Republicans - Rich vs. Rubes

[Truthmatters]

It wasnt the Bush spending they hated as much as wht he spent on.

Wars entered into by lying to the American people.


Then he crashed the world economy with his fiscal policy.


how do you fix any of it without spending?

I love how liberals think spending=gauranteed success

you can fix it with good law and let the economy do its thing....we dont need bullshit like Obamacare


Hey I got an idea, how about we make tuition and books affordable for college studends to they dont need thousands of dollars of debt to graduate???? Funny how the left never takes on big education????

Then why do corporations always spend money when they want to fix something?

 

[bripat9643]

I have not yet learned how to articulate the anti-American Democrats yet, but your definition of the GOP base is the best goddamned definition I've read in a long time. It is amazing how some people vote for and endorse the very people who **** them sideways from now until Rapture.

You're a Stalinist imbecile, Knobby.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

The thing I've noticed in my 12 step recovery from being a Republican is that the GOP, since 1980 at least, has divided itself into Rich Issues vs. Rube Issues.

And it's really easy to tell them apart.

A Rich Issue is one where only the 1% really benefits, the rest of us are left holding the bag, but the GOP will act on these things like they are top priorities and their mouthpieces on Hate Radio and Faux News will spend a lot of time convincing you that you have a stake at the table.

Examples- Tax Cuts for Rich People. Free Trade. Right to Work. At Will Employment.


A Rube issue is one that people get emotionally invested in, but the GOP isn't really the least bit interested in changing things on them. Instead, these are issues that are meant to keep you truly upset about something and voting against your own economic issues, and they are never mentioned again until the next election-

Examples - Abortion. Gay Marriage. Creationism. Prayer in Schools. The needle hasn't moved one inch on most of these issues, or if it has moved (as in the case of gay marriage) its been in the opposite of the desired direction.

There are some cavaets, of course. Guns might seem on the surface to be a "Rube" issue, but it's really a "rich" issue. It's about the gun companies being able to sell to someone like Nancy Lanza, and screw the consequences. There wouldn't be as big a market for the rich to make money off the guns if the rubes weren't kept really scared all the time, so you have to make it easy for crooks to get guns.

Immigration is another one. ON the surface, you keep the rubes angry about "those people" wanting to take their jobs, but the Rich are the ones offering the jobs to "those people". Not just the 20 or so illegals who are already here, but the 1.25 million "legal" immigrants who get entry visas from employers because they claim up and down they can't find a qualified American. No, really.

When I stopped being a Republican is when I realized I had nothing in common with the "rich" and refused to be a "Rube".

The GOP base is now the yahoo hayseeds, bible thumpers backward southern slow witted slackjawed uneducated yokels who support and defend the few rich at the top who are pulling their strings

I have not yet learned how to articulate the anti-American Democrats yet, but your definition of the GOP base is the best goddamned definition I've read in a long time. It is amazing how some people vote for and endorse the very people who **** them sideways from now until Rapture.

DLC Democrat [aka, Clintonista]: anti-American social fascist front for government unions, trial lawyers, and healthcare corporations IN ADDITION TO Goldman Sachs/AIG level financial service sector interests.

In 2008 after reading Obama's cease and desist letter to the DLC [forbidding the DLC to associate itself with Obama], he got the maximum contribution from me, which my memory is was $2,500. Then before the ************ took the oath he announced Timidfee Geithner at Treasury. I sent a letter asking for my money back. That was my last correspondence to or from the Obama people. My vote in 2012 went to Gary Johnson, the man who said his dog had created more shovel ready jobs in his neighbor's yard than Obama's stimulus had created in his state.

The difference between a real liberal and a fake-liberal social fascist fronting for the corporate plutocracy is their stance on individual rights vs group rights. There is no mention of group rights in the Constitution. Corporations are groups. Fake-liberal fascists are the kind of people who embrace efforts to trade freedom for delusions of security.

Hope this helps you find a path to denouncing the fake-liberal fake-left helping fake-conservative nutballs destroy the United States for the benefit of transnational corporations.

