1963 to 2016

[Syriusly]

In 1963 an individual(s) like Barack Hussein Obama, Bernie Sanders, and Lee Harvey Oswald were and would be considered to have radically dangerous political beliefs (Oswald would call himself a progressive today). But, in 2016 Obama and Sanders are considered legit. Is this a sign of how far we have came, or a sign of how far we have fallen?

This is a sign of how far we have fallen

View attachment 78777

Man of the people.

Yeah- born into wealth, stayed in wealth.

Believes in hiring foreign workers for his resorts
Believes in eminent domain to the benefit of his commercial enterprises

Man of the 'people'.....LOL

Yeah-took start up cash and became a wildly successful businessman.
Does not micro-manage his operations and has created thousands of jobs for hard working Americans.
Believes in the 5th Amendment to the Constitution.

Took millions of dollars in loans from his millionaire dad and became a successful businessman- except for all of the businesses of his that failed.
Created lots of jobs- and has hired foreign workers for his resorts.

Believes in the 5th Amendment? Not so much. Since he actively promoted the use of government's power of eminent domain to deprive private home owners of their home- for his enrichment.

Which is against the takings clause of the 5th Amendment.

This week, we will be discussing the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment which states:

“…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

 

[Bush92]

Redistribution of wealth, raising tax rate to 60pct. And socialism in general.

As I suspected, a bad case of ignorance underlied the original post of this thread

Redistribution of wealth? You mean like foodstamps, education grants, medicaid, public education, welfare? That sort of crazy radical stuff?

60% tax rate? In 1963 top marginal tax rate was 90%, 60% was a righty position in 1963.

"Socialism in general" for those two adds up to a bit higher taxes, higher minimum wage and free state college education and healthcare...in other words it DOESN'T add up at all, unless you consider Sweden, England and Canada socialist countries.

Public education should be local...food stamps should be eliminated...I'm talking 60% tax rate for middle class, not the top of the earnings pyramid. Socialism adds up to a transition to communism. Grow up.

 

[Bush92]

In 1963 an individual(s) like Barack Hussein Obama, Bernie Sanders, and Lee Harvey Oswald were and would be considered to have radically dangerous political beliefs (Oswald would call himself a progressive today). But, in 2016 Obama and Sanders are considered legit. Is this a sign of how far we have came, or a sign of how far we have fallen?

This is a sign of how far we have fallen

View attachment 78777

Man of the people.

Yeah- born into wealth, stayed in wealth.

Believes in hiring foreign workers for his resorts
Believes in eminent domain to the benefit of his commercial enterprises

Man of the 'people'.....LOL

Yeah-took start up cash and became a wildly successful businessman.
Does not micro-manage his operations and has created thousands of jobs for hard working Americans.
Believes in the 5th Amendment to the Constitution.

Took millions of dollars in loans from his millionaire dad and became a successful businessman- except for all of the businesses of his that failed.
Created lots of jobs- and has hired foreign workers for his resorts.

Believes in the 5th Amendment? Not so much. Since he actively promoted the use of government's power of eminent domain to deprive private home owners of their home- for his enrichment.

Which is against the takings clause of the 5th Amendment.

This week, we will be discussing the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment which states:

“…nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Obviously the courts found " just compensation"

 

[daws101]

Redistribution of wealth, raising tax rate to 60pct. And socialism in general.

As I suspected, a bad case of ignorance underlied the original post of this thread

Redistribution of wealth? You mean like foodstamps, education grants, medicaid, public education, welfare? That sort of crazy radical stuff?

60% tax rate? In 1963 top marginal tax rate was 90%, 60% was a righty position in 1963.

"Socialism in general" for those two adds up to a bit higher taxes, higher minimum wage and free state college education and healthcare...in other words it DOESN'T add up at all, unless you consider Sweden, England and Canada socialist countries.

Public education should be local...food stamps should be eliminated...I'm talking 60% tax rate for middle class, not the top of the earnings pyramid. Socialism adds up to a transition to communism. Grow up.

Ok fascist 92 without government aid how do you feed the poor?

 

[Bush92]

Redistribution of wealth, raising tax rate to 60pct. And socialism in general.

