That's the Kind of Man Mitt Romney is

[peach174]

It has nothing do with Envy. I don't want to be like them. I don't want to get my rocks off firing people like Romney apparently does. I certainly don't want to be a brain-washed Mormon Cultist, either. I mean, Jesus, ever have a talk with a Mormon about how there's no evidence of a Nephite Civilization in the Americas. It's hilarious. It's like arguing with a retard who still believes in Santa Claus.

But my point stands.

What if the Rich were sent to war? What if their children were the first ones to go.

Yeah, we'd still fight necessary wars like WWII, but idiotic crap like Vietnam and Iraq wouldn't happen. If they were burying their kids instead of counting their profits from the war, they'd think twice about it.

Yes, it's envy. The rich have money -- you don't. You want it, and you want the government to take it away from them and give it to you.

Simple, huh?

No, it's not that simple. A nation produces a finite amount of wealth in any given year. It is wrong if too much of that wealth ends up in the hands of too few. It is wrong for government to encourage that. Conservatives want the government to encourage that. That is a fundamental error in the philosophy of conservatism. Read my sigline.

Taking from the wealthy to redistribute it, never works. It robs the rich and enslaves the poor. It never helps the poor to get out of that poverty and to be able to become wealthy themselves.
Your philosophy does not work for the poor. There is no finite amount of wealth.
Capitalism is the best that man has come up with. It brings the poor out of poverty and into the middle class and moves them towards becoming wealthy.
Wealth is redistributed by the wealthy, in the things that they buy and the fund raisers that they produce and pay for, that returns it back into the economy.
They also help with new businesses by investing in them.
They just don't sit on it and never spend it .
You as an individual can bring wealth into existence and you are paid accordingly.
It is explained in this link;
When It Comes to Wealth Creation, There Is No Pie - Forbes

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yes, it's envy. The rich have money -- you don't. You want it, and you want the government to take it away from them and give it to you.

Simple, huh?

No, it's not that simple. A nation produces a finite amount of wealth in any given year. It is wrong if too much of that wealth ends up in the hands of too few. It is wrong for government to encourage that. Conservatives want the government to encourage that. That is a fundamental error in the philosophy of conservatism. Read my sigline.

Taking from the wealthy to redistribute it, never works. It robs the rich and enslaves the poor. It never helps the poor to get out of that poverty and to be able to become wealthy themselves.
Your philosophy does not work for the poor. There is no finite amount of wealth.
Capitalism is the best that man has come up with. It brings the poor out of poverty and into the middle class and moves them towards becoming wealthy.
Wealth is redistributed by the wealthy, in the things that they buy and the fund raisers that they produce and pay for, that returns it back into the economy.
They also help with new businesses by investing in them.
They just don't sit on it and never spend it .
You as an individual can bring wealth into existence and you are paid accordingly.
It is explained in this link;
When It Comes to Wealth Creation, There Is No Pie - Forbes

1. " There is no finite amount of wealth."
They just don't get it.


2. "Capitalism is the best that man has come up with."
The slow-thinking can't seem to agree because they are not the most-rewarded.
Millionaire Moore plays to his base:


Michael Moore tells CNN's Anderson Cooper that capitalism as we know it is over. Moore say capitalism is where "the problem" is. Moore was broadcasting from "Occupy Oakland."

"So, let's not use the old definition where we think -- when we say capitalism, we're talking about 2011. 2011 capitalism is an evil system set up to benefit the few at the expense of the many. That's what happened, and that's what people are tired of. Which is too bad for the capitalists because I think a lot of people, perhaps in this crowd, probably used to support the 'old-style' of capitalism," Moore said on CNN.

"So, what system do you want?" Anderson Cooper asked Moore.

"Well there's no system right now that exists. We're going to create that system. This movement, this movement in the next year, or two, or few years is going to create a democratic economic system. That's the most important thing. Whatever we come up with it has to have at its core -- the American people are going to be the one's controlling this economy. We're going to have a say, a big say, the say in how this economy is run," Moore said.

