It's No Wonder Liberals Are Always Complain About the Rich

[KMAN]

Look at the top 20 worst paying jobs and wouldn't you agree that it's mostly liberals who are in these jobs. Education, Art, Music, etc...

When you go to college you have a choice to make... Taking a path that will lead you to a high paying job, or taking a path to a low paying job. It looks like liberals tend to take the low paying job path and after they realize that they are not making any money (because of their decision) they take it out on the people who took the well paying job path.

20-worst-paying-college-degrees-in-2010: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

The problem with your crapaganda is on the average Libs earn MORE than you lazy CON$ervative slackers.

Get a job you lazy slacker, then you won't have to be so jealous of the higher achieving Libs.

Of course they do....

 

[edthecynic]

that's not what obama is sayin, he is blaming the republicans for not wanting to extend the benefits.

The GOP want to cripple any recovery to regain power. They see their only path to power is through the suffering of the American people. So if the GOP do not want to extend UE benefits it's because they are absolutely convinced extending benefits will help the economy.

last november when obama signed the extension of unemployment benefits, he made hte point to say that they were paid for, because that was the responsible thing to do.

then in july, republicans wanted this round of extensions to be paid for, democrats apparently didn't. R's said use unspent stimulus funds. dems didn't want to do that.

why was it the responsible thing to pay for benefits in november but not july?

Again, if the GOP want to redirect stimulus funds it is only because they believe it will cripple the stimulus and hurt recovery.

Just because stimulus funds are not PAID OUT does not mean they have not been contracted for and therefore spent. It means the projects have not been completed yet so the money has not been paid out. If the money is diverted as the GOP desires the contracts have to be canceled crippling the recovery, the primary goal of the GOP power grab.

 

[cad]

The GOP want to cripple any recovery to regain power. They see their only path to power is through the suffering of the American people. So if the GOP do not want to extend UE benefits it's because they are absolutely convinced extending benefits will help the economy.

last november when obama signed the extension of unemployment benefits, he made hte point to say that they were paid for, because that was the responsible thing to do.

then in july, republicans wanted this round of extensions to be paid for, democrats apparently didn't. R's said use unspent stimulus funds. dems didn't want to do that.

why was it the responsible thing to pay for benefits in november but not july?

Again, if the GOP want to redirect stimulus funds it is only because they believe it will cripple the stimulus and hurt recovery.

Just because stimulus funds are not PAID OUT does not mean they have not been contracted for and therefore spent. It means the projects have not been completed yet so the money has not been paid out. If the money is diverted as the GOP desires the contracts have to be canceled crippling the recovery, the primary goal of the GOP power grab.

so why wasn't it the responsible thing to do to pay for the benefits?

and i don't think cancelling the building of turtle bridges and window replacements at unused buildings would cripple the recovery.

 

[edthecynic]

Look at the top 20 worst paying jobs and wouldn't you agree that it's mostly liberals who are in these jobs. Education, Art, Music, etc...

When you go to college you have a choice to make... Taking a path that will lead you to a high paying job, or taking a path to a low paying job. It looks like liberals tend to take the low paying job path and after they realize that they are not making any money (because of their decision) they take it out on the people who took the well paying job path.

20-worst-paying-college-degrees-in-2010: Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance

The problem with your crapaganda is on the average Libs earn MORE than you lazy CON$ervative slackers.

Get a job you lazy slacker, then you won't have to be so jealous of the higher achieving Libs.

Of course they do....

Yes they do, and you lazy CON$ revealed that fact when CON$ were bragging about how much more generous CON$ were than Libs even though CON$ earn less money than Libs.

 

[cad]

The problem with your crapaganda is on the average Libs earn MORE than you lazy CON$ervative slackers.

Get a job you lazy slacker, then you won't have to be so jealous of the higher achieving Libs.

Of course they do....

Yes they do, and you lazy CON$ revealed that fact when CON$ were bragging about how much more generous CON$ were than Libs even though CON$ earn less money than Libs.

isn't that based on giving as a percentage of income?

is it more generous for the person who makes 40k a year to give 1000 to a charity,
or bill gates to give 100 million?

 

[edthecynic]

last november when obama signed the extension of unemployment benefits, he made hte point to say that they were paid for, because that was the responsible thing to do.

then in july, republicans wanted this round of extensions to be paid for, democrats apparently didn't. R's said use unspent stimulus funds. dems didn't want to do that.

why was it the responsible thing to pay for benefits in november but not july?

Again, if the GOP want to redirect stimulus funds it is only because they believe it will cripple the stimulus and hurt recovery.