As I suspected, a bad case of ignorance underlied the original post of this thread

Redistribution of wealth? You mean like foodstamps, education grants, medicaid, public education, welfare? That sort of crazy radical stuff?

60% tax rate? In 1963 top marginal tax rate was 90%, 60% was a righty position in 1963.

"Socialism in general" for those two adds up to a bit higher taxes, higher minimum wage and free state college education and healthcare...in other words it DOESN'T add up at all, unless you consider Sweden, England and Canada socialist countries.

Public education should be local...food stamps should be eliminated...I'm talking 60% tax rate for middle class, not the top of the earnings pyramid. Socialism adds up to a transition to communism. Grow up.

Ok fascist 92 without government aid how do you feed the poor?

THIS IS GREAT! Hey how about a JOB! Don't know much about capitalism do you?

 

[daws101]

Redistribution of wealth, raising tax rate to 60pct. And socialism in general.

As I suspected, a bad case of ignorance underlied the original post of this thread

Redistribution of wealth? You mean like foodstamps, education grants, medicaid, public education, welfare? That sort of crazy radical stuff?

60% tax rate? In 1963 top marginal tax rate was 90%, 60% was a righty position in 1963.

"Socialism in general" for those two adds up to a bit higher taxes, higher minimum wage and free state college education and healthcare...in other words it DOESN'T add up at all, unless you consider Sweden, England and Canada socialist countries.

Public education should be local...food stamps should be eliminated...I'm talking 60% tax rate for middle class, not the top of the earnings pyramid. Socialism adds up to a transition to communism. Grow up.

Ok fascist 92 without government aid how do you feed the poor?

THIS IS GREAT! Hey how about a JOB! Don't know much about capitalism do you?

Standard denial of reality.
Fact is there are not enough jobs to go around even in the best of times .
Be a man and answer the question.

 

[AntonToo]

Public education should be local...food stamps should be eliminated...I'm talking 60% tax rate for middle class, not the top of the earnings pyramid. Socialism adds up to a transition to communism. Grow up.

Hmm interesting, I personally always thought that part of being a grown up is to respond directly to what the discussion is actually about instead pretending like you are responding.

In question is Obama and Sanders being considered too radical to be in populist parties in 1963.

I asked you why you think that and the reasons you gave have so far been nonsense you couldn't maintain.

So I suggest you grow up and just concede that point instead of dodging into something about local public education and comments on my character.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

In 1963 the United states government funded a much larger portion of the gdp on infrastructure, science, r&d(70%). Of course, you don't know what you're talking about and that really doesn't surprise anyone. So you think Germany, Britiain, norway, Sweden, Japan and south Korea are dangerous? Government been paving roads and investing in science in countries like the roman empire and china for at least 2,500 years. I guess they're such failures and didn't do anything to improve humanity.

The Government doesn't fund anything.

 

[Rustic]

In 1963 the United states government funded a much larger portion of the gdp on infrastructure, science, r&d(70%). Of course, you don't know what you're talking about and that really doesn't surprise anyone. So you think Germany, Britiain, norway, Sweden, Japan and south Korea are dangerous? Government been paving roads and investing in science in countries like the roman empire and china for at least 2,500 years. I guess they're such failures and didn't do anything to improve humanity.

Are any of those countries $20,000,000,000,000 in debt?

Infrastructure, science, r&d and education never caused any of this debt. Bill clinton in the late 1990's balanced the budget without having to cut those areas...I ask you how do you justify weakening our economy by cutting areas taht never caused the problem?

Can we look at the massive wars and the cheating done by the top 5% of our society for most of the cause of our debt.

Slick willy didn't balance shit, he was too busy child molesting/raping... Dumbass

 

[candycorn]

In 1963 an individual(s) like Barack Hussein Obama, Bernie Sanders, and Lee Harvey Oswald were and would be considered to have radically dangerous political beliefs (Oswald would call himself a progressive today). But, in 2016 Obama and Sanders are considered legit. Is this a sign of how far we have came, or a sign of how far we have fallen?

Oswald would be called a murderer today.

Your post is a sign that while every one can post on the Internet, not everyone should.

