None of you are rich. Why are you defending billionaires?

[editec]

It is self protection. If it acceptable to steal by vote from one set of people, it is acceptable to steal by vote from any group of people.

If we once go along with the concept that there are acceptable targets that can be robbed with impunity, then the rights of all of us to safe enjoyment of what is ours are annihilated. Lets steal from the Kulaks, from the asians, from the Jews, from the target de jour. And sooner or later it becomes our turn.

No one's stealing anything from Kulaks, you're just a whiny whore *****.

Ya think?

I think the superwealthy are stealing from the Kulak class.

And FWIW, I think the Dems AND the Republicans are both doing that.

Calling people who make $250,000.01 RICH?

They're not rich, they're Kulaks...the most productive class in this nation.

And by imposing upon them the SAME RATE OF TAXATION ON THE KYLAKS as the truly RICH, this nation is raping that Kylak class to protect the truly RICH from the burden of paying a higher rate of taxes.

Now we could entirely elminate what little WELFARE we give to the roughly 2,000,000 mostly children who get welfare and the continued RAPE of the Kulak class would have to continue since WELFARE is such a very VERY minor amount of money compared to the overall budget.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I think the dummies that buy into this latest neocon/teabagger talking point and defend it on these boards are actually the stiffs who are paid by various GOP think tanks and Pacs to comb the internet and post the preposterous and convoluted BS we see now....either that or they are truly willfully ignornat fools who are smug that they haven't lost their job yet.

The constitution guaranteed an equal " opportunity" it did not guarantee an equal " outcome." Outcomes are determined by the individual, the individual's drive and ambition constitute failure or success, success is not determined by some government hand out with other people's money.

" The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher.

" Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the gospel of envy, the creed of ignorance, it's only virtue is the shared equality of misery." Winston Churchill.

BTW there are plenty of conservatives who have lost their jobs, they just don't sit in front of the TV and whine about it and look for handout's everywhere, they are out looking for another job. They also take anything they can get to get through this debaucle of a socialist agenda with a socialist for President.

Your opening paragraph immediately displays your erroneous and/or dishonest take on the situation......as the NO ONE is talking about "equal outcome".....we are talking about a decent tax rate that can contribute to the nations coffers that is not unbalanced to the point where you have the working/lower/middle class paying heavily into a system while their upper middle and rich counter parts have access to numerous loop holes and write offs along with comparatively a lower tax rate. The upper middle and rich will STILL have their status and wealth, as a 3% increase won't kill them. for the working/lower/middle class, however, a 3% increase could drastically change their lives. Also, given that Obama is offering tax incentives for businesses that CREATE jobs, all the ballyhoo about class warfare is just nonsense!

Your last paragraph reeks of the pure willfully ignorant and stereotype clap trap spewed out by the likes of Levin, Savage, Limbaugh, Maulkin and company. You keep saying "socialist" when obviously you haven't a clue as to the definitions of capitalism and socialism. However, I do agree that the bank and Wall St. bailouts started by the Shrub was indeed socialist in nature. But hey, if Obama's managing of TARP (another Shrub creation) that saved GM isn't to your liking, what would you have suggested?

No! Not higher taxes or what you consider to be a "decent tax rate"...Government must learn to spend within it's means. It must learn to get out of the entitlement business for the purpose of buying votes from the entitled.

 

[Bfgrn]

The constitution guaranteed an equal " opportunity" it did not guarantee an equal " outcome." Outcomes are determined by the individual, the individual's drive and ambition constitute failure or success, success is not determined by some government hand out with other people's money.

" The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher.

" Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the gospel of envy, the creed of ignorance, it's only virtue is the shared equality of misery." Winston Churchill.

BTW there are plenty of conservatives who have lost their jobs, they just don't sit in front of the TV and whine about it and look for handout's everywhere, they are out looking for another job. They also take anything they can get to get through this debaucle of a socialist agenda with a socialist for President.