 

[blackhawk]

The bottom line is there is very little difference between either party or those that support them both have their bases who will follow and support them no matter what and both have their rank and file who aren't very happy with the party but don't see a better realistic option out there so they reluctantly stick with them.

 

[bripat9643]

Then why do corporations always spend money when they want to fix something?

They don't, moron. However, one thing is certain: government never fixes anything.

 

[t_polkow]

I have not yet learned how to articulate the anti-American Democrats yet, but your definition of the GOP base is the best goddamned definition I've read in a long time. It is amazing how some people vote for and endorse the very people who **** them sideways from now until Rapture.

You're a Stalinist imbecile, Knobby.

Looks like he tough a nerve, now go rotate the tires on your trailer house jethro

 

[buckeye45_73]

I have not yet learned how to articulate the anti-American Democrats yet, but your definition of the GOP base is the best goddamned definition I've read in a long time. It is amazing how some people vote for and endorse the very people who **** them sideways from now until Rapture.

You're a Stalinist imbecile, Knobby.

Looks like he tough a nerve, now go rotate the tires on your trailer house jethro

I think Knobby summed it up with that. Freudian slip???????

 

[buckeye45_73]

I have not yet learned how to articulate the anti-American Democrats yet, but your definition of the GOP base is the best goddamned definition I've read in a long time. It is amazing how some people vote for and endorse the very people who **** them sideways from now until Rapture.

You're a Stalinist imbecile, Knobby.

Looks like he tough a nerve, now go rotate the tires on your trailer house jethro

wow tporky, thinks he can match wits with me on southern strategy and he has responses like that......hey tporky....go stick starkeys dick in yo mouth....k, homie?

 

[Erand7899]

The thing I've noticed in my 12 step recovery from being a Republican is that the GOP, since 1980 at least, has divided itself into Rich Issues vs. Rube Issues.

And it's really easy to tell them apart.

A Rich Issue is one where only the 1% really benefits, the rest of us are left holding the bag, but the GOP will act on these things like they are top priorities and their mouthpieces on Hate Radio and Faux News will spend a lot of time convincing you that you have a stake at the table.

Examples- Tax Cuts for Rich People. Free Trade. Right to Work. At Will Employment.


A Rube issue is one that people get emotionally invested in, but the GOP isn't really the least bit interested in changing things on them. Instead, these are issues that are meant to keep you truly upset about something and voting against your own economic issues, and they are never mentioned again until the next election-

Examples - Abortion. Gay Marriage. Creationism. Prayer in Schools. The needle hasn't moved one inch on most of these issues, or if it has moved (as in the case of gay marriage) its been in the opposite of the desired direction.

There are some cavaets, of course. Guns might seem on the surface to be a "Rube" issue, but it's really a "rich" issue. It's about the gun companies being able to sell to someone like Nancy Lanza, and screw the consequences. There wouldn't be as big a market for the rich to make money off the guns if the rubes weren't kept really scared all the time, so you have to make it easy for crooks to get guns.

Immigration is another one. ON the surface, you keep the rubes angry about "those people" wanting to take their jobs, but the Rich are the ones offering the jobs to "those people". Not just the 20 or so illegals who are already here, but the 1.25 million "legal" immigrants who get entry visas from employers because they claim up and down they can't find a qualified American. No, really.

When I stopped being a Republican is when I realized I had nothing in common with the "rich" and refused to be a "Rube".

Your comments indicate that you are not only a rube, but you are a super rube, a dupe. You have not just bought the big lie, you have bought into the bad logic behind the big lie. Your argument is vague generalities, based on vague terms that are necessarily redefined to fit your claims.

Who are the rich? What is the dollar amount, in either income or wealth, that makes one a defined member of that evil cabol? Are Obama and Soros part of that evil 1%, or are they exceptions to it.

The Democrat party leadership seems to think that anyone who makes over $250,000 are rich. A large percentage of the Democrat party faithful seem to think that anyone who makes a decent living, or owns a business is rich. The term "rich" seems to change to fit whatever segment of society that your politicians are after at the moment.