Moore says the Occupy group and himself have "declared" the current economic system as over. "It's just a matter of time until we make that happen," Moore said.
Michael Moore: We're Going To Replace Capitalism As We Know It | RealClearPolitics

 

[daveman]

Poor Communists.


Say, did they teach you what your oh-so-peaceful Communists did after we left?

Lakes of blood.

I suppose if you're going to acknowledge that at all, it will be to blame the US.

There were lakes of blood in Cambodia, a country WE dragged into the war even though it wanted to stay out. Sihanouk didn't want to get into the war, so we staged a coup against him. And the guy we put in was so inept, the Communists took over.

Vietnam, not so much.

Didn't say it was peaceful, guy. In fact, you drag out a civil war long enough, there will be reprecussions. Has little to do with political philosophies and more with the fact that you have years of grudges and payback.

Shit, this country hasn't recovered from it's civil war, given all the rednecks who fly Confederate Battle flags like that's something to be proud of.

I predicted you'd blame the US, and you did.

How does it feel to be so predictable?

Oh, and you're wrong about Cambodia. The Communists dragged them into the war.

Vietnam War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

North Vietnam invaded Laos in 1959, and used 30,000 men to build invasion routes through Laos and Cambodia by 1961.​

But you blame the US.

Not at all surprising.

 

[daveman]

Yeah, I usually ignore anything from Christian assholes like C.S. Lewis.

Of course. You're afraid of differing viewpoints.

Well, no. I have no problem with an informed viewpoint.

The definition of "informed" being, of course, "one that agrees with me".

It's funny the way you pretend to be not perfectly transparent.

LIke I said, I used to be as right wing as you are, until I learned it doesn't work. (The Recession of 2008 was a Harsh Mistress!)

I doubt you were ever conservative.

What I find amusing is that the Modern "Conservative" movement holds Ayn Rand in one hand and the Bible in the other, and doesn't see the obvious contradiction.

Ayn Rand was an atheist who had nothing but contempt for religious people, while the Bible disdains the "I've got mine, screw you" mentality it espouses.

But you celebrate greed and still call yourself a "Christian"... it's amusing to me on so many levels.

I have never understood why it is greed to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.

-- Thomas Sowell

Can you explain that? Rhetorical question. Of course you can't.

 

[daveman]

" It is wrong if too much of that wealth ends up in the hands of too few."

Is there any correspondence between "ends up" and "earned"?

They can't comprehend the idea of earning wealth. It all has to be stolen from the poor.

And the give-away is that he believes it to be a zero-sum situation.

Of course.

Well, it's easier than getting off the couch and getting to work, I suppose.

 

[daveman]

No, it's not that simple. A nation produces a finite amount of wealth in any given year. It is wrong if too much of that wealth ends up in the hands of too few. It is wrong for government to encourage that. Conservatives want the government to encourage that. That is a fundamental error in the philosophy of conservatism. Read my sigline.

Taking from the wealthy to redistribute it, never works. It robs the rich and enslaves the poor. It never helps the poor to get out of that poverty and to be able to become wealthy themselves.
Your philosophy does not work for the poor. There is no finite amount of wealth.
Capitalism is the best that man has come up with. It brings the poor out of poverty and into the middle class and moves them towards becoming wealthy.
Wealth is redistributed by the wealthy, in the things that they buy and the fund raisers that they produce and pay for, that returns it back into the economy.
They also help with new businesses by investing in them.
They just don't sit on it and never spend it .
You as an individual can bring wealth into existence and you are paid accordingly.
It is explained in this link;
When It Comes to Wealth Creation, There Is No Pie - Forbes

1. " There is no finite amount of wealth."
They just don't get it.


2. "Capitalism is the best that man has come up with."
The slow-thinking can't seem to agree because they are not the most-rewarded.
Millionaire Moore plays to his base:


Michael Moore tells CNN's Anderson Cooper that capitalism as we know it is over. Moore say capitalism is where "the problem" is. Moore was broadcasting from "Occupy Oakland."