Your opening paragraph immediately displays your erroneous and/or dishonest take on the situation......as the NO ONE is talking about "equal outcome".....we are talking about a decent tax rate that can contribute to the nations coffers that is not unbalanced to the point where you have the working/lower/middle class paying heavily into a system while their upper middle and rich counter parts have access to numerous loop holes and write offs along with comparatively a lower tax rate. The upper middle and rich will STILL have their status and wealth, as a 3% increase won't kill them. for the working/lower/middle class, however, a 3% increase could drastically change their lives. Also, given that Obama is offering tax incentives for businesses that CREATE jobs, all the ballyhoo about class warfare is just nonsense!

Your last paragraph reeks of the pure willfully ignorant and stereotype clap trap spewed out by the likes of Levin, Savage, Limbaugh, Maulkin and company. You keep saying "socialist" when obviously you haven't a clue as to the definitions of capitalism and socialism. However, I do agree that the bank and Wall St. bailouts started by the Shrub was indeed socialist in nature. But hey, if Obama's managing of TARP (another Shrub creation) that saved GM isn't to your liking, what would you have suggested?

No! Not higher taxes or what you consider to be a "decent tax rate"...Government must learn to spend within it's means. It must learn to get out of the entitlement business for the purpose of buying votes from the entitled.

End the earned programs you call entitlements? So you advocate stealing from the American people who payed into those programs every week?

You folks on the right have moves SO FAR to the right that you have no connection with reality.

 

[uscitizen]

The answer actually leads to one of the most spectacular political stories in American history. It has to do with a shift in populism which started with Nixon and was solidified under Reagan.

Here is a very brief history of the shift.

In the 60s, business started to worry about the power of Labor. This was prompted perhaps because their staggering postwar profits started to wane.

So they began investing in a political party. They used financial pressure to replace the Liberal Rockefeller wing with candidates who would help them lower labor costs, regulations, and taxes. In short, they wanted to end New Deal Capitalism (which taxed their profits in order to build a strong middle class).

They had a very serious hurdle. America was very prosperous during the postwar period, which lead to a broad consensus for the New Deal. In order to over turn the New Deal, the Right had to win the hearts and minds of the country. They had to break the New Deal coalition and sever the relationship the Democrats had with the middle class - especially in the South and Heartland.

It all started with LBJ and the Civil Rights Movement. Nixon and Goldwater used the Southern Strategy to weaken the hold the democrats had on the South, and they used 60s backlash to weaken the Democratic hold on the heartland. They basically told the south that they didn't think the Federal Government should tell them how to run their lives. Then, Nixon told his Silent White Majority that he would take the country back from the bra burning atheist antiwar free loving hippies. (notice how they shifted from postwar anti-business populism to values or "culture war" populism. This was a strategic way of getting poor people and workers into the tent)

By the time Reagan arrived on the scene the Dixiecrats had completely converted to the Republican party.

How would the GOP keep them in the tent? Remember: the Democrats offered them economic salvation. So what did Ronnie do? Sine he was put in office to help the rich, what kind of salvation would he offer to the poor, whose programs he was cutting. Enter Pat Robertson and the Moral Majority. Like Nixon, Reagan - a divorced man who never set foot in a church and was estranged from his children - shifted the populism from economic to family values.

In the back of the house, he helped big money take over Washington, while in the front of the house he would win elections by protecting middle America from drugs & sin.

The Republican Party won loyalty not by talking about tax cuts to offshore millionaires or how they were going to help business ship manufacturing jobs to Asian sweatshops, but by focusing on social issues, communists, and terrorists. In short, they would fight evil demons at home and abroad. This is how they got poor people to vote against their economic interests - by shifting the discussion from disappearing jobs to Islamo-fascist mexican socialists who are going to confiscate your guns and make your child gay.