Just because stimulus funds are not PAID OUT does not mean they have not been contracted for and therefore spent. It means the projects have not been completed yet so the money has not been paid out. If the money is diverted as the GOP desires the contracts have to be canceled crippling the recovery, the primary goal of the GOP power grab.

so why wasn't it the responsible thing to do to pay for the benefits?

and i don't think cancelling the building of turtle bridges and window replacements at unused buildings would cripple the recovery.

Replacing broken windows in unused buildings prevents further damage to the buildings from the elements. You can be sure if the GOP propaganda machine says something is a waste of money, it's not.

 

[edthecynic]

Of course they do....

Yes they do, and you lazy CON$ revealed that fact when CON$ were bragging about how much more generous CON$ were than Libs even though CON$ earn less money than Libs.

isn't that based on giving as a percentage of income?

is it more generous for the person who makes 40k a year to give 1000 to a charity,
or bill gates to give 100 million?

March 27, 2008
Conservatives More Liberal Givers
By George Will

Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

 

[cad]

Again, if the GOP want to redirect stimulus funds it is only because they believe it will cripple the stimulus and hurt recovery.

Just because stimulus funds are not PAID OUT does not mean they have not been contracted for and therefore spent. It means the projects have not been completed yet so the money has not been paid out. If the money is diverted as the GOP desires the contracts have to be canceled crippling the recovery, the primary goal of the GOP power grab.

so why wasn't it the responsible thing to do to pay for the benefits?

and i don't think cancelling the building of turtle bridges and window replacements at unused buildings would cripple the recovery.

Replacing broken windows in unused buildings prevents further damage to the buildings from the elements. You can be sure if the GOP propaganda machine says something is a waste of money, it's not.

and those turtle bridges? yes, i'm sure that unused building was in imminent danger.

how about those unemployment benefits? why didn't they need to be paid for? what changed since november?

 

[cad]

wh

Yes they do, and you lazy CON$ revealed that fact when CON$ were bragging about how much more generous CON$ were than Libs even though CON$ earn less money than Libs.

isn't that based on giving as a percentage of income?

is it more generous for the person who makes 40k a year to give 1000 to a charity,
or bill gates to give 100 million?

March 27, 2008
Conservatives More Liberal Givers
By George Will

Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

what point are you making? that conservatives give more than liberals?

 

[edthecynic]

so why wasn't it the responsible thing to do to pay for the benefits?

and i don't think cancelling the building of turtle bridges and window replacements at unused buildings would cripple the recovery.

Replacing broken windows in unused buildings prevents further damage to the buildings from the elements. You can be sure if the GOP propaganda machine says something is a waste of money, it's not.

and those turtle bridges? yes, i'm sure that unused building was in imminent danger.

how about those unemployment benefits? why didn't they need to be paid for? what changed since november?

The idea was to prevent the building from becoming in imminent danger so it can be sold or rented eventually for full value.

And the GOP have no problem with unpaid for tax cuts, so the only reason the GOP were demanding the diversion of funds away from the recovery was to cripple the recovery so the GOP can grab power.

 

[cad]

Replacing broken windows in unused buildings prevents further damage to the buildings from the elements. You can be sure if the GOP propaganda machine says something is a waste of money, it's not.

and those turtle bridges? yes, i'm sure that unused building was in imminent danger.

how about those unemployment benefits? why didn't they need to be paid for? what changed since november?

The idea was to prevent the building from becoming in imminent danger so it can be sold or rented eventually for full value.

And the GOP have no problem with unpaid for tax cuts, so the only reason the GOP were demanding the diversion of funds away from the recovery was to cripple the recovery so the GOP can grab power.

that doesn't explain why the benefits needed to be paid for in november but not july.

and why did you prove that cons give more than libs? weren't you arguing the opposite point?

 

[edthecynic]

wh

isn't that based on giving as a percentage of income?

is it more generous for the person who makes 40k a year to give 1000 to a charity,
or bill gates to give 100 million?

March 27, 2008
Conservatives More Liberal Givers
By George Will

Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

what point are you making? that conservatives give more than liberals?

No obviously!!! The point is that the title and premiss of this thread is a CON$ervative LIE!
Get it?????

 

[Misty]

Responsible Wealth | United for a Fair Economy

Study debunks journalistic image of rich 'Latte' Democrats, poor 'NASCAR' Republicans | Newsroom | Washington University in St. Louis

"For decades, Democrats have been viewed as the party of the poor, with Republicans representing the rich. Recent presidential elections suggested a reversal in this pattern, with Democrats performing well in richer "blue" states of the Northeast and West Coast, and Republicans dominating a central swath of poorer "red" states in the South and Midwest.