"So, let's not use the old definition where we think -- when we say capitalism, we're talking about 2011. 2011 capitalism is an evil system set up to benefit the few at the expense of the many. That's what happened, and that's what people are tired of. Which is too bad for the capitalists because I think a lot of people, perhaps in this crowd, probably used to support the 'old-style' of capitalism," Moore said on CNN.

"So, what system do you want?" Anderson Cooper asked Moore.

"Well there's no system right now that exists. We're going to create that system. This movement, this movement in the next year, or two, or few years is going to create a democratic economic system. That's the most important thing. Whatever we come up with it has to have at its core -- the American people are going to be the one's controlling this economy. We're going to have a say, a big say, the say in how this economy is run," Moore said.

Moore says the Occupy group and himself have "declared" the current economic system as over. "It's just a matter of time until we make that happen," Moore said.
Michael Moore: We're Going To Replace Capitalism As We Know It | RealClearPolitics

After Lying About His Wealth on National TV, Michael Moore Admits He's A One Percenter | NewsBusters.org

If only those Occutards knew that Moore is worth $50 million and has shares in Boeing, Honeywell, and Halliburton.

 

[Shelzin]

Taking from the wealthy to redistribute it, never works. It robs the rich and enslaves the poor. It never helps the poor to get out of that poverty and to be able to become wealthy themselves.
Your philosophy does not work for the poor. There is no finite amount of wealth.
Capitalism is the best that man has come up with. It brings the poor out of poverty and into the middle class and moves them towards becoming wealthy.
Wealth is redistributed by the wealthy, in the things that they buy and the fund raisers that they produce and pay for, that returns it back into the economy.
They also help with new businesses by investing in them.
They just don't sit on it and never spend it .
You as an individual can bring wealth into existence and you are paid accordingly.
It is explained in this link;
When It Comes to Wealth Creation, There Is No Pie - Forbes

1. " There is no finite amount of wealth."
They just don't get it.


2. "Capitalism is the best that man has come up with."
The slow-thinking can't seem to agree because they are not the most-rewarded.
Millionaire Moore plays to his base:


Michael Moore tells CNN's Anderson Cooper that capitalism as we know it is over. Moore say capitalism is where "the problem" is. Moore was broadcasting from "Occupy Oakland."

"So, let's not use the old definition where we think -- when we say capitalism, we're talking about 2011. 2011 capitalism is an evil system set up to benefit the few at the expense of the many. That's what happened, and that's what people are tired of. Which is too bad for the capitalists because I think a lot of people, perhaps in this crowd, probably used to support the 'old-style' of capitalism," Moore said on CNN.

"So, what system do you want?" Anderson Cooper asked Moore.

"Well there's no system right now that exists. We're going to create that system. This movement, this movement in the next year, or two, or few years is going to create a democratic economic system. That's the most important thing. Whatever we come up with it has to have at its core -- the American people are going to be the one's controlling this economy. We're going to have a say, a big say, the say in how this economy is run," Moore said.

Moore says the Occupy group and himself have "declared" the current economic system as over. "It's just a matter of time until we make that happen," Moore said.
Michael Moore: We're Going To Replace Capitalism As We Know It | RealClearPolitics

After Lying About His Wealth on National TV, Michael Moore Admits He's A One Percenter | NewsBusters.org

If only those Occutards knew that Moore is worth $50 million and has shares in Boeing, Honeywell, and Halliburton.

That doesn't upset me nearly as much as calling his movies "documentaries"

Man... That burns my biscuit... Documentary my ass.

 

[daveman]

1. " There is no finite amount of wealth."
They just don't get it.


2. "Capitalism is the best that man has come up with."
The slow-thinking can't seem to agree because they are not the most-rewarded.
Millionaire Moore plays to his base:


Michael Moore tells CNN's Anderson Cooper that capitalism as we know it is over. Moore say capitalism is where "the problem" is. Moore was broadcasting from "Occupy Oakland."

"So, let's not use the old definition where we think -- when we say capitalism, we're talking about 2011. 2011 capitalism is an evil system set up to benefit the few at the expense of the many. That's what happened, and that's what people are tired of. Which is too bad for the capitalists because I think a lot of people, perhaps in this crowd, probably used to support the 'old-style' of capitalism," Moore said on CNN.