(in other words. the GOP has cultivated useful idiots in order to win elections so that they can help their backers continue to get subsidies, bailouts, and tax breaks for sending jobs overseas)

It's funny. The left makes us poor so we'll vote for Democrats and their entitlement programs. So they spend all of their time trying to make the Middle-class unemployed and we're supposed to thank them for it.

How's that $16 muffin taste????

And since the New Deal saved this country's ass, and with the GI bill helped build a strong, industry and a middle class, WTF are YOU babbling about? Because it sure as hell wasn't the Dems spearheading "trickle down" economics.

Yep class warfare started in the 80's and now that ir has made the rich so much richer the rich are blaming class warfare on the liberals. sheesh.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Your opening paragraph immediately displays your erroneous and/or dishonest take on the situation......as the NO ONE is talking about "equal outcome".....we are talking about a decent tax rate that can contribute to the nations coffers that is not unbalanced to the point where you have the working/lower/middle class paying heavily into a system while their upper middle and rich counter parts have access to numerous loop holes and write offs along with comparatively a lower tax rate. The upper middle and rich will STILL have their status and wealth, as a 3% increase won't kill them. for the working/lower/middle class, however, a 3% increase could drastically change their lives. Also, given that Obama is offering tax incentives for businesses that CREATE jobs, all the ballyhoo about class warfare is just nonsense!

Your last paragraph reeks of the pure willfully ignorant and stereotype clap trap spewed out by the likes of Levin, Savage, Limbaugh, Maulkin and company. You keep saying "socialist" when obviously you haven't a clue as to the definitions of capitalism and socialism. However, I do agree that the bank and Wall St. bailouts started by the Shrub was indeed socialist in nature. But hey, if Obama's managing of TARP (another Shrub creation) that saved GM isn't to your liking, what would you have suggested?

No! Not higher taxes or what you consider to be a "decent tax rate"...Government must learn to spend within it's means. It must learn to get out of the entitlement business for the purpose of buying votes from the entitled.

End the earned programs you call entitlements? So you advocate stealing from the American people who payed into those programs every week?

You folks on the right have moves SO FAR to the right that you have no connection with reality.

HA! There is no such thing as "earned programs" or "paid" ( not "payed") into".
If your theory regarding entitlements is that ALL money TAXED yes, TAXED would be returned to the payor..Not so. In each of the entitlement programs. workers are TAXED then only a small portion of that money is returned to the taxpayer
There are no "accounts". There are no "trust funds".
Learn this and learn well. Medicare/ SS and FICA are TAXES. Period.
The only difference between these taxes and other taxes is that regular taxes go to pay for government services. The above taxes are used for other purposes and a small portion of the money is returned to the taxpayer.
You people think social entitlements are not large enough. You'd like to see tax rates skyrocket to fund your pet programs.
Look, this is going to piss you off. Those in DC who want to expand entitlements and transfer payments don't give a rat's ass about the people who these things are directed to. All they want are the votes. The more dependence on government they can create, the more likely the elected people who provided the goodies would keep their seats.
That's all and that's it.

 

[freedombecki]

Class Warfare!!!!!

Class Warfare started before Republicans apologized to BP.

It started before business and the Chamber of Commerce began giving to Republicans 9 to 1 over Democrats.

It began before Republicans created subsidies for oil companies.

Sheeze, rdean, not many people can spin a round marble as well as you.

But bless his sweet bippy, yo boss Obambam got 'zactly what he wanted with BP:

From the campaign trail, then Senator Obama spoke of increased electricityy prices as a means for advancing his agenda, noting that costs would "necessarily skyrocket" and that America must be the nation that leads the "clean energy economy."

And speaking of billionaires, how's all that trillion stimulus going to clean energy stuff working out for ya, starting with over half a billion dollars going down in less than 3 years to Solyndra?

source with credits
​

 

[Contumacious]

It's funny. The left makes us poor so we'll vote for Democrats and their entitlement programs. So they spend all of their time trying to make the Middle-class unemployed and we're supposed to thank them for it.

