Koch Bothers: Callous and Indifferent While Pursuing Profit and Power.

[RandomVariable]

Nonsense. Socialism is for the lazy and corrupt. Capitalism has created more prosperity and raised people out of their social class than Socialism ever will.

Capitalism, as you describe it, has left rural American and is never coming back. what do you say to those people? (rhetorical question)

I'm always answering back the obvious. I just can't help myself because it's so much fun
Rural America is doing much better than the rest of the nation.
That's because of Capitalism.

Rural America has much more individuals who are their own little entrepreneurs because of Capitalism.

A recent study at the University of Illinois found that much of rural America is actually prosperous.

The study analyzed unemployment rates, poverty rates, high school drop-out rates and housing conditions to identify prospering communities. According to the study, one in five rural counties in the United States is prosperous. They do better than the nation on all these measures.
Capitalism is alive and well in rural America.

http://extension.missouri.edu/ceed/reports/WhyRuralCommunitiesProsperIsserman.pdf
"More than 300 rural counties are more prosperous than the nation." Rural is gauged by the person density so, yeah, there are 300 sparsely populated counties doing well, like those in the Northeast corridor. And that line in the western part of Virginia, next to a National Forest. You will notice West Virginia, Kentucky, and practically the entire South is not doing so well. Between a somewhat misleading title and your laziness, which includes providing a link, saying '300' rural countries are doing great sounds awesome. Actually the whole report seems to a jumble somewhat truisms to make a foredrawn conclusion. I think one line in the summary (which begins a research paper) might be quite telling, " Some of the statistical results support empirically what many rural people believe to be true: religious groups and other identities that bind people together can really matter."

 

[dnsmith35]

so no rich Democrat assholes do this?...

Yes they do, and that is as it should be. Spending money is spreading your speech just as much as saying your words.

Ridiculous.
You're saying that rich people have more right to be heard than others.

No, I am saying that rich people have as much right to freedom of speech as others. To deny them that right is hypocritical.

 

[idb]

Yes they do, and that is as it should be. Spending money is spreading your speech just as much as saying your words.

Ridiculous.
You're saying that rich people have more right to be heard than others.

No, I am saying that rich people have as much right to freedom of speech as others. To deny them that right is hypocritical.

Has anyone ever said otherwise?

 

[elektra]

Callous and Indifferent

Is this not the slogan of the new Liberal/Leftist/Democrat party

 

[idb]

Callous and Indifferent

Is this not the slogan of the new Liberal/Leftist/Democrat party

Gosh, I would have expected you to get at least one 'thanks' for this!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

the Collectivist Left, they pool everything including all their "thoughts" and "ideas"

 

[idb]

the Collectivist Left, they pool everything including all their "thoughts" and "ideas"

Oh, you'll definitely get 'thanked' for that one...that was a goodie!

 

[Iceweasel]

No, they wouldn't. Liberal then is Liberal today, excepting for the fact that we know a hell of a lot more than they did.

PMH continues to illustrate his complete lack of knowledge about history.. Today, when conservatives echo John F. Kennedy's position that lower taxes create a more prosperous economy, a large tax base to draw revenue from, and a more sustainable market, they are accused of being "radical tea baggers".

If he was consistent, which he isn't, would have to call conservatives liberals if they rebelled against a complete leftist takeover of the government, which isn't too far fetched. I guess the liberals would then be the conservatives?

 

[kidrocks]

By the time the Democrats get through with the fat-cat Koch brothers... in comparison Mitt Romney will have looked like a boy scout.







http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/06/us/politics/to-hit-back-at-kochs-democrats-revive-tactic-that-hurt-romney.html?hp&_r=0

WASHINGTON — After months of wincing in the face of negative ads funded by the industrialists David and Charles Koch, Democrats believe they have finally found a way to fight back: attacking the brothers’ sprawling business conglomerate as callous and indifferent to the lives of ordinary people while pursuing profit and power.

Kid rocks....clueless and incoherent while pursuing reps and thanks from LIBTARDS.

Attacking the messenger instead of the message I see. Hmmm, typical conservative bullshit as usual. Carry on comrades.

