The Party of the Rich

[PoliticalChic]

The Party of the GREEDY Rich- and brainwashed fools....YOU. LOL

Now you've done it, blanko!!!


I'll have my butler and chauffeur have a few words with you!!

You'll be taught never to mess with us GREEDY Rich- and brainwashed fools!!!!

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, they are ahead only in the realm of propaganda organizations.

Ah, so the reason Romney had a 9% tax rate was because of all that money he gives to a propaganda organization.

Interesting take. You never fail to come through.

Romney paid 14% of his income in taxes, dolt, and Romney didn't give any of his money to propaganda organizations. The Ford Foundation donates millions of dollars every year to organizations like Public Broadcasting for the purpose of propaganda. That isn't "charity."

Romney gives millions to his own foundation you idiot. A foundation that you previously identified as a 'propaganda organization'.

Try to keep track of your own posts.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So contrary to rightwing propaganda, the Democratic Party is the party that, in addition to all its other constituencies,

represents those that the right likes to call the 'job creators'?

So, who is left for the GOP to represent?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sudden silence. We all know what that means.

I see you’ve offered two photos in this post….but you’ve neglected to specify which one you snack on….


....but I do have my suspicions.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So contrary to rightwing propaganda, the Democratic Party is the party that, in addition to all its other constituencies,

represents those that the right likes to call the 'job creators'?

So, who is left for the GOP to represent?

Themselves, and those who donate to them, of course.

 

[edthecynic]

No, they are ahead only in the realm of propaganda organizations.

Ah, so the reason Romney had a 9% tax rate was because of all that money he gives to a propaganda organization.

Interesting take. You never fail to come through.

Romney paid 14% of his income in taxes, dolt, and Romney didn't give any of his money to propaganda organizations. The Ford Foundation donates millions of dollars every year to organizations like Public Broadcasting for the purpose of propaganda. That isn't "charity."

Guess what, so do the KOCH BROS donate to PBS!!!! Are you going to pass them off as Liberal too? The Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation are hardly Liberal, and Willard is an establishment Rockefeller Republican CON$ervative.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Ah, so the reason Romney had a 9% tax rate was because of all that money he gives to a propaganda organization.

Interesting take. You never fail to come through.

Romney paid 14% of his income in taxes, dolt, and Romney didn't give any of his money to propaganda organizations. The Ford Foundation donates millions of dollars every year to organizations like Public Broadcasting for the purpose of propaganda. That isn't "charity."

Guess what, so do the KOCH BROS donate to PBS!!!! Are you going to pass them off as Liberal too? The Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation are hardly Liberal, and Willard is an establishment Rockefeller Republican CON$ervative.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Hardly unusual for a reliable Democrat voter.

 

[PoliticalChic]

By way of example, the Koch Brothers gave Scott Walker $43,000 during the 2010 election.
The Wisconsin Education Association council gave $1.6 million to four senate races in opposition to Walker and other Republicans during the same cycle.
Same election, AFSME and SIEU gave $1.3 million.

This is the kind of multiples we're talking about.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Well it seems some rich folks think it's a responsibility to pay their fair share into a nation which has helped them garner their wealth..and others think they are entitled to every penny of profit.

There in lies the "debate".

North Korea, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, China, Mexico,Sweden and many other countries have a rich elitist class. It's "fair" for everyone else. Is that the direction America should be headed? A rising tide raises all ships as JFK so aptly noted.

 

[Inthemiddle]

I see you’ve offered two photos in this post….but you’ve neglected to specify which one you snack on….


....but I do have my suspicions.

Good lady, you are the pinnacle of maturity.

 

[edthecynic]

Romney paid 14% of his income in taxes, dolt, and Romney didn't give any of his money to propaganda organizations. The Ford Foundation donates millions of dollars every year to organizations like Public Broadcasting for the purpose of propaganda. That isn't "charity."

Guess what, so do the KOCH BROS donate to PBS!!!! Are you going to pass them off as Liberal too? The Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation are hardly Liberal, and Willard is an establishment Rockefeller Republican CON$ervative.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Hardly unusual for a reliable Democrat voter.

unlike you, I always know what I'm talking about. Koch gave 7 million to PBS.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Guess what, so do the KOCH BROS donate to PBS!!!! Are you going to pass them off as Liberal too? The Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation are hardly Liberal, and Willard is an establishment Rockefeller Republican CON$ervative.

You don't know what you're talking about.

Hardly unusual for a reliable Democrat voter.

unlike you, I always know what I'm talking about. Koch gave 7 million to PBS.

"The Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation are hardly Liberal,...."

1. "...The degree to which the Ford Foundation's values and ideals have continued to move leftward since Henry Ford II wrote those words is reflected in the objectives and worldviews of the organizations it currently supports. These objectives and worldviews include: the weakening of homeland security and anti-terrorism measures on the theory that they constitute unacceptable assaults on civil liberties; the dissolution of American borders; the promotion of mass, unchecked immigration to the United States; the redistribution of wealth; the blaming of America for virtually every conceivable international dispute; the depiction of Israel as an oppressor state that routinely victimizes its Palestinian minority; the weakening of American military capabilities; a devotion to the principle of preferences based on race, ethnicity, gender, and a host of other demographic attributes; the condemnation of the U.S. as a racist, sexist, homophobic nation that discriminates against minorities, women and gays; the characterization of America as an unrepentant polluter whose industrial pursuits cause immense harm to the natural environment; the portrayal of the U.S. as a violator of human rights both at home and abroad; the depiction of America as an aggressively militaristic nation; and support for taxpayer-funded abortion-on-demand as an inalienable right for all women. ”
Discover the Networks


2. "Among the Rockefeller Foundation’s many hundreds of donees are: the Tides Foundation; the Tides Center; the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund; the National Council of La Raza; the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Education Fund; the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund; the American Civil Liberties Union; the Center for Reproductive Law and Policy; the Institute for Policy Studies; the Ploughshares Fund; the Council on Foundations; the Earth Trust Foundation; the Brennan Center for Justice; the American Land Institute; the Center for Community Change; the Islamic Circle of North America; Amnesty International; the Brennan Center for Justice; the Center for Community Change; the Center for Economic and Policy Research; Gay Men’s Health Crisis; the International Food Policy Research Institute; the American Friends Service Committee; The American Prospect; Greenpeace International;..."
Ibid.