How's that $16 muffin taste????

And since the New Deal saved this country's ass, and with the GI bill helped build a strong, industry and a middle class, WTF are YOU babbling about? Because it sure as hell wasn't the Dems spearheading "trickle down" economics.

Yep class warfare started in the 80's and now that ir has made the rich so much richer the rich are blaming class warfare on the liberals. sheesh.

Class warfare began when the first "income tax" was adopted by scumbag Ape Lincoln.

.

.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Class Warfare!!!!!

Class Warfare started before Republicans apologized to BP.

It started before business and the Chamber of Commerce began giving to Republicans 9 to 1 over Democrats.

It began before Republicans created subsidies for oil companies.

Sheeze, rdean, not many people can spin a round marble as well as you.

But bless his sweet bippy, yo boss Obambam got 'zactly what he wanted with BP:

From the campaign trail, then Senator Obama spoke of increased electricityy prices as a means for advancing his agenda, noting that costs would "necessarily skyrocket" and that America must be the nation that leads the "clean energy economy."

And speaking of billionaires, how's all that trillion stimulus going to clean energy stuff working out for ya, starting with over half a billion dollars going down in less than 3 years to Solyndra?

source with credits
​

You'll never convince the Lefty Obama followers that Obama made a mistake. They are every bit as arrogant and elitist as Obama.

 

[bripat9643]

End the earned programs you call entitlements? So you advocate stealing from the American people who payed into those programs every week?

You folks on the right have moves SO FAR to the right that you have no connection with reality.

The money has already been stolen, nitwit. Congress spent it all on losers and parasites. You don't prevent theft by taking the money from some third innocent person.

 

[Bfgrn]

No! Not higher taxes or what you consider to be a "decent tax rate"...Government must learn to spend within it's means. It must learn to get out of the entitlement business for the purpose of buying votes from the entitled.

End the earned programs you call entitlements? So you advocate stealing from the American people who payed into those programs every week?

You folks on the right have moves SO FAR to the right that you have no connection with reality.

HA! There is no such thing as "earned programs" or "paid" ( not "payed") into".
If your theory regarding entitlements is that ALL money TAXED yes, TAXED would be returned to the payor..Not so. In each of the entitlement programs. workers are TAXED then only a small portion of that money is returned to the taxpayer
There are no "accounts". There are no "trust funds".
Learn this and learn well. Medicare/ SS and FICA are TAXES. Period.
The only difference between these taxes and other taxes is that regular taxes go to pay for government services. The above taxes are used for other purposes and a small portion of the money is returned to the taxpayer.
You people think social entitlements are not large enough. You'd like to see tax rates skyrocket to fund your pet programs.
Look, this is going to piss you off. Those in DC who want to expand entitlements and transfer payments don't give a rat's ass about the people who these things are directed to. All they want are the votes. The more dependence on government they can create, the more likely the elected people who provided the goodies would keep their seats.
That's all and that's it.

Thank you for proving you have no connection with reality.

Social Security is a social insurance program that is primarily funded through dedicated payroll taxes called Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax (FICA). Tax deposits are formally entrusted to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, or the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund.

Medicare alone has lifted millions of elderly Americans from poverty. Before Medicare, 56% of retired Americans had NO medical insurance. Elderly Americans were among the most likely to end up in poverty. NOW, they are among the least likely to end up in poverty. Medicare gave senior citizens the dignity to sustain the end of their lives independent of their children and family.

It is the VERY BEST of what government can do for WE, THE PEOPLE.

 

[bodhisattva]

Class Warfare!!!!!

Class Warfare started before Republicans apologized to BP.

It started before the Bush Tax cuts for billionaires.

It started before business and the Chamber of Commerce began giving to Republicans 9 to 1 over Democrats.

It began before Republicans created subsidies for oil companies.

Class Warfare began before medical bills became the number one cause of bankruptcy.