 

[rightwinger]

In 1963, Barack Hussein Obama's father would have been lynched for marrying a white woman

 

[rightwinger]

[



.

Hey,what about those "shovel ready jobs?" That was $$$$ well spent on the infrastructure.

If your surprised by a politician lying, then you'll be equally surprised by water flowing down hill and trees casting shade...

What happened to "Hope and Change?"

Why would you ask me that?[/QUOTE]
Just pointing out that Obama was supposed to be the messiah and change everything. Instead he paid back his political cronies. Was not directed at you. Just general statement.[/QUOTE]

What did Obama "Change"?

Universal Healthcare
Stopped a depression
Expanded rights for gays
Recognition of Cuba after 50 years

Change you can believe in

 

[easyt65]

Fallen, obviously.

In 2008 America elected President a man who addmittedly was tutored by a Communist, studied a Socialist, was mentored by a racist hate-spewing anti-American pastor, was friends with a domestic terrorist who bombed his own country and killed cops, and was sired by an anti-colonislist who wanted to see the US eliminated as a world power and world influence.

And liberal leaders and media told Americans none of this mattered because he was / is black and voting a black guy as the 1st black President was more important than all of that.

And now those same liberal leaders and media are telling those same people that Hillary's scandal-plagued, corrupt, elitist criminal past doesn't matter because electing the qst woman President is more important than electing one actually worthy of such an honor and responsibility.

 

[rightwinger]

Fallen, obviously.

In 2008 America elected President a man who addmittedly was tutored by a Communist, studied a Socialist, was mentored by a racist hate-spewing anti-American pastor, was friends with a domestic terrorist who bombed his own country and killed cops, and was sired by an anti-colonislist who wanted to see the US eliminated as a world power and world influence.

And liberal leaders and media told Americans none of this mattered because he was / is black and voting a black guy as the 1st black President was more important than all of that.

And now those same liberal leaders and media are telling those same people that Hillary's scandal-plagued, corrupt, elitist criminal past doesn't matter because electing the qst woman President is more important than electing one actually worthy of such an honor and responsibility.

Funny...in 2008, Republicans raised all those "issues"

The public treated them like the nonsense it was

 

[jon_berzerk]

In 1963 the United states government funded a much larger portion of the gdp on infrastructure, science, r&d(70%). Of course, you don't know what you're talking about and that really doesn't surprise anyone. So you think Germany, Britiain, norway, Sweden, Japan and south Korea are dangerous? Government been paving roads and investing in science in countries like the roman empire and china for at least 2,500 years. I guess they're such failures and didn't do anything to improve humanity.

Are any of those countries $20,000,000,000,000 in debt?

Infrastructure, science, r&d and education never caused any of this debt. Bill clinton in the late 1990's balanced the budget without having to cut those areas...I ask you how do you justify weakening our economy by cutting areas taht never caused the problem?

Can we look at the massive wars and the cheating done by the top 5% of our society for most of the cause of our debt.

Everyone knows that we are no longer at war with anyone according to Obama.
The top 5% paid 58.55% of all federal income taxes and their average tax rate was 23.2% in 2015. They didn't cheat very much, if at all.

The top 5% paid 58.55% of all federal income taxes


and people like hillary says that is not their fair share

 

[rightwinger]

In 1963 the United states government funded a much larger portion of the gdp on infrastructure, science, r&d(70%). Of course, you don't know what you're talking about and that really doesn't surprise anyone. So you think Germany, Britiain, norway, Sweden, Japan and south Korea are dangerous? Government been paving roads and investing in science in countries like the roman empire and china for at least 2,500 years. I guess they're such failures and didn't do anything to improve humanity.

Are any of those countries $20,000,000,000,000 in debt?

Infrastructure, science, r&d and education never caused any of this debt. Bill clinton in the late 1990's balanced the budget without having to cut those areas...I ask you how do you justify weakening our economy by cutting areas taht never caused the problem?

Can we look at the massive wars and the cheating done by the top 5% of our society for most of the cause of our debt.

Everyone knows that we are no longer at war with anyone according to Obama.
The top 5% paid 58.55% of all federal income taxes and their average tax rate was 23.2% in 2015. They didn't cheat very much, if at all.