"So, what system do you want?" Anderson Cooper asked Moore.

"Well there's no system right now that exists. We're going to create that system. This movement, this movement in the next year, or two, or few years is going to create a democratic economic system. That's the most important thing. Whatever we come up with it has to have at its core -- the American people are going to be the one's controlling this economy. We're going to have a say, a big say, the say in how this economy is run," Moore said.

Moore says the Occupy group and himself have "declared" the current economic system as over. "It's just a matter of time until we make that happen," Moore said.
Michael Moore: We're Going To Replace Capitalism As We Know It | RealClearPolitics

After Lying About His Wealth on National TV, Michael Moore Admits He's A One Percenter | NewsBusters.org

If only those Occutards knew that Moore is worth $50 million and has shares in Boeing, Honeywell, and Halliburton.

That doesn't upset me nearly as much as calling his movies "documentaries"

Man... That burns my biscuit... Documentary my ass.

Howzabout "blatant leftist propaganda, indoctrination, and outright lies"?

 

[Shelzin]

After Lying About His Wealth on National TV, Michael Moore Admits He's A One Percenter | NewsBusters.org

If only those Occutards knew that Moore is worth $50 million and has shares in Boeing, Honeywell, and Halliburton.

That doesn't upset me nearly as much as calling his movies "documentaries"

Man... That burns my biscuit... Documentary my ass.

Howzabout "blatant leftist propaganda, indoctrination, and outright lies"?

Yeah... Freedom of the press, Freedom of speech... I don't have a problem with him making the movies... I'd call them a whole lot of things. But documentary isn't close by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[daveman]

That doesn't upset me nearly as much as calling his movies "documentaries"

Man... That burns my biscuit... Documentary my ass.

Howzabout "blatant leftist propaganda, indoctrination, and outright lies"?

Yeah... Freedom of the press, Freedom of speech... I don't have a problem with him making the movies... I'd call them a whole lot of things. But documentary isn't close by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[JoeB131]

I predicted you'd blame the US, and you did.

How does it feel to be so predictable?

Oh, and you're wrong about Cambodia. The Communists dragged them into the war.

Vietnam War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

North Vietnam invaded Laos in 1959, and used 30,000 men to build invasion routes through Laos and Cambodia by 1961.​

But you blame the US.

Not at all surprising.

Okay, here's the thing.

The Laotians lived there.
The Cambodians lived there.
The Vietnamese lived there.

We didn't. But we overthrew governments and bombed and terrorized those people for a decade, until our own people finally got tired of the lies and made our leaders pull out.

We were the bad guys over there. Sorry. There's no nice way to put it. We got involved in someone else's civil war, and we picked the wrong side. Every sensible historian agrees on this.

 

[JoeB131]

[
I doubt you were ever conservative.

Well, of course not. You're just not intelligent enough to think that something can happen in one's life that can change your viewpoint.

For me, it was when my last job illegally fired me after I ran up too many medical bills.

Put the whole thing in perspective as to who my friends were, and who weren't.

What I find amusing is that the Modern "Conservative" movement holds Ayn Rand in one hand and the Bible in the other, and doesn't see the obvious contradiction.

Ayn Rand was an atheist who had nothing but contempt for religious people, while the Bible disdains the "I've got mine, screw you" mentality it espouses.

But you celebrate greed and still call yourself a "Christian"... it's amusing to me on so many levels.

I have never understood why it is greed to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else's money.

-- Thomas Sowell

Can you explain that? Rhetorical question. Of course you can't.

No, I honestly can't explain why Thomas Sowell sides with people who would make him a second class citizen, if they had their way.

But the reality is, the rich don't "earn" their money. Someone else earns it for them. Bill Gates didn't personally program my computer, burn the CD, lovingly put it into a box and shipped it to me. Someone else did all that. He just collected a large share of the proceeds. (And Bill is one of the better rich people, he treats his folks fairly.)

So it's not unreasonable to ask the rich to pay their fair share for a society that benefits them.