It was before corporations, with Republican help, moved millions of jobs to China.

It was before Republicans practiced voter suppression in Midwestern state.

I think it's been around for awhile.

Most of us who vehemently disagree with Obama's agenda of "taxing the rich" i.e., taxing achievement, are not against an economically sound taxation of the billionaires, and I mean billionaires. There is no doubt taht beyond a certain point of taxation the billionaires will pick up their investments and play their games in other countries, with tremendous benefits to those other countries.

The overwhelming number of us, if not all, are against Obama's agenda of taxing those with single incomes ~ $200,000 and Married incomes ~250,000 which is the income of successful people who earned the money not to be doled out to the undeserving lazies because of Obama's clearly Socialistic or Communistic agenda.

The main reason the overwhelming number of us are against Obama's agenda is that people with incomes ~$200,000 - $500,000 are usually the small business owners who are responsible for ~75% of our Nation's employment. And, in spite of the Obama rhetoric of being a "warrior" for the middle class, it is the very class that the mendacious Obama is destroying.

And, even taxing the corporations is non-productive because clearly the corporations pass on their taxes to the consumers. Even a retarded nincompoop knows that.

In view of the above, it is monumentally obvious that Obama is ideologically committed to Socialism even though his European model is clearly a disaster or near disaster. Also, even though some Socialistic Scandinavian countries with a homogenous population and a semi-equal level of achievement can get away with a Socialistic structure, it is clearly an impossibility to foist the Socialistic structure on our 300 million population which is comprised of tens of millions of ignorant inhabitants, tens of millions of permanent welfare parasites, drug addicts, and incorrigible lazies.

Nevertheless Obama is committed to Socialism (or interim Communism) and is disguising it as a "class warfare" issue for the 2012 election purposes.

 

[taichiliberal]

The constitution guaranteed an equal " opportunity" it did not guarantee an equal " outcome." Outcomes are determined by the individual, the individual's drive and ambition constitute failure or success, success is not determined by some government hand out with other people's money.

" The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." Margaret Thatcher.

" Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the gospel of envy, the creed of ignorance, it's only virtue is the shared equality of misery." Winston Churchill.

BTW there are plenty of conservatives who have lost their jobs, they just don't sit in front of the TV and whine about it and look for handout's everywhere, they are out looking for another job. They also take anything they can get to get through this debaucle of a socialist agenda with a socialist for President.

Your opening paragraph immediately displays your erroneous and/or dishonest take on the situation......as the NO ONE is talking about "equal outcome".....we are talking about a decent tax rate that can contribute to the nations coffers that is not unbalanced to the point where you have the working/lower/middle class paying heavily into a system while their upper middle and rich counter parts have access to numerous loop holes and write offs along with comparatively a lower tax rate. The upper middle and rich will STILL have their status and wealth, as a 3% increase won't kill them. for the working/lower/middle class, however, a 3% increase could drastically change their lives. Also, given that Obama is offering tax incentives for businesses that CREATE jobs, all the ballyhoo about class warfare is just nonsense!

Your last paragraph reeks of the pure willfully ignorant and stereotype clap trap spewed out by the likes of Levin, Savage, Limbaugh, Maulkin and company. You keep saying "socialist" when obviously you haven't a clue as to the definitions of capitalism and socialism. However, I do agree that the bank and Wall St. bailouts started by the Shrub was indeed socialist in nature. But hey, if Obama's managing of TARP (another Shrub creation) that saved GM isn't to your liking, what would you have suggested?

No! Not higher taxes or what you consider to be a "decent tax rate"...Government must learn to spend within it's means. It must learn to get out of the entitlement business for the purpose of buying votes from the entitled.