The top 5% paid 58.55% of all federal income taxes


and people like hillary says that is not their fair share

That will happen when you monopolize most the income and wealth

 

[jon_berzerk]

In 1963 the United states government funded a much larger portion of the gdp on infrastructure, science, r&d(70%). Of course, you don't know what you're talking about and that really doesn't surprise anyone. So you think Germany, Britiain, norway, Sweden, Japan and south Korea are dangerous? Government been paving roads and investing in science in countries like the roman empire and china for at least 2,500 years. I guess they're such failures and didn't do anything to improve humanity.

Are any of those countries $20,000,000,000,000 in debt?

Infrastructure, science, r&d and education never caused any of this debt. Bill clinton in the late 1990's balanced the budget without having to cut those areas...I ask you how do you justify weakening our economy by cutting areas taht never caused the problem?

Can we look at the massive wars and the cheating done by the top 5% of our society for most of the cause of our debt.

Everyone knows that we are no longer at war with anyone according to Obama.
The top 5% paid 58.55% of all federal income taxes and their average tax rate was 23.2% in 2015. They didn't cheat very much, if at all.

The top 5% paid 58.55% of all federal income taxes


and people like hillary says that is not their fair share

That will happen when you monopolize most the income and wealth

yes we all know you are a loser

who has made excuses for the failures in your life

 

[easyt65]

Fallen, obviously.

In 2008 America elected President a man who addmittedly was tutored by a Communist, studied a Socialist, was mentored by a racist hate-spewing anti-American pastor, was friends with a domestic terrorist who bombed his own country and killed cops, and was sired by an anti-colonislist who wanted to see the US eliminated as a world power and world influence.

And liberal leaders and media told Americans none of this mattered because he was / is black and voting a black guy as the 1st black President was more important than all of that.

And now those same liberal leaders and media are telling those same people that Hillary's scandal-plagued, corrupt, elitist criminal past doesn't matter because electing the qst woman President is more important than electing one actually worthy of such an honor and responsibility.

Funny...in 2008, Republicans raised all those "issues"

The public treated them like the nonsense it was

What part of 'admitted' do you not understand? Obama did not hide these but did not want anyone dwelling on them or digging into them more.

 

[rightwinger]

Fallen, obviously.

In 2008 America elected President a man who addmittedly was tutored by a Communist, studied a Socialist, was mentored by a racist hate-spewing anti-American pastor, was friends with a domestic terrorist who bombed his own country and killed cops, and was sired by an anti-colonislist who wanted to see the US eliminated as a world power and world influence.

And liberal leaders and media told Americans none of this mattered because he was / is black and voting a black guy as the 1st black President was more important than all of that.

And now those same liberal leaders and media are telling those same people that Hillary's scandal-plagued, corrupt, elitist criminal past doesn't matter because electing the qst woman President is more important than electing one actually worthy of such an honor and responsibility.

Funny...in 2008, Republicans raised all those "issues"

The public treated them like the nonsense it was

What part of 'admitted' do you not understand? Obama did not hide these but did not want anyone dwelling on them or digging into them more.

Seems it got full time coverage in the rightwing media......Michelle hates America, Obama is a terrorist, Rev Wright, birth certificates, Obama is a Muslim

The voters yawned

Want more of the same in 2016?
Try basing your campaign on Benghazi and emails

 

[daws101]

Are any of those countries $20,000,000,000,000 in debt?

Infrastructure, science, r&d and education never caused any of this debt. Bill clinton in the late 1990's balanced the budget without having to cut those areas...I ask you how do you justify weakening our economy by cutting areas taht never caused the problem?

Can we look at the massive wars and the cheating done by the top 5% of our society for most of the cause of our debt.

Everyone knows that we are no longer at war with anyone according to Obama.
The top 5% paid 58.55% of all federal income taxes and their average tax rate was 23.2% in 2015. They didn't cheat very much, if at all.

The top 5% paid 58.55% of all federal income taxes


and people like hillary says that is not their fair share

That will happen when you monopolize most the income and wealth

yes we all know you are a loser

who has made excuses for the failures in your life

Ohhhh no not yer a loser ploy! Again!