limited resource, and it can increase over time without making everyone else poorer.

Wealth did not increase 1000% in the past 30 years, simpleton. So save the wear and tear on your fingers, you typed a bunch of tea bagger dumb shit for nothing.

Like I just did your insistence that the founding Fathers were all richer than you? Or did you have some other specific stupid statement you have made you think is true?

Again, you are a total retard. In today's dollars, most of the founding fathers would be multi-millionaires. You've obviously got no game, no facts, and no intellect, so this weak ass shit is the best you can come up with.

And I am asking you to explain what the problem is, and all you can do is point to people who agree there could be a problem.

Let me see if I can explain it in unsophisticated, uninformed trailer trash tea bagger terms that even an idiot like you can understand -- One day I decide to be a liberal jerk, and I come to your dilapidated trailer and, without even asking, I eat 40% of your 2-week old, nasty apple pie that you are sharing with your hungry 10 member family. Suddenly, there is much less pie for you and your tea bagger peasant family. Suddenly, you and your tea bagger peasant family have 40% less pie to eat.

I know, in your fantasy tea bagger world, the pie is "infinite" and the pie magically reappears and you and your tea bagger peasant family live happily ever after, no matter how much of your meager food I decide to devour. However, that's just not reality, simpleton. I deprived your sorry ass tea bagger family of food because I was a greedy bastard.

Do you finally get it? I don't really care if you do, because you are hopeless tea bagger idiot, after all.

 

[Revere]

Get a second job and buy two pies, asshole.