More neocon/teabagger slogans and mantras from you while you avoid the points I put forth. Bottom line: YOU benefit from the federal services that are funded by taxes paid by ALL Americans. If the Americans who are making the most money and hiding the largesse of that from taxes, the bulk is left to everyone else. Again, 3% increase won't take away a yacht, but it could put a family in the poor house. Screaming "it's govt' spending" while lavishing tax breaks and loopholes to the rich is not the solution. Again, since YOU are not rich, WTF are you carrying on about?

 

[BDBoop]

Class Warfare!!!!!

Class Warfare started before Republicans apologized to BP.

It started before the Bush Tax cuts for billionaires.

It started before business and the Chamber of Commerce began giving to Republicans 9 to 1 over Democrats.

It began before Republicans created subsidies for oil companies.

Class Warfare began before medical bills became the number one cause of bankruptcy.

It was before corporations, with Republican help, moved millions of jobs to China.

It was before Republicans practiced voter suppression in Midwestern state.

I think it's been around for awhile.

Most of us who vehemently disagree with Obama's agenda of "taxing the rich" i.e., taxing achievement, are not against an economically sound taxation of the billionaires, and I mean billionaires. There is no doubt taht beyond a certain point of taxation the billionaires will pick up their investments and play their games in other countries, with tremendous benefits to those other countries.

The overwhelming number of us, if not all, are against Obama's agenda of taxing those with single incomes ~ $200,000 and Married incomes ~250,000 which is the income of successful people who earned the money not to be doled out to the undeserving lazies because of Obama's clearly Socialistic or Communistic agenda.

The main reason the overwhelming number of us are against Obama's agenda is that people with incomes ~$200,000 - $500,000 are usually the small business owners who are responsible for ~75% of our Nation's employment. And, in spite of the Obama rhetoric of being a "warrior" for the middle class, it is the very class that the mendacious Obama is destroying.

And, even taxing the corporations is non-productive because clearly the corporations pass on their taxes to the consumers. Even a retarded nincompoop knows that.

In view of the above, it is monumentally obvious that Obama is ideologically committed to Socialism even though his European model is clearly a disaster or near disaster. Also, even though some Socialistic Scandinavian countries with a homogenous population and a semi-equal level of achievement can get away with a Socialistic structure, it is clearly an impossibility to foist the Socialistic structure on our 300 million population which is comprised of tens of millions of ignorant inhabitants, tens of millions of permanent welfare parasites, drug addicts, and incorrigible lazies.

Nevertheless Obama is committed to Socialism (or interim Communism) and is disguising it as a "class warfare" issue for the 2012 election purposes.

Really? So - they don't benefit us, but if they receive a reasonable tax rate, they'll go bless someone else beyond their wildest dreams? I gotta doubt that.

 

[Si modo]

This thread is correct. I am not rich. But Obama and the Democrats think I am. I keep saying that I'm not, but that doesn't matter to him and them.

 

[uscitizen]

No! Not higher taxes or what you consider to be a "decent tax rate"...Government must learn to spend within it's means. It must learn to get out of the entitlement business for the purpose of buying votes from the entitled.

End the earned programs you call entitlements? So you advocate stealing from the American people who payed into those programs every week?

You folks on the right have moves SO FAR to the right that you have no connection with reality.

HA! There is no such thing as "earned programs" or "paid" ( not "payed") into".
If your theory regarding entitlements is that ALL money TAXED yes, TAXED would be returned to the payor..Not so. In each of the entitlement programs. workers are TAXED then only a small portion of that money is returned to the taxpayer
There are no "accounts". There are no "trust funds".
Learn this and learn well. Medicare/ SS and FICA are TAXES. Period.
The only difference between these taxes and other taxes is that regular taxes go to pay for government services. The above taxes are used for other purposes and a small portion of the money is returned to the taxpayer.
You people think social entitlements are not large enough. You'd like to see tax rates skyrocket to fund your pet programs.
Look, this is going to piss you off. Those in DC who want to expand entitlements and transfer payments don't give a rat's ass about the people who these things are directed to. All they want are the votes. The more dependence on government they can create, the more likely the elected people who provided the goodies would keep their seats.
That's all and that's it.

