Waxman, self-hating (?) Jewish Congressman explains why those greedy Jews vote GOP

Liability

Locked Account.
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
35,447
Reaction score
5,178
Points
48
Location
Mansion in Ravi's Head
Waxman, the bat-faced moron, tried to explain how the Dims lost the Weiner seat in Congress (one they had held since 1923): His reasoning?

The Jews wanted to protect their wealth, which, he maintains, is why anybody who votes GOP is likely to vote GOP. I keed you not. Henry Waxman | Jewish Voters | New York Special Election | The Daily Caller

Not only is he engaging in the old anti-Semitic commentary about "greedy" Jews (he might be a self-hating Jew), but he is inadvertently ADMITTING that a vote for the Dim Party is a vote AGAINST one's own financial self interest.

And in that last regard, he finally said something smart and accurate.

Here then is a possible new Democrat-supported election bumper sticker for the GOP:

"VOTE AGAINST YOUR FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST: Vote Democrat!"​
-- Harry Waxman says so!
 

Salt Jones

Rookie
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
6,900
Reaction score
511
Points
0
Well I guess there aren't many "greedy Jews" because the republicans don't get a lot of Jewish votes.
 
OP
L

Liability

Locked Account.
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
35,447
Reaction score
5,178
Points
48
Location
Mansion in Ravi's Head
Well I guess there aren't many "greedy Jews" because the republicans don't get a lot of Jewish votes.
They certainly didn't in Weiner's district --

until a couple of days ago.

Thus, it is possible that the situation is changing.

:clap2:
Nope, study the history.
Stupid rejoinder.

I'm not surprised.

Your unarticulated (suppressed) premise is that "the past is inevitably prologue."

What you have over-looked or chosen to ignore is that situations like this can be fluid. There are myriad examples of changing circumstances leading to changing alliances or affiliations.

And no matter how ignorant you appear to be, the truth is you OUGHT to already know as much.
 

ClosedCaption

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2010
Messages
53,238
Reaction score
6,694
Points
1,830
Waxman, the bat-faced moron, tried to explain how the Dims lost the Weiner seat in Congress (one they had held since 1923): His reasoning?

The Jews wanted to protect their wealth, which, he maintains, is why anybody who votes GOP is likely to vote GOP. I keed you not. Henry Waxman | Jewish Voters | New York Special Election | The Daily Caller

Not only is he engaging in the old anti-Semitic commentary about "greedy" Jews (he might be a self-hating Jew), but he is inadvertently ADMITTING that a vote for the Dim Party is a vote AGAINST one's own financial self interest.

And in that last regard, he finally said something smart and accurate.

Here then is a possible new Democrat-supported election bumper sticker for the GOP:

"VOTE AGAINST YOUR FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST: Vote Democrat!"​
-- Harry Waxman says so!
Stop it. He never said greedy, he said they want to protect their wealth. What is wrong with saying someone wants protect their wealth?
 
OP
L

Liability

Locked Account.
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
35,447
Reaction score
5,178
Points
48
Location
Mansion in Ravi's Head
Waxman, the bat-faced moron, tried to explain how the Dims lost the Weiner seat in Congress (one they had held since 1923): His reasoning?

The Jews wanted to protect their wealth, which, he maintains, is why anybody who votes GOP is likely to vote GOP. I keed you not. Henry Waxman | Jewish Voters | New York Special Election | The Daily Caller

Not only is he engaging in the old anti-Semitic commentary about "greedy" Jews (he might be a self-hating Jew), but he is inadvertently ADMITTING that a vote for the Dim Party is a vote AGAINST one's own financial self interest.

And in that last regard, he finally said something smart and accurate.

Here then is a possible new Democrat-supported election bumper sticker for the GOP:

"VOTE AGAINST YOUR FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST: Vote Democrat!"​
-- Harry Waxman says so!
Stop it. He never said greedy, he said they want to protect their wealth. What is wrong with saying someone wants protect their wealth?
I agree on both counts. Waxman did not use the word "greedy." If my commentary about what he did say appears to suggest that he used that word, then I wrote poorly.

I also agree that there's nothing "wrong" with saying that anybody wants to protect their wealth. A healthy SELF interest is a good thing. But in context, Waxman said it as though it was somehow a tawdry explanation for that remarkable vote.

In any event, there IS nothing wrong with trying to protect your wealth.

This is why there's nothing all that right about voting for the Democrat Parody.
 

Salt Jones

Rookie
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
6,900
Reaction score
511
Points
0
They certainly didn't in Weiner's district --

until a couple of days ago.

Thus, it is possible that the situation is changing.

:clap2:
Nope, study the history.
Stupid rejoinder.

I'm not surprised.

Your unarticulated (suppressed) premise is that "the past is inevitably prologue."

What you have over-looked or chosen to ignore is that situations like this can be fluid. There are myriad examples of changing circumstances leading to changing alliances or affiliations.

And no matter how ignorant you appear to be, the truth is you OUGHT to already know as much.
Capital letters are a bitch move.

Study how long it took blacks to switch from 90% republican to 90% democratic.