 

[kidrocks]

No, they wouldn't. Liberal then is Liberal today, excepting for the fact that we know a hell of a lot more than they did.

PMH continues to illustrate his complete lack of knowledge about history.. Today, when conservatives echo John F. Kennedy's position that lower taxes create a more prosperous economy, a large tax base to draw revenue from, and a more sustainable market, they are accused of being "radical tea baggers".

Indisputable proof that the Dumbocrat party has been hijacked by radical communists, marxists, and socialists. They reject their own golden boy and refer to his position on taxes as "radical tea bagging".

JFK - the case for tax cuts

You talking about the Taliban-Tea Party again?

 

[Iceweasel]

You talking about the Taliban-Tea Party again?

You probably think that's cute but it illustrates the fact you know little of either.

 

[Vigilante]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScCejJBRO24"]

[/ame]

 

[dnsmith35]

Ridiculous.
You're saying that rich people have more right to be heard than others.

No, I am saying that rich people have as much right to freedom of speech as others. To deny them that right is hypocritical.

Has anyone ever said otherwise?

Apparently you are when you said, "Ridiculous.
You're saying that rich people have more right to be heard than others."

 

[dnsmith35]

No, they wouldn't. Liberal then is Liberal today, excepting for the fact that we know a hell of a lot more than they did.

PMH continues to illustrate his complete lack of knowledge about history.. Today, when conservatives echo John F. Kennedy's position that lower taxes create a more prosperous economy, a large tax base to draw revenue from, and a more sustainable market, they are accused of being "radical tea baggers".

If he was consistent, which he isn't, would have to call conservatives liberals if they rebelled against a complete leftist takeover of the government, which isn't too far fetched. I guess the liberals would then be the conservatives?

As an old JFK democrat I renounce the left wing extremism which has moved my party away from reason.

 

[dnsmith35]

Wealth neither frightens me nor makes me want more. The 1% are not the reason for the huge income differential. Left wing attacks on the rich are nothing but signs of envy, almost as if they have penis envy of money.

 

[kidrocks]

No, I am saying that rich people have as much right to freedom of speech as others. To deny them that right is hypocritical.

Has anyone ever said otherwise?

Apparently you are when you said, "Ridiculous.
You're saying that rich people have more right to be heard than others."

It was Tom Perkins' big idea that the rich should get more votes... remember?

 

[kidrocks]

Wealth neither frightens me nor makes me want more. The 1% are not the reason for the huge income differential. Left wing attacks on the rich are nothing but signs of envy, almost as if they have penis envy of money.

Left wing attacks on the rich are but mere reactions to the r-wing's vicious attacks on the poor.

 

[dnsmith35]

Wealth neither frightens me nor makes me want more. The 1% are not the reason for the huge income differential. Left wing attacks on the rich are nothing but signs of envy, almost as if they have penis envy of money.

Left wing attacks on the rich are but mere reactions to the r-wing's vicious attacks on the poor.

If you actually believe that, you need to find a psychiatrist immediately.

I stand by my post that left wing attacks on the wealthy are penis envy. (Pssst! there are many wealthy l-wingrs)

 

[dnsmith35]

Has anyone ever said otherwise?

Apparently you are when you said, "Ridiculous.
You're saying that rich people have more right to be heard than others."

It was Tom Perkins' big idea that the rich should get more votes... remember?

I didn't say the rich should get more votes. That is your fantasy. I said the rich have as much right to spend their money on politics as anyone else.

 

[kidrocks]

Wealth neither frightens me nor makes me want more. The 1% are not the reason for the huge income differential. Left wing attacks on the rich are nothing but signs of envy, almost as if they have penis envy of money.

Left wing attacks on the rich are but mere reactions to the r-wing's vicious attacks on the poor.

If you actually believe that, you need to find a psychiatrist immediately.

I stand by my post that left wing attacks on the wealthy is penis envy. (Pssst! there are many wealthy l-wingrs)

You're the one that's crazy if you haven't heard the vicious attacks on the poor by r-wingers calling them lazy illiterate moochers seeking free-stuff hand outs such as food-stamps, Social Security, Obamacare, welfare, medicare etc, etc, etc.

BTW... penis envy is owning a gun.