You claim that the Republican party uses wedge issues such as abortion, gay marriage, gun control, etc., to keep the Republican masses preoccupied while they rip them off. However, it has probably never dawned on you that wedge issues necessarily require two sides to even be an issue. Consequently, there must be rubes on the Democrat side to keep those issues alive. Either that or you are just a misinformed stooge or a useful idiot.

It is obvious that you have little in common with the rich, and your lack of common sense is a chief difference.

anyone who makes 250,000 dollars a year is wealthy.

anyone who doesnt think they are is a ******* idiot

Not if they have $250,001 a year in expenses. Any idiot can find an extreme to rest a bad argument on. Welcome to the club. $250,000 a year in New York or San Francisco means a completely different standard of living than it does in other areas of the country.

Wealth is relative, and therefore, wealthy is a vague term that means different things to different people. Where I grew up, anyone who could afford a new car was wealthy. Yet, I can buy a new car whenever I desire, and I am not wealthy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The thing I've noticed in my 12 step recovery from being a Republican is that the GOP, since 1980 at least, has divided itself into Rich Issues vs. Rube Issues.

And it's really easy to tell them apart.

A Rich Issue is one where only the 1% really benefits, the rest of us are left holding the bag, but the GOP will act on these things like they are top priorities and their mouthpieces on Hate Radio and Faux News will spend a lot of time convincing you that you have a stake at the table.

Examples- Tax Cuts for Rich People. Free Trade. Right to Work. At Will Employment.


A Rube issue is one that people get emotionally invested in, but the GOP isn't really the least bit interested in changing things on them. Instead, these are issues that are meant to keep you truly upset about something and voting against your own economic issues, and they are never mentioned again until the next election-

Examples - Abortion. Gay Marriage. Creationism. Prayer in Schools. The needle hasn't moved one inch on most of these issues, or if it has moved (as in the case of gay marriage) its been in the opposite of the desired direction.

There are some cavaets, of course. Guns might seem on the surface to be a "Rube" issue, but it's really a "rich" issue. It's about the gun companies being able to sell to someone like Nancy Lanza, and screw the consequences. There wouldn't be as big a market for the rich to make money off the guns if the rubes weren't kept really scared all the time, so you have to make it easy for crooks to get guns.

Immigration is another one. ON the surface, you keep the rubes angry about "those people" wanting to take their jobs, but the Rich are the ones offering the jobs to "those people". Not just the 20 or so illegals who are already here, but the 1.25 million "legal" immigrants who get entry visas from employers because they claim up and down they can't find a qualified American. No, really.

When I stopped being a Republican is when I realized I had nothing in common with the "rich" and refused to be a "Rube".

And democrats are more than happy to engage republicans in such battles.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And, yes, it’s noted that most conservative subscribers to this thread are only attacking the OP or other posters, rather than addressing the valid points made by the OP.

 

[kiwiman127]

Bending over and spreading your cheeks for the plutocratic string-pullers is patriotic, damn it!

 

[Wyatt earp]

The thing I've noticed in my 12 step recovery from being a Republican is that the GOP, since 1980 at least, has divided itself into Rich Issues vs. Rube Issues.

And it's really easy to tell them apart.

A Rich Issue is one where only the 1% really benefits, the rest of us are left holding the bag, but the GOP will act on these things like they are top priorities and their mouthpieces on Hate Radio and Faux News will spend a lot of time convincing you that you have a stake at the table.

Examples- Tax Cuts for Rich People. Free Trade. Right to Work. At Will Employment.


A Rube issue is one that people get emotionally invested in, but the GOP isn't really the least bit interested in changing things on them. Instead, these are issues that are meant to keep you truly upset about something and voting against your own economic issues, and they are never mentioned again until the next election-

Examples - Abortion. Gay Marriage. Creationism. Prayer in Schools. The needle hasn't moved one inch on most of these issues, or if it has moved (as in the case of gay marriage) its been in the opposite of the desired direction.

There are some cavaets, of course. Guns might seem on the surface to be a "Rube" issue, but it's really a "rich" issue. It's about the gun companies being able to sell to someone like Nancy Lanza, and screw the consequences. There wouldn't be as big a market for the rich to make money off the guns if the rubes weren't kept really scared all the time, so you have to make it easy for crooks to get guns.