Study how long it took Southern white conservatives to move from democrats to republicans.

The issues just aren't there. There's a reason Cantor stands out.
 

The T

George S. Patton Party
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
48,082
Reaction score
5,533
Points
1,773
Location
What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
Waxman, the bat-faced moron, tried to explain how the Dims lost the Weiner seat in Congress (one they had held since 1923): His reasoning?

The Jews wanted to protect their wealth, which, he maintains, is why anybody who votes GOP is likely to vote GOP. I keed you not. Henry Waxman | Jewish Voters | New York Special Election | The Daily Caller

Not only is he engaging in the old anti-Semitic commentary about "greedy" Jews (he might be a self-hating Jew), but he is inadvertently ADMITTING that a vote for the Dim Party is a vote AGAINST one's own financial self interest.

And in that last regard, he finally said something smart and accurate.

Here then is a possible new Democrat-supported election bumper sticker for the GOP:


"VOTE AGAINST YOUR FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST: Vote Democrat!"​
-- Harry Waxman says so!
Stop it. He never said greedy, he said they want to protect their wealth. What is wrong with saying someone wants protect their wealth?
I agree on both counts. Waxman did not use the word "greedy." If my commentary about what he did say appears to suggest that he used that word, then I wrote poorly.

I also agree that there's nothing "wrong" with saying that anybody wants to protect their wealth. A healthy SELF interest is a good thing. But in context, Waxman said it as though it was somehow a tawdry explanation for that remarkable vote.

In any event, there IS nothing wrong with trying to protect your wealth.

This is why there's nothing all that right about voting for the Democrat Parody.
Waxman was outing himself. He is among the many in government that still thinks wealth belongs to government and will say/do anything to get it.

He's a twerp and needs to resign.
 
OP
L

Liability

Locked Account.
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
35,447
Reaction score
5,178
Points
48
Location
Mansion in Ravi's Head
Nope, study the history.
Stupid rejoinder.

I'm not surprised.

Your unarticulated (suppressed) premise is that "the past is inevitably prologue."

What you have over-looked or chosen to ignore is that situations like this can be fluid. There are myriad examples of changing circumstances leading to changing alliances or affiliations.

And no matter how ignorant you appear to be, the truth is you OUGHT to already know as much.
Capital letters are a bitch move.

Study how long it took blacks to switch from 90% republican to 90% democratic.

Study how long it took Southern white conservatives to move from democrats to republicans.

The issues just aren't there. There's a reason Cantor stands out.
To ignorant dumb fuckers like you, Salt Peter, all letters are a bitch. Hell; you're a bitch for that matter.

No matter the time frame, dumb ass, it always starts somewhere. One little motivating incipient factor or one LAST straw. Either way, you don't find the full reversal without it beginning SOMEWHERE. And where and when it starts is motivated by something. Always.
 

Ravi

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
90,899
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,205
Location
Hating Hatters
I didn't realize you had a thing against Jews, Liarbility.

That is beyond pathetic.
 

L.K.Eder

unbannable non-troll
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
26,093
Reaction score
5,438
Points
280
Location
theartching thapphireth
Waxman, the bat-faced moron, tried to explain how the Dims lost the Weiner seat in Congress (one they had held since 1923): His reasoning?

The Jews wanted to protect their wealth, which, he maintains, is why anybody who votes GOP is likely to vote GOP. I keed you not. Henry Waxman | Jewish Voters | New York Special Election | The Daily Caller

Not only is he engaging in the old anti-Semitic commentary about "greedy" Jews (he might be a self-hating Jew), but he is inadvertently ADMITTING that a vote for the Dim Party is a vote AGAINST one's own financial self interest.

And in that last regard, he finally said something smart and accurate.

Here then is a possible new Democrat-supported election bumper sticker for the GOP:

"VOTE AGAINST YOUR FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST: Vote Democrat!"​
-- Harry Waxman says so!
henry waxman,

beyond that, i have nothing to contribute.
 

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
101,087
Reaction score
35,467
Points
2,260
Location
Brooklyn, NY
Waxman, the bat-faced moron, tried to explain how the Dims lost the Weiner seat in Congress (one they had held since 1923): His reasoning?

The Jews wanted to protect their wealth, which, he maintains, is why anybody who votes GOP is likely to vote GOP. I keed you not. Henry Waxman | Jewish Voters | New York Special Election | The Daily Caller

Not only is he engaging in the old anti-Semitic commentary about "greedy" Jews (he might be a self-hating Jew), but he is inadvertently ADMITTING that a vote for the Dim Party is a vote AGAINST one's own financial self interest.

And in that last regard, he finally said something smart and accurate.

Here then is a possible new Democrat-supported election bumper sticker for the GOP:

"VOTE AGAINST YOUR FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST: Vote Democrat!"​
-- Harry Waxman says so!
Stop it. He never said greedy, he said they want to protect their wealth. What is wrong with saying someone wants protect their wealth?
I agree on both counts. Waxman did not use the word "greedy." If my commentary about what he did say appears to suggest that he used that word, then I wrote poorly.