Umm I have a SS account and my payout is based on how much I paid into the system.

 

[taichiliberal]

Class Warfare!!!!!

Class Warfare started before Republicans apologized to BP.

It started before the Bush Tax cuts for billionaires.

It started before business and the Chamber of Commerce began giving to Republicans 9 to 1 over Democrats.

It began before Republicans created subsidies for oil companies.

Class Warfare began before medical bills became the number one cause of bankruptcy.

It was before corporations, with Republican help, moved millions of jobs to China.

It was before Republicans practiced voter suppression in Midwestern state.

I think it's been around for awhile.

Most of us who vehemently disagree with Obama's agenda of "taxing the rich" i.e., taxing achievement, are not against an economically sound taxation of the billionaires, and I mean billionaires. There is no doubt taht beyond a certain point of taxation the billionaires will pick up their investments and play their games in other countries, with tremendous benefits to those other countries.

The overwhelming number of us, if not all, are against Obama's agenda of taxing those with single incomes ~ $200,000 and Married incomes ~250,000 which is the income of successful people who earned the money not to be doled out to the undeserving lazies because of Obama's clearly Socialistic or Communistic agenda.

The main reason the overwhelming number of us are against Obama's agenda is that people with incomes ~$200,000 - $500,000 are usually the small business owners who are responsible for ~75% of our Nation's employment. And, in spite of the Obama rhetoric of being a "warrior" for the middle class, it is the very class that the mendacious Obama is destroying.

And, even taxing the corporations is non-productive because clearly the corporations pass on their taxes to the consumers. Even a retarded nincompoop knows that.

In view of the above, it is monumentally obvious that Obama is ideologically committed to Socialism even though his European model is clearly a disaster or near disaster. Also, even though some Socialistic Scandinavian countries with a homogenous population and a semi-equal level of achievement can get away with a Socialistic structure, it is clearly an impossibility to foist the Socialistic structure on our 300 million population which is comprised of tens of millions of ignorant inhabitants, tens of millions of permanent welfare parasites, drug addicts, and incorrigible lazies.

Nevertheless Obama is committed to Socialism (or interim Communism) and is disguising it as a "class warfare" issue for the 2012 election purposes.

Reality check: Fact Check: Obama’s tax plan and small businesses – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

 

[taichiliberal]

This thread is correct. I am not rich. But Obama and the Democrats think I am. I keep saying that I'm not, but that doesn't matter to him and them.

Reality check:

Fact Check: Obama’s tax plan and small businesses – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

 

[uscitizen]

Class warfare becomes an issue on the right only when the under class starts fighting back?
but not when trickle down and bush tax cuts were making the rich richer and the poor poorer?

 

[JoeB131]

Class Warfare!!!!!

Class Warfare started before Republicans apologized to BP.

It started before the Bush Tax cuts for billionaires.

It started before business and the Chamber of Commerce began giving to Republicans 9 to 1 over Democrats.

It began before Republicans created subsidies for oil companies.

Class Warfare began before medical bills became the number one cause of bankruptcy.

It was before corporations, with Republican help, moved millions of jobs to China.

It was before Republicans practiced voter suppression in Midwestern state.

I think it's been around for awhile.

Um, guy, Bill Clinton was the guy who thought opening the door to trade with the Chi-Coms was a great idea, and he took bags of money from them washed through Bhuddist monks.

And frankly, Obama's new hate for "billionaires" have not stopped him from palling about with Soros and Buffett

 

[Si modo]

This thread is correct. I am not rich. But Obama and the Democrats think I am. I keep saying that I'm not, but that doesn't matter to him and them.

Reality check:

Fact Check: Obama’s tax plan and small businesses – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

That does nothing to address what I said.

I believe that you think it does.

As I said in another thread, I cannot associate with a political party that consistently proves that it is filled with morons.