Immigration is another one. ON the surface, you keep the rubes angry about "those people" wanting to take their jobs, but the Rich are the ones offering the jobs to "those people". Not just the 20 or so illegals who are already here, but the 1.25 million "legal" immigrants who get entry visas from employers because they claim up and down they can't find a qualified American. No, really.

When I stopped being a Republican is when I realized I had nothing in common with the "rich" and refused to be a "Rube".

Your comments indicate that you are not only a rube, but you are a super rube, a dupe. You have not just bought the big lie, you have bought into the bad logic behind the big lie. Your argument is vague generalities, based on vague terms that are necessarily redefined to fit your claims.

Who are the rich? What is the dollar amount, in either income or wealth, that makes one a defined member of that evil cabol? Are Obama and Soros part of that evil 1%, or are they exceptions to it.

The Democrat party leadership seems to think that anyone who makes over $250,000 are rich. A large percentage of the Democrat party faithful seem to think that anyone who makes a decent living, or owns a business is rich. The term "rich" seems to change to fit whatever segment of society that your politicians are after at the moment.

You claim that the Republican party uses wedge issues such as abortion, gay marriage, gun control, etc., to keep the Republican masses preoccupied while they rip them off. However, it has probably never dawned on you that wedge issues necessarily require two sides to even be an issue. Consequently, there must be rubes on the Democrat side to keep those issues alive. Either that or you are just a misinformed stooge or a useful idiot.

It is obvious that you have little in common with the rich, and your lack of common sense is a chief difference.

anyone who makes 250,000 dollars a year is wealthy.

anyone who doesnt think they are is a ******* idiot

WTF? you claim to live in California and think $250k is wealthy? lol.

 

[buckeye45_73]

And, yes, it’s noted that most conservative subscribers to this thread are only attacking the OP or other posters, rather than addressing the valid points made by the OP.

The thing I've noticed in my 12 step recovery from being a Republican is that the GOP

Why address a known liar......he has an issue with the GOP on wealth, yet adopts democrat policies on every subject.....I think not.......just another libtard saying he was a republican

 

[bripat9643]

And, yes, it’s noted that most conservative subscribers to this thread are only attacking the OP or other posters, rather than addressing the valid points made by the OP.

What "valid points?" Joe never made a valid point in his life.

 

[JoeB131]

Hint: you're a rube if you think the "welfare state" can survive. Obamacare is a "train wreck". When interest rates start to go up, and they will the Budget will become unmanageable. Its a simply matter of time."

Actually, we'd save money if we went to a single payer system that controlled costs. If Obamacare has a flaw, it's that it relies on the current system of greedy health care companies and greedier health insruance companies.

As for your rube issues:
abortion: kill all the little dems you want

Nice to see what "Pro-Life" really means.

gay marriage: call it civil unions, whats in a name?

That's kind of the last gasp. It's kind of like a "colored" water fountain. Well, we got to give them the water, but we don't have to like it. Separeate but equal is an oxymoron.

creationism: no worse than the leftist indoctrination bullshit in all school levels

Well, actually, it is. It's bad science. It puts us behind our rivals in understanding medicine and science.

prayer in schools: not an issue as much as the state violating religious rights

No issue here at all. The schools are run by the state, as they should be. Keep your prayers in your church, keep your schooling in your schools. Works for me.

you forgot these:
gun control: get the crazies and violent video games off the streets first

Um, dude, video games don't cause violence. the Japanese play video games that you couldn't even sell here... and they had 11 gun deaths last year.

immigration: stop importing terrorists

Are you going to hit all the redneck talking point, because honestly, I think you are missing the point of the discussion. Who is insisting on immigration?

save SS & Medicare: these will be bankrupt if not managed properly
sequester: start cutting the Budget or we are in deep trouble

Again, not really. The problem isn't a cutting problem, it's a revenue problem. We aren't taxing teh wealthy enough... and they fool the dumb rubes like you into going along with hit.

