Debunking the rightwing "class warfare" retard rhetoric

We drop a ton of money on education and the little pukes can't even read and write on par with their grade level.Yet children of similar age in other countries are geniuses compared to our little brats....
Our kids aren't learning for a variety of reasons and it's not that we don't spend enough.

The way to fix this if you ask a Lib is we need to spend more money on education.....
Enough already...It's a joke only it's not fukin funny.

We waste a great deal of money on education because it is used unwisely. Throwing more money at education is not the answer. Concentrating our efforts on teaching the core subjects would help a great deal, especially math and science, and English.
 
If class warfare is defined as having money taken from the rich and given to the poor, why are the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer? Who's really waging class warfare against whom financed by the Koch Brothers?

I love the way you deliberately fail to get the point.

In the first place, the poor are not getting poorer. That's pure leftwing horseshit without a shred of visible support. Second, not the word "take" in the definition. To "take" means to use force to retrieve something from the person who owns it. Government takes when it taxes you. Getting paid less than you would like because you're crack whore who can't keep her legs together or an alcoholic with no skills is not an example of "taking."
 
The rightwingers like to make the bogus claim that higher taxes on the rich constitutes "class warfare," but conveniently ignore the fact that their efforts to cut funding for the poor and disadvantaged, unemployment assistance, funding to schools, funding to improve inner city decay, etc, are all examples of the worst kind of class warfare in themselves.

Of course they like to make their own form of class warfare under the mask of calling it "fiscal conservatism," but we all know the deal about Republican "fiscal conservatism. As I posted in another thread, Republitards are the party of big government and deficits, in the past 30 years not one Republitard president has presided over a surplus while and office and each year the size of government grew while the rich got richer and the poor got poorer, so can the real party of class warfare please stand up?

Sure, Amos, sure.

Obama's gotten black unemployment to 16% but you keeps on keeping on going to your fine public schools

I didn't know the president is the hiring authority for the entire country. You'll have to clue me in on that one. You can't play the race card CrusaderFranktard when your party played the party of the "oppressed white patriots" being threatened by the Black socialist in the White House. Regardless of who has been in office black unemployment has always been proportionally higher.
 
Minimum wage laws violate my right to determine for myself what im worth, and have actually priced me out of the labour market, thanks allot.


:lol:


i dont care what you do on your side, that was my point, make all the laws you want, as long as they dont apply to me i dont care.

Then you must not be worth much as an employee. While it is true that some people aren't even worth minimum wage, that does not mean the job is not worth at least minimum wage. Anyone who has a minimum wage job works their butt off and produces significantly for their employer. If they do not, they can easily be replaced.
 
The rightwingers like to make the bogus claim that higher taxes on the rich constitutes "class warfare," but conveniently ignore the fact that their efforts to cut funding for the poor and disadvantaged, unemployment assistance, funding to schools, funding to improve inner city decay, etc, are all examples of the worst kind of class warfare in themselves.

Of course they like to make their own form of class warfare under the mask of calling it "fiscal conservatism," but we all know the deal about Republican "fiscal conservatism. As I posted in another thread, Republitards are the party of big government and deficits, in the past 30 years not one Republitard president has presided over a surplus while and office and each year the size of government grew while the rich got richer and the poor got poorer, so can the real party of class warfare please stand up?

Sure, Amos, sure.

Obama's gotten black unemployment to 16% but you keeps on keeping on going to your fine public schools

I didn't know the president is the hiring authority for the entire country. You'll have to clue me in on that one. You can't play the race card CrusaderFranktard when your party played the party of the "oppressed white patriots" being threatened by the Black socialist in the White House. Regardless of who has been in office black unemployment has always been proportionally higher.

Obama is copying the FDR Depression, Amos, except he's actually made black unemployment WORSE than the FDR Depression!

Obama's Economic Jihad on Free Enterprise is responsible, Amos Starkey, you fine, fine self described "Conservative"
 
Please read row 27 from the years 1998-2001 Mr Kochtard, and tell me what it says, deficit or surplus? Look at data from last 30 years and show me one Republitard president that has presided over a surplus. If the stats show that the ideology you retards spew and defend day and day out on this forum has a track record of *FAIL* why personally attack me?

The word is Republican. And you would recognize that fact if you'd take your partisan hate-tinged glasses off, dipshit, and ask how a President of either Party "presides" over a "surplus."

In the case of Bubba Clintube, it took a Republican controlled Congress. It helped to "preside" fortuitously over the dot-com bubble, too.

But go ahead and be an obvious asshole, Basshole, by ignoring all facts that undermine your silly "point."

Shithead.

It took Al Sharpton and his racist blacks to guilt republicans into meeting their demands of free mortgages.

Because you know, credit is racist.

Well, to the extent that Al (Not-so-)Sharpton (and his posse) was able to guilt anybody into that mindless exercise, the shame and the blame falls less on Reverend Al than on the schmucks who went along with his idiotic mindless racist notions.
 