I also agree that there's nothing "wrong" with saying that anybody wants to protect their wealth. A healthy SELF interest is a good thing. But in context, Waxman said it as though it was somehow a tawdry explanation for that remarkable vote.

In any event, there IS nothing wrong with trying to protect your wealth.

This is why there's nothing all that right about voting for the Democrat Parody.
"I also agree that there's nothing "wrong" with saying that anybody wants to protect their wealth."

Sorry to be picky, here, but "wealth" has no place in this discussion.

wealthNoun/welTH/
1. An abundance of valuable possessions or money.
2. The state of being rich; material prosperity.
Wealth - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


Wealth is not taxed.

Income is taxes, earnings, dividends, realized capital gains are taxed.

So, one need not vote GOP to save ones 'wealth.'



Did I go overboard here?

Buzzkill, huh.
 

dilloduck

Diamond Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
53,240
Reaction score
5,795
Points
1,850
Location
Austin, TX
I didn't realize you had a thing against Jews, Liarbility.

That is beyond pathetic.
You watched the "exploding" windows on WTC 7 too long. There's no anti-semitism in this thread.
 
Last edited:

peach174

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
26,246
Reaction score
6,761
Points
290
Location
S.E. AZ
Well Harry Waxman, you can't keep pissing off your voters and expect them to keep voting for the Dems do you?
The excuse is very very weak.
 
OP
L

Liability

Locked Account.
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
35,447
Reaction score
5,178
Points
48
Location
Mansion in Ravi's Head
I didn't realize you had a thing against Jews, Liarbility.

That is beyond pathetic.
Obviously, I don't, you dishonest stupid hack ho.

And there's not a single thing in ANYTHING I said that would suggest it or imply it, either. So you truly are just a lying shitty little bitch.

But don't fret, ho. Everybody sees you for what you are. yeech.
 
OP
L

Liability

Locked Account.
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
35,447
Reaction score
5,178
Points
48
Location
Mansion in Ravi's Head
Waxman, the bat-faced moron, tried to explain how the Dims lost the Weiner seat in Congress (one they had held since 1923): His reasoning?

The Jews wanted to protect their wealth, which, he maintains, is why anybody who votes GOP is likely to vote GOP. I keed you not. Henry Waxman | Jewish Voters | New York Special Election | The Daily Caller

Not only is he engaging in the old anti-Semitic commentary about "greedy" Jews (he might be a self-hating Jew), but he is inadvertently ADMITTING that a vote for the Dim Party is a vote AGAINST one's own financial self interest.

And in that last regard, he finally said something smart and accurate.

Here then is a possible new Democrat-supported election bumper sticker for the GOP:

"VOTE AGAINST YOUR FINANCIAL SELF-INTEREST: Vote Democrat!"​
-- Harry Waxman says so!
henry waxman,

beyond that, i have nothing to contribute.
Well, the correction of his first name is an important contribution.
 
OP
L

Liability

Locked Account.
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
35,447
Reaction score
5,178
Points
48
Location
Mansion in Ravi's Head
Stop it. He never said greedy, he said they want to protect their wealth. What is wrong with saying someone wants protect their wealth?
I agree on both counts. Waxman did not use the word "greedy." If my commentary about what he did say appears to suggest that he used that word, then I wrote poorly.

I also agree that there's nothing "wrong" with saying that anybody wants to protect their wealth. A healthy SELF interest is a good thing. But in context, Waxman said it as though it was somehow a tawdry explanation for that remarkable vote.

In any event, there IS nothing wrong with trying to protect your wealth.

This is why there's nothing all that right about voting for the Democrat Parody.
"I also agree that there's nothing "wrong" with saying that anybody wants to protect their wealth."

Sorry to be picky, here, but "wealth" has no place in this discussion.

wealthNoun/welTH/
1. An abundance of valuable possessions or money.
2. The state of being rich; material prosperity.
Wealth - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary


Wealth is not taxed.

Income is taxes, earnings, dividends, realized capital gains are taxed.

So, one need not vote GOP to save ones 'wealth.'



Did I go overboard here?

Buzzkill, huh.
Nah. That's fine. But your point amounts to a kind of meaningless quibble. For one cannot amass wealth if one's income is gutted. So if you want to protect your wealth, you probably also want to protect as much of your income as you can.

And the government most certainly does tax wealth, too.

We pay property taxes. We pay estate taxes. My estate has already been acquired and the income by which I paid for it was already taxed. Yet, upon my demise, the fuckers think they can properly take a portion of what I amassed for which I already have a clear tax basis.
 

Ravi

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
90,899
Reaction score
13,994
Points
2,205
Location
Hating Hatters
I didn't realize you had a thing against Jews, Liarbility.

That is beyond pathetic.
Obviously, I don't, you dishonest stupid hack ho.

And there's not a single thing in ANYTHING I said that would suggest it or imply it, either. So you truly are just a lying shitty little bitch.

But don't fret, ho. Everybody sees you for what you are. yeech.
Read your thread title. Waxman's point is not that Jews are greedy, fucktard. His point is that the wealthy tend to care more about their wealth than social issues.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top