 

[JoeB131]

[q
You mean the same way the Democrats do with those who do that to them? Obama was elected in 2008 in no small part by how put off people were with Bush and his policies especially his spending yet during his first term Obama and the Democrats not only continue the Bush spending ways but expand them what happens in 2012 the Democratic base rally's behind endorse's and reelects the very people who continued the polices they were so opposed to in 2008 seems rather telling about the Democrat base.

Your premise if flawed from the start.

People did not turn against Bush because of his "Spending".

They turned on him because of his wars and his incompetence.

As for turning against things you used to be for... you guys were all for "ObamaCare" when it was called "RomneyCare".

 

[TemplarKormac]

[q
You mean the same way the Democrats do with those who do that to them? Obama was elected in 2008 in no small part by how put off people were with Bush and his policies especially his spending yet during his first term Obama and the Democrats not only continue the Bush spending ways but expand them what happens in 2012 the Democratic base rally's behind endorse's and reelects the very people who continued the polices they were so opposed to in 2008 seems rather telling about the Democrat base.

Your premise if flawed from the start.

People did not turn against Bush because of his "Spending".

They turned on him because of his wars and his incompetence.

As for turning against things you used to be for... you guys were all for "ObamaCare" when it was called "RomneyCare".

Uh no. People turned on him because the media had already begun its shift to the far left. It was preparing itself for the inevitable coming of a liberal president. Far left, as it now stands today SURPRISE! You were one of those folks who were no doubt suckered into this feeding frenzy.

As for the wars you used to be for, John Kerry was for the war before he was against it. Remember that?

Kerry's Top Ten Flip-Flops - CBS News

 

[JoeB131]

[

Your comments indicate that you are not only a rube, but you are a super rube, a dupe. You have not just bought the big lie, you have bought into the bad logic behind the big lie. Your argument is vague generalities, based on vague terms that are necessarily redefined to fit your claims.

Who are the rich? What is the dollar amount, in either income or wealth, that makes one a defined member of that evil cabol? Are Obama and Soros part of that evil 1%, or are they exceptions to it.

The Democrat party leadership seems to think that anyone who makes over $250,000 are rich. A large percentage of the Democrat party faithful seem to think that anyone who makes a decent living, or owns a business is rich. The term "rich" seems to change to fit whatever segment of society that your politicians are after at the moment.

You claim that the Republican party uses wedge issues such as abortion, gay marriage, gun control, etc., to keep the Republican masses preoccupied while they rip them off. However, it has probably never dawned on you that wedge issues necessarily require two sides to even be an issue. Consequently, there must be rubes on the Democrat side to keep those issues alive. Either that or you are just a misinformed stooge or a useful idiot.

It is obvious that you have little in common with the rich, and your lack of common sense is a chief difference.

The only thing I don't have in common with rich a--holes is a willingness to screw people over to make myself richer.

Which I'm actually sort of smug about.

But the point you miss, so I'll make it similiar to you.

What's more important to your average right winger- ending abortion or making sure the rich get their tax cuts. IF YOU COULD ONLY HAVE ONE, which one would be more important?

Well, I would hope, if you guys believe half the spew I see on the 20 anti-abortion threads running, you'd put banning abortion over giving rich people tax cuts. Right?

But funny thing is, when you guys get into the White House, the rich gets there tax cuts, and nothing is done about abortion.. Cutting taxes for rich people were the first things both Reagan and Bush-43 set out to do.

Now why is that? Who is really running things?

 

[JoeB131]

[

Uh no. People turned on him because the media had already begun its shift to the far left. It was preparing itself for the inevitable coming of a liberal president. Far left, as it now stands today SURPRISE! You were one of those folks who were no doubt suckered into this feeding frenzy.

As for the wars you used to be for, John Kerry was for the war before he was against it. Remember that?

Kerry's Top Ten Flip-Flops - CBS News

Uh, no, the media is always been left.

People turned on bush because he fucked up Iraq, he fucked up Katrina and he fucked up the economy. Maybe some of that blame SHOULD be on other people, but as one of his better predecessors pointed out "The Buck Stops here!"