Please explain why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

[Cecilie1200]

And this brings to mind the fact that ANY action for the public good is now called "leftist" by the Tea Bag crowd, and therefore is objectionable. Which is why the GOP controlled House is absolutely constipated.

No, shitstain. Any action proposed "for the public good" which any sane adult can see would have the opposite effect is called "leftist", because that sort of ass-backward thinking is the hallmark of the left. Furthermore, my personal rule of thumb is that any action touted by juveniles with latent homosexual tendencies (as evidenced by the belief that "Tea Bag" and "Tea Bagger" is the height of wit) should automatically be dismissed from any serious consideration.

Don't throw a hissy at me for correctly identifying your ilk just because you wish reality was different.

I have to assume that your preoccupation with shit stains is that you find them so hard to get out of leather.

You're still not being clear as to how you define leftist. Are you some sort of anarchist?

As for Tea Bagging, hey, the right wingers brought it up.

My only "preoccupation" with shitstains is the fact that they keep showing up to this message board and running their gums. Identifying something as what it is does not constitute "being preoccupied"; just observant.

I define leftism by many factors. Not all of them have to be present at once in order for something to be leftist in orientation.

As for the Huffington Post, you're a big enough joke as it is without wasting my time endlessly citing a "source" that you've already been told is like the Internet equivalent of unscooped kitty litter: totally full of shit.

 

[Cecilie1200]

How can that meet your definition of leftist?

The left in America is the embodiment of the old saying, "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." They always want to be lauded for what they INTENDED to do, or INTENDED to have happen, and they always want us to ignore what ACTUALLY happened, even when a purblind monkey could have seen those very same consequences coming from a mile away.

That answer your question?

No, it sure doesn't. It's just kind of a vague, random, baseless attack. You start by attacking a former President for having an idea-a very good idea-that he was unable, because of the nature of our system of government, to follow through on. He is, therefore, a leftist, because someone praised him for THINKING of something that was for the public good, something that was not enacted till much later, by that notable leftist Dwight Eisenhower. [Note: This is one of the reasons I keep pointing out that the right wingers on these boards are in line with John Birch Society ideology-the JBS attacked Ike as a committed agent of communism.]

You've put yourself in the position of calling the Interstate Highway System a liberal failure-when in fact, it's been a spectacular economic and public safety success-of government acting as government should act. For the public benefit.

Oh, excuse me. I thought you were asking me my definition of "leftist" in this context. I didn't realize you were asking me to tell you how wonderful and brilliant leftist thinking is. Had you made that clear, I would have saved myself a lot of time and told you to fuck off.

I never said the Interstate Highway System was a failure OR liberal, but I'm frankly impressed that you were able to understand the conversation well enough to grasp that it involved the Interstate Highway System AT ALL, so kudos on that.

 

[Unkotare]

An angry response does nothing to mask your ignorance of the English language. I wasn't calling Harding a leftist; I was calling YOU one. And what part of "don't bother getting your panties in a ruffle at me like I'm supposed to know all about you" was too complicated? Don't know if you consider yourself a leftist; don't give a shit. Don't know if you're always a leftist; don't care enough to remember you. I just know you sound like a leftist when you bring up irrelevant shit like "Well, So-and-so PROPOSED this."

I didn't make any errors, dipshit. You sounded like a leftist; I called you a leftist. You sound like a leftist AND an idiot now; I'm calling you both. Keep talking; I'll just believe even more firmly that my initial judgement of you was correct.

This continuing anger just makes you look desperate and humiliated. Your "If you respond that means I'm right!" gambit is not the escape you are looking for. Suck it up, admit your mistake and try to do better next time. The "your ignorance of the English language" bit also fails, as your comments could only reasonbly be read one way and were inaccurate no matter how they might be read. So, that escape doesn't work. Pointing out how the policy objectives of a successful Republican President were thwarted by a democrat Congress doesn't make anyone "sound like a leftist." You know this. You're now letting your pride get the better of you when you should know well enough to admit your error and move on.

Oh, I've already moved on, Sparky. I've explained myself twice, which is once more than I usually deign to bother with. If you'd rather continue pretending that I was talking about President Harding than admit that you sounded like an irrelevant liberal dumbass, you'll be doing it solo. I might suggest, however, that if you're "pointing out the thwarting by a Democrat Congress", you might want to actually include the word "Congress" somewhere in your post. If people could read your mind, we wouldn't have to log into the Internet message board at all, you see.

You're humiliating yourself for no good reason. Relax and let the pride take a break.

 

[SAT]

Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party.