If class warfare is defined as having money taken from the rich and given to the poor, why are the poor getting poorer and the rich getting richer? Who's really waging class warfare against whom financed by the Koch Brothers?

I love the way you deliberately fail to get the point.

In the first place, the poor are not getting poorer. That's pure leftwing horseshit without a shred of visible support. Second, not the word "take" in the definition. To "take" means to use force to retrieve something from the person who owns it. Government takes when it taxes you. Getting paid less than you would like because you're crack whore who can't keep her legs together or an alcoholic with no skills is not an example of "taking."

I like how you paint a privileged group of people as victims and paint the disadvantaged as the villians who steal despite the wealth gap getting wider with the privileged getting richer. If their was class warfare the gap would be narrowing Mr Britpatard.
 
Right on!!! :clap2:

We have seen tax cut after tax cut for the rich over the last 30 years while the middle class has bore the brunt of the recession. And that's not "class warfare"? :confused:

.

The rich pay a higher percentage of the revenue from income taxes than they did when marginal rates were at 90%. People are simply not as stupid as Democrats think they are. They aren't going to sit idly by and let the government loot everything they earn. The rich can take measures to avoid paying taxes when they become onerous.

When are you numskulls ever going to learn?

Top 10% earns 45% of all income and pays 30% of all Federal taxes. Great deal if you are in the top 10%. Of course, that leaves the middle class paying the bulk and getting screwed the most. I don't have a problem with the dirt poor not paying much, and they do pay a small amount in most cases. For the life of me though, I can't understand how anyone other than the super wealthy would support the wealthy paying less than the middle class.
 
Sure, Amos, sure.

Obama's gotten black unemployment to 16% but you keeps on keeping on going to your fine public schools

I didn't know the president is the hiring authority for the entire country. You'll have to clue me in on that one. You can't play the race card CrusaderFranktard when your party played the party of the "oppressed white patriots" being threatened by the Black socialist in the White House. Regardless of who has been in office black unemployment has always been proportionally higher.

Obama is copying the FDR Depression, Amos, except he's actually made black unemployment WORSE than the FDR Depression!

Obama's Economic Jihad on Free Enterprise is responsible, Amos Starkey, you fine, fine self described "Conservative"

Sure, he assaulted free enterprise by keeping the Bush tax cuts alive while the rich business owners kept raking in the dough, why is there never any official evidence for this presented by you Republitards?
 
I'm not gonna respond to all that drivel but ill ask you this. Why the Fuck is all the unemployment extensions not enough? Get off your ass and do something for them yourself and stop demanding I pay their way. You idiots cry about taxes being to low yet you never send in extra "because its the right thing to do"

Get off my nuts and out of my wallet.

Why should I send in more if you are not going to help out also?
 
The rightwingers like to make the bogus claim that higher taxes on the rich constitutes "class warfare," but conveniently ignore the fact that their efforts to cut funding for the poor and disadvantaged, unemployment assistance, funding to schools, funding to improve inner city decay, etc, are all examples of the worst kind of class warfare in themselves.

Of course they like to make their own form of class warfare under the mask of calling it "fiscal conservatism," but we all know the deal about Republican "fiscal conservatism. As I posted in another thread, Republitards are the party of big government and deficits, in the past 30 years not one Republitard president has presided over a surplus while and office and each year the size of government grew while the rich got richer and the poor got poorer, so can the real party of class warfare please stand up?

Another classic example of liberals attempting to redefine the labels they have rightly earned.

Class warfare is defined this way: "taking money from those who earned and giving it to those who haven't earned it."

Reducing the rate of the pilfering is not class warfare. That definition is just sleazy demagoguery.

What you want is a society with no safety net. There are quite a few of those throughout the world. Personally, I don't know too many who would choose to live in any of those places other than volunteer workers who provide humanitarian aid to those people.
 
The rightwingers like to make the bogus claim that higher taxes on the rich constitutes "class warfare," but conveniently ignore the fact that their efforts to cut funding for the poor and disadvantaged, unemployment assistance, funding to schools, funding to improve inner city decay, etc, are all examples of the worst kind of class warfare in themselves.

Of course they like to make their own form of class warfare under the mask of calling it "fiscal conservatism," but we all know the deal about Republican "fiscal conservatism. As I posted in another thread, Republitards are the party of big government and deficits, in the past 30 years not one Republitard president has presided over a surplus while and office and each year the size of government grew while the rich got richer and the poor got poorer, so can the real party of class warfare please stand up?

Sure, Amos, sure.

Obama's gotten black unemployment to 16% but you keeps on keeping on going to your fine public schools

What was the black unemployment rate before Obamanomics helped the plight of the black Americans seeking jobs?

