GOP Strategist: Party Needs To Be Less Old, White And Fat

I saw this live and immediately wondered how much was paid just to speak the Democratic old divisive talking points, eh there will be more media libtards show theyre true colors.
 
Get used to it folks. The tax exempt left wing propaganda center, Media Matters stated mission is to monitor ONLY conservative speech and you can bet your ass-ets that they are working overtime. They cherry pick statements and feed them to Huffington and other left wing blog sites for liberal fools to get their panties in a bunch.

And MSNBC working hand in hand with the WH
spending the day hammering home the same talking points that Obama
is set to deliver during the day.

How is it the left bitches that the WH is at a disadvantage dollar wise.
They have the media,TV,print,radio attacking the GOP candidate all day long
24/7...Yet they cry that they are at such a huge disadvantage money wise in this
election.

Do people buy the poverty line coming out of the DNC?

Every employee of MSNBC? :lol::lol:
 
Pubs only help greedy rich/corporations, chumps. See sig pp1, and distract the dupes with hateful BS, pp3....

Another anti-corporate hypocrite. God help us if some day the radicals get the upper hand and eliminate corporations and plunder the rich. Don't worry about illegal immigration, Americans will be fighting to get to Mexico.

I'm no hypocrite, moron. The corporations should pay their fair share, not 12%, and the rich are paying 17%, dimwit dupe. The POOR pay more %wise in all taxes and fees fcs. Change the channel. What dumbass tools the dupes/haters are.....

details:
1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.
Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.
But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):
1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%
A 13% drop since 1980
2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.
Share of National Income going to Top 10%:
1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%
An increase of 16% since Reagan.
3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.
The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.
1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)
A 12.3% drop after Reagan.
4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.
Household Debt as percentage of GDP:
1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%
A 45% increase after 1980.
5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.
Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:
1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%
A 5.6 times increase.
6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.
The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:
1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%
A 10% Decrease.
Links:
1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – Congratulations to Emmanuel Saez | The White House
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb...able=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear=2008&LastYear=2010
4 = PrudentBear
4 = FRB: Z.1 Release--Flow of Funds Accounts of the United States--June 7, 2012
5/6 = http://www.b
usinessinsider.com/15-charts-about-wealth-and-inequality-in-america-2010-4?slop=1#slideshow-start
Overview = Reagan Revolution Home To Roost -- In Charts | OurFuture.org
 
The Democrat party is very sick. All they can do is point fingers and cry "racist". Even Brad Pitt's mother is hiding because of death threats for speaking her mind. The USA is in distress and this President and his gang need to be removed for the health of our nation.
 
Bush II seemed slim, tanned, and youthful for his age. He looked better when he left the WH than when he entered, he certainly got plenty of rest.
 
By Melissa Jeltsen

In the words of GOP strategist Ed Rollins, the Republican Party can still be summed up as "a bunch of old white guys."

Appearing on Fox News Tuesday morning, Rollins was asked whom he would pick as a running mate for presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. Rollins said he would choose Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who is a Cuban American, and also addressed criticism of the Republican Party's relative homogeny.

"It is a bunch of old white guys. Unfortunately, a lot of them are fat like me," he said. "We need to basically broaden the base. We need to have more women. We need to have more Latinos. We need to have more African Americans."

Rollins is not exactly out on a limb with his comments.

Research, notably by political scientist Ruy Teixeira, has suggested that various ongoing demographic shifts -- the rising number of Hispanics, a growing gender gap between the two parties and the movement of urban professionals to the Democratic side -- benefit the Democratic Party.

More: Ed Rollins: GOP Needs To Be Less Old, White And Fat (VIDEO)

Funny.....since Ed Rollins is bald, old, fat, and white himself.

I think he should STFU.

He admitted to being old, fat, and white in the interview.
 
By Melissa Jeltsen

In the words of GOP strategist Ed Rollins, the Republican Party can still be summed up as "a bunch of old white guys."

Appearing on Fox News Tuesday morning, Rollins was asked whom he would pick as a running mate for presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney. Rollins said he would choose Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who is a Cuban American, and also addressed criticism of the Republican Party's relative homogeny.

"It is a bunch of old white guys. Unfortunately, a lot of them are fat like me," he said. "We need to basically broaden the base. We need to have more women. We need to have more Latinos. We need to have more African Americans."

Rollins is not exactly out on a limb with his comments.

Research, notably by political scientist Ruy Teixeira, has suggested that various ongoing demographic shifts -- the rising number of Hispanics, a growing gender gap between the two parties and the movement of urban professionals to the Democratic side -- benefit the Democratic Party.

More: Ed Rollins: GOP Needs To Be Less Old, White And Fat (VIDEO)

Racist, Both the OP and the Loser who perpetuated his Racist Old people hating BS. lol

It's quite possible that Rollins is a racist. He did run Reagan's campaign after all.
 
i noticed when the Libs bring up the minorites, its always africans or spanish never the others, like there are no other nationalities here, and before u say it asians have a big population here yet asians are never mentioned by thte libs, why is that?
 
i noticed when the Libs bring up the minorites, its always africans or spanish never the others, like there are no other nationalities here, and before u say it asians have a big population here yet asians are never mentioned by thte libs, why is that?

Aw, those Asians probably vote Republican.
 
i noticed when the Libs bring up the minorites, its always africans or spanish never the others, like there are no other nationalities here, and before u say it asians have a big population here yet asians are never mentioned by thte libs, why is that?

Aw, those Asians probably vote Republican.

oo so asians dont count if they choose to vote republican i see.
 
i noticed when the Libs bring up the minorites, its always africans or spanish never the others, like there are no other nationalities here, and before u say it asians have a big population here yet asians are never mentioned by thte libs, why is that?

Aw, those Asians probably vote Republican.

oo so asians dont count if they choose to vote republican i see.

Yes, I'm sure you "see" quite clearly...
 
What do Republicans do for minorities that doesn't require Vaseline or K-Y Jelly?

"...do for..."

And there's those words.

Minorities will be far better off when they realize they should not wait for the government to do anything for them.

.

Government sets the stage for how we live our lives.

NO, they do that for how you Democrats sheep live your lives because you can't seem to do it on your own
 

Forum List

Back
Top