3. O'Sullivan's First Law (a.k.a. O'Sullivan's Law), paraphrased by George Will as stating that any institution that is not libertarian and classically liberal will, over time, become collectivist and statist. O'Sullivan's First Law: All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing. I cite as supporting evidence the ACLU, the Ford Foundation, and the Episcopal Church. The reason is, of course, that people who staff such bodies tend to be the sort who don't like private profit, business, making money, the current organization of society, and, by extension, the Western world. At which point Michels's Iron Law of Oligarchy takes over — and the rest follows. John O'Sullivan on O'Sullivan's First Law on National Review Online



Until this moment you were clueless.

Now....go out into the world armed with truth...and vote the right way.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I see you’ve offered two photos in this post….but you’ve neglected to specify which one you snack on….


....but I do have my suspicions.

Good lady, you are the pinnacle of maturity.

If only you were blessed with the gift of irony....

...or any gifts of an intellectual nature.


The disgusting picture that you inserted into this pristine thread, turned back on you....and you seem....what? upset? chagrined? abashed?


Well, then, I've made my point, haven't I?

Hopefully you will learn from it.

 

[SuMar]

Makes me wonder how often Obama's mom read Obama bedtime stories or maybe just story, Robin Hood.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Well it seems some rich folks think it's a responsibility to pay their fair share into a nation which has helped them garner their wealth..and others think they are entitled to every penny of profit.

There in lies the "debate".

1. Since one cannot see any objective harm done to the less wealthy by another’s greater wealth, the explanation for the ‘economic equality imperative’ can only be envy. The resentment of luxury in another is evil, in that there is no benefit to depriving others with no gain to ourselves. What is the satisfaction of seeing the better off lessened?



2. The unspoken assumption is that there is something morally wrong with inequalities. Where is the explanation of what would be a ‘fair share’ for the wealthy to give up? Irving Kristol, as editor of ‘Public Interest,’ wrote to professors who had written about the unfairness of income distribution, asking them to write an article as to what a ‘fair distribution’ would be; he has never gotten that article.
Irving Kristol, “Neoconservative: the Autobiography of an Idea,” p. 166


I'm guessing that a mendicant in wolf's clothing will have no answer for that,either.
Correct?

 

[Truthmatters]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/media...rs-conservatives-look-who-they-donate-to.html

 

[NYcarbineer]

Well it seems some rich folks think it's a responsibility to pay their fair share into a nation which has helped them garner their wealth..and others think they are entitled to every penny of profit.

There in lies the "debate".

1. Since one cannot see any objective harm done to the less wealthy by another’s greater wealth, the explanation for the ‘economic equality imperative’ can only be envy. The resentment of luxury in another is evil, in that there is no benefit to depriving others with no gain to ourselves. What is the satisfaction of seeing the better off lessened?

That's an absurdly false premise. The history of civilization is a history of those of wealth, and the attendant power wealth brings, using that power against those without wealth and power.

 

[bripat9643]

Well it seems some rich folks think it's a responsibility to pay their fair share into a nation which has helped them garner their wealth..and others think they are entitled to every penny of profit.

There in lies the "debate".

1. Since one cannot see any objective harm done to the less wealthy by another’s greater wealth, the explanation for the ‘economic equality imperative’ can only be envy. The resentment of luxury in another is evil, in that there is no benefit to depriving others with no gain to ourselves. What is the satisfaction of seeing the better off lessened?

That's an absurdly false premise. The history of civilization is a history of those of wealth, and the attendant power wealth brings, using that power against those without wealth and power.

Wrong. The history of civilization is the history of men obtaining wealth by using the sword. In fact, the way government started is that waring nomads, rather then just occasionally raiding and plundering the sedentary farming peoples, moved in with them permanently so they could be mulcted and enslaved indefinitely. Until the advent of capitalism, the sword was used to obtain wealth. Under democracy, the same thing occurs. The only difference is that now the recipients are the Democrat constituencies who keep the thieves in power.

 

[PoliticalChic]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/media...rs-conservatives-look-who-they-donate-to.html

I sure hope so!!!


If you read the OP, you'll be surprised to find that the forces of evil have far more assets available....ten times more!


Makes me think of Shakespeare:

How with this rage shall beauty hold a plea,
Whose action is no stronger than a flower?
O, how shall summer's honey breath hold out
Against the wreckful siege of battering days,
When rocks impregnable are not so stout,
Nor gates of steel so strong,...


Did you think of that, too?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Well it seems some rich folks think it's a responsibility to pay their fair share into a nation which has helped them garner their wealth..and others think they are entitled to every penny of profit.

There in lies the "debate".

1. Since one cannot see any objective harm done to the less wealthy by another’s greater wealth, the explanation for the ‘economic equality imperative’ can only be envy. The resentment of luxury in another is evil, in that there is no benefit to depriving others with no gain to ourselves. What is the satisfaction of seeing the better off lessened?

That's an absurdly false premise. The history of civilization is a history of those of wealth, and the attendant power wealth brings, using that power against those without wealth and power.

"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme."
Mark Twain