Black unemployment started to rise when the recession took place, not when Obama took office and please point out what Obama policies cause the black unemployment rate to rise, give the name of said policy(ies) and show how they impacted black unemployment.
 
I didn't know the president is the hiring authority for the entire country. You'll have to clue me in on that one. You can't play the race card CrusaderFranktard when your party played the party of the "oppressed white patriots" being threatened by the Black socialist in the White House. Regardless of who has been in office black unemployment has always been proportionally higher.

Obama is copying the FDR Depression, Amos, except he's actually made black unemployment WORSE than the FDR Depression!

Obama's Economic Jihad on Free Enterprise is responsible, Amos Starkey, you fine, fine self described "Conservative"

Sure, he assaulted free enterprise by keeping the Bush tax cuts alive while the rich business owners kept raking in the dough, why is there never any official evidence for this presented by you Republitards?

Obama's economic jihad? Do these people ever read what they write or listen to what they say? Since when has cutting taxes been considered economic jihad by the right? It's just about hate; it has nothing to do with actual policies.
 
I like how you paint a privileged group of people as victims and paint the disadvantaged as the villians who steal despite the wealth gap getting wider with the privileged getting richer. If their was class warfare the gap would be narrowing Mr Britpatard.

The fact that you're a loser who can't earn enough to pay your bills does not make you a "victim." Poor people can be victims, and rich people can be victims. Just ask the police. However, in the case of taxation, productive people are clearly the victims.

There is no credible evidence that the gap is widening. Furthermore, liberal democrats trying to protect their union thug constituents are the ones who made is more difficult for investors to take control of corporations where the executives were not doing their jobs and looting the company treasury. Liberals are responsible for the vast increase in CEO pay.
 
I'm not gonna respond to all that drivel but ill ask you this. Why the Fuck is all the unemployment extensions not enough? Get off your ass and do something for them yourself and stop demanding I pay their way. You idiots cry about taxes being to low yet you never send in extra "because its the right thing to do"

Get off my nuts and out of my wallet.

Why should I send in more if you are not going to help out also?

How do you know what I do or don't do? In fact my business donates to Habitat for Humanity. What do you do? But now that you know I do give to the poor I can assume your going to now follow suit? LOL
 
Sure, Amos, sure.

Obama's gotten black unemployment to 16% but you keeps on keeping on going to your fine public schools

What was the black unemployment rate before Obamanomics helped the plight of the black Americans seeking jobs?

Black unemployment started to rise when the recession took place, not when Obama took office and please point out what Obama policies cause the black unemployment rate to rise, give the name of said policy(ies) and show how they impacted black unemployment.

Hey, douche, I asked FRANK a question.

Please tell us all how the Obama Administration efforts came close to honoring the promises he made when he sought the jobs programs spending bills.

Are things a whole lot BETTER now thanks to the Obama Administration policies, Basshole?

Or are you content to possibly give honesty a try for a refreshing change of pace, and acknowledge that maybe Crusdaer Frank had a point?
 
What you want is a society with no safety net. There are quite a few of those throughout the world. Personally, I don't know too many who would choose to live in any of those places other than volunteer workers who provide humanitarian aid to those people.

so called "safety nets" have only come into existence in countries where capitalism has made them wealthy enough to pay for such foolishness. You have put the cart before the horse. Capitalism made the safety net possible, not the other way around.

Without the "safety nets," the USA would be a much wealthier country with much fewer poor people who could easily be supported with private charity.
 
I like how you paint a privileged group of people as victims and paint the disadvantaged as the villians who steal despite the wealth gap getting wider with the privileged getting richer. If their was class warfare the gap would be narrowing Mr Britpatard.

The fact that you're a loser who can't earn enough to pay your bills does not make you a "victim." Poor people can be victims, and rich people can be victims. Just ask the police. However, in the case of taxation, productive people are clearly the victims.

There is no credible evidence that the gap is widening. Furthermore, liberal democrats trying to protect their union thug constituents are the ones who made is more difficult for investors to take control of corporations where the executives were not doing their jobs and looting the company treasury. Liberals are responsible for the vast increase in CEO pay.

I pay my bills and have a job Mr Bripatard and the wealth gap has been widening for years, seems you never check the stats.
 
What was the black unemployment rate before Obamanomics helped the plight of the black Americans seeking jobs?

Black unemployment started to rise when the recession took place, not when Obama took office and please point out what Obama policies cause the black unemployment rate to rise, give the name of said policy(ies) and show how they impacted black unemployment.

Hey, douche, I asked FRANK a question.

Please tell us all how the Obama Administration efforts came close to honoring the promises he made when he sought the jobs programs spending bills.

Are things a whole lot BETTER now thanks to the Obama Administration policies, Basshole?

Or are you content to possibly give honesty a try for a refreshing change of pace, and acknowledge that maybe Crusdaer Frank had a point?

Can't answer the question so you're using fallacious reasoning right?
 

Forum List

Back
Top