To reconcile this paradox, Park and his colleagues examined more than four decades of data on income and voting patterns and compared trends at the individual, county, state and national levels. Results shed light on what's really behind the seeming shift in rich-poor voter affiliations and debunk a number of common misconceptions about current political realities.

'Gross oversimplification'

"Our results suggest that the popular journalistic image of rich latte-drinking Democrats and poor NASCAR Republicans is a gross oversimplification," Park says. "Income varies far more within states than average income does between states, and it is these with-in-state variances that explain national voting patterns."

 

[Bfgrn]

they hate the rich (or the conservative rich) because they believe that there is only so much to go around, and if you have a lot, you must have taken it (usually unfairly) from someone else, probably someone with a darker skin color than you.

Liberals don't 'hate' the rich, or hate anyone for that matter. But liberals don't worship the rich like you right wing Monica Lewinsky's do.

There are 2 types of people that vote Republicans, millionaires and suckers...

 

[Misty]

Arthur Brooks: Conservatives More Generous Than Liberals
Both liberals and conservatives claim to care more about the poor. But which group is backing up that claim with cash? Arthur Brooks' examines this in his new book, "Who Really Cares."

His study shows that conservatives give more of their time, money, and even blood to help out the less fortunate."

LiveLeak.com - Arthur Brooks: Conservatives More Generous Than Liberals




Conservatives are so sweet and giving. ((((((((hug))))))))

 

[Bfgrn]

Arthur Brooks: Conservatives More Generous Than Liberals
Both liberals and conservatives claim to care more about the poor. But which group is backing up that claim with cash? Arthur Brooks' examines this in his new book, "Who Really Cares."

His study shows that conservatives give more of their time, money, and even blood to help out the less fortunate."

LiveLeak.com - Arthur Brooks: Conservatives More Generous Than Liberals




Conservatives are so sweet and giving. ((((((((hug))))))))

BULLSHIT!

THE Arthur Brooks study

Arthur Brooks writes: "When it comes to giving or not giving, conservatives and liberals look a lot alike. Conservative people are a percentage point or two more likely to give money each year than liberal people, but a percentage point or so less likely to volunteer [citing the 2002 General Social Survey (GSS) and the 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey (SCCBS)]". (pp. 21-22)

So, according to THE Arthur Brooks study: conservatives believe in the giving of mammon (money) and liberals believe in the giving of themselves.

 

[cad]

they hate the rich (or the conservative rich) because they believe that there is only so much to go around, and if you have a lot, you must have taken it (usually unfairly) from someone else, probably someone with a darker skin color than you.

Liberals don't 'hate' the rich, or hate anyone for that matter. But liberals don't worship the rich like you right wing Monica Lewinsky's do.

There are 2 types of people that vote Republicans, millionaires and suckers...

considering there were about 8 million millionaires in the US in 2009, that must mean there are a lot of suckers out there...probably all racists homophobes too

 

[cad]

The book uses data from many sources to prove that the one overwhelming predictor of generosity is religion. Political affiliation is almost irrelevent - the statistics for religious liberals and religious conservaties are identical. Religious people are statistically more likely to give than secularists (91% to 66%), and give more of their money (3.5 times more than secularists), are more likely to volunteer their time (67% to 44%), and volunteer more of their time (almost twice as much). The fact that the conservative population is more charitable than the liberal population is due to the fact that religious people tend to be politically conservative.

 

[edthecynic]

The book uses data from many sources to prove that the one overwhelming predictor of generosity is religion. Political affiliation is almost irrelevent - the statistics for religious liberals and religious conservaties are identical. Religious people are statistically more likely to give than secularists (91% to 66%), and give more of their money (3.5 times more than secularists), are more likely to volunteer their time (67% to 44%), and volunteer more of their time (almost twice as much). The fact that the conservative population is more charitable than the liberal population is due to the fact that religious people tend to be politically conservative.

BALONEY!

Just as CON$ pretend to be wealthier than Libs, they pretend to be more religious too.
CON$ are ChINOs, Christians In Name Only, for political purposes only.

 

[cad]

The book uses data from many sources to prove that the one overwhelming predictor of generosity is religion. Political affiliation is almost irrelevent - the statistics for religious liberals and religious conservaties are identical. Religious people are statistically more likely to give than secularists (91% to 66%), and give more of their money (3.5 times more than secularists), are more likely to volunteer their time (67% to 44%), and volunteer more of their time (almost twice as much). The fact that the conservative population is more charitable than the liberal population is due to the fact that religious people tend to be politically conservative.

BALONEY!

Just as CON$ pretend to be wealthier than Libs, they pretend to be more religious too.
CON$ are ChINOs, Christians In Name Only, for political purposes only.

what political purpose does it serve to "pretend" to be a christian?