Clean air, clean water, roads, schools, infrastructure, law enforcement. The wealthy as much or more than working folks do out of that. They should pay their fair share of it.

 

[thanatos144]

I predicted you'd blame the US, and you did.

How does it feel to be so predictable?

Oh, and you're wrong about Cambodia. The Communists dragged them into the war.

Vietnam War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

North Vietnam invaded Laos in 1959, and used 30,000 men to build invasion routes through Laos and Cambodia by 1961.​

But you blame the US.

Not at all surprising.

Okay, here's the thing.

The Laotians lived there.
The Cambodians lived there.
The Vietnamese lived there.

We didn't. But we overthrew governments and bombed and terrorized those people for a decade, until our own people finally got tired of the lies and made our leaders pull out.

We were the bad guys over there. Sorry. There's no nice way to put it. We got involved in someone else's civil war, and we picked the wrong side. Every sensible historian agrees on this.

Go learn some history you idiot.....You obviously dont know what your fucking talking about.

 

[JoeB131]

Go learn some history you idiot.....You obviously dont know what your fucking talking about.

Guy, I have a degree in history.

What do you got?

(Incidently, most of these events occurred within my lifetime...)

 

[thanatos144]

Go learn some history you idiot.....You obviously dont know what your fucking talking about.

Guy, I have a degree in history.

What do you got?

(Incidently, most of these events occurred within my lifetime...)

Bullshit.

 

[JoeB131]

Go learn some history you idiot.....You obviously dont know what your fucking talking about.

Guy, I have a degree in history.

What do you got?

(Incidently, most of these events occurred within my lifetime...)

Bullshit.

It's kind of hard to argue with your ignorance... But let's take a look at just one part of our stupidity.

We had a hand in the 1963 coup against President Diem in South Vietnam. JFK and RFK even discussed it on tape. Horrible idea, he had a little credibility as a nationalist, but the generals who took over did.

In 1970, we sponsered the coup against Norodom Sihanouk (who passed away this week) and put into power, Lon Nol.

We dropped more bombs on Laos than we dropped on Germany and Japan combined in WWII.

And, really, for what? Oh, because they might turn out to be communists or something.

 

[Interpol]

That's the kind of man Mitt Romney is.....on Monday, but by Thursday he's this kind of man.

Sorry, but I can't trade a President Romney working for free for millions of Americans losing their jobs. Sketchy deal that would be.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLo0Jwj03JU]Stage - YouTube[/ame]

 

[PoliticalChic]

That's the kind of man Mitt Romney is.....on Monday, but by Thursday he's this kind of man.

Sorry, but I can't trade a President Romney working for free for millions of Americans losing their jobs. Sketchy deal that would be.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLo0Jwj03JU]Stage - YouTube[/ame]

"I can't trade a President Romney working for free for millions of Americans losing their jobs."



OK....hands down....in a week with lots of stiff competition.....

...this is the winner in the category of 'Unintentional Humor"!



"ROMNEY on the failure of Obama's economic policy: "And the proof of that is 23 million people out of work. The proof of that is 1 out of 6 people in poverty. The proof of that is we've gone from 32 million on food stamps to 47 million on food stamps. The proof of that is that 50 percent of college graduates this year can't find work."

THE FACTS: The number of unemployed is 12.5 million, not 23 million. Romney was also counting 8 million people who are working part time but would like a full-time job and 2.6 million who have stopped looking for work, either because they are discouraged or because they are going back to school or for other reasons.

He got the figure closer to right earlier in the debate, leaving out only the part-timers when he said the U.S. has "23 million people out of work or stopped looking for work."
Presidential debate: Checking the facts on health care, unemployment | NOLA.com



Want to add in Obama's outsourcing jobs overseas?

 

[JoeB131]

The GOP Mantra-

"Obama hasn't fixed what we screwed up fast enough!"

 

[Meister]

The GOP Mantra-

"Obama hasn't fixed what we screwed up fast enough!"

Obama has hurt the process, that's what the conservatives are saying.
He doesn't have a clue on how to fix it.