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you

-----

1) The top 1% are not the same people year to year. Most of the top income earners are in that bracket only temporarily through the sale of an asset like a home or the inheritance of a business, or a temporary investment windfall. So I assume you are talking about the permanent 1%, the Bill Gates/Steve Jobs of the world.
2) The top 1% didn't steal the money. They earned it. They shouldn't be punished for doing so.
3) The earnings of the top 1% doesn't effect my ability to earn. In fact, in many cases, the top 1% of earners don't do it alone. They take other people with them on the way up.

So I have a question for you. Why do feel you must be "against" the wealthy? Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, et al, employ 100s of thousands of people worldwide who make very nice incomes as employees of these companies. Their innovations have indirectly created opportunity for thousands of people outside of their companies through the use and sale of the products/services they make. They navigated through endless regulation and a punishing tax code to make their companies a success. And this is what you are "Against"? For all the good these people have done, directly and indirectly, you want to punish their success. And you call conservatives 'traders'.

Instead of looking up with envy, why don't you look down in shame? There are able bodied poor in this country who, despite a free education, free housing and free food as they grew up, remain dependent on the middle and upper class for their daily existence as adults. This, too you, is acceptable. These folks, to you, are victims of the evils of the rich. Their squandered opportunities are somehow the fault of those who didn't squander their own. America guarantees you opportunity, not outcome.

Your anger is ignorant and misplaced.

If they aren't the same people from year to year, then they don't have to pay the taxes in the years that they are not the top one percent.

Often, yes, they did steal the money. I'm sorry to wake you up to that fact, but yes, the people who dealt in risky financial instruments that they actually bet against while failing to disclose that to the buyers, ARE, in fact, THIEVES. And that's only one example. Another example is that of dishonest lenders.

You are mistaken if you attribute complaints about injustice as envy. If you get rid of that misconception, the discussion will move on. Please keep in mind that pointing out that the rich are usually born into better off families, and that they do in fact have disproportionate influence on government policy is to be honest. Try being honest.

No, shitstain. Any action proposed "for the public good" which any sane adult can see would have the opposite effect is called "leftist", because that sort of ass-backward thinking is the hallmark of the left. Furthermore, my personal rule of thumb is that any action touted by juveniles with latent homosexual tendencies (as evidenced by the belief that "Tea Bag" and "Tea Bagger" is the height of wit) should automatically be dismissed from any serious consideration.

Don't throw a hissy at me for correctly identifying your ilk just because you wish reality was different.

I have to assume that your preoccupation with shit stains is that you find them so hard to get out of leather.

You're still not being clear as to how you define leftist. Are you some sort of anarchist?

As for Tea Bagging, hey, the right wingers brought it up.

My only "preoccupation" with shitstains is the fact that they keep showing up to this message board and running their gums. Identifying something as what it is does not constitute "being preoccupied"; just observant.

I define leftism by many factors. Not all of them have to be present at once in order for something to be leftist in orientation.

As for the Huffington Post, you're a big enough joke as it is without wasting my time endlessly citing a "source" that you've already been told is like the Internet equivalent of unscooped kitty litter: totally full of shit.

I think that your preoccupation with shit stains is that they keep showing up in your drawers. So you take it out on the rest of us.

The Huffington Post has noting to do with the topic. I showed you an image of a Tea Party sign. Attacking ONE of the outlets that publicized the sign doesn't make the sign go away.

 

[Foxfyre]

Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party.

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you

-----

1) The top 1% are not the same people year to year. Most of the top income earners are in that bracket only temporarily through the sale of an asset like a home or the inheritance of a business, or a temporary investment windfall. So I assume you are talking about the permanent 1%, the Bill Gates/Steve Jobs of the world.
2) The top 1% didn't steal the money. They earned it. They shouldn't be punished for doing so.
3) The earnings of the top 1% doesn't effect my ability to earn. In fact, in many cases, the top 1% of earners don't do it alone. They take other people with them on the way up.

So I have a question for you. Why do feel you must be "against" the wealthy? Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, et al, employ 100s of thousands of people worldwide who make very nice incomes as employees of these companies. Their innovations have indirectly created opportunity for thousands of people outside of their companies through the use and sale of the products/services they make. They navigated through endless regulation and a punishing tax code to make their companies a success. And this is what you are "Against"? For all the good these people have done, directly and indirectly, you want to punish their success. And you call conservatives 'traders'.

Instead of looking up with envy, why don't you look down in shame? There are able bodied poor in this country who, despite a free education, free housing and free food as they grew up, remain dependent on the middle and upper class for their daily existence as adults. This, too you, is acceptable. These folks, to you, are victims of the evils of the rich. Their squandered opportunities are somehow the fault of those who didn't squander their own. America guarantees you opportunity, not outcome.

Your anger is ignorant and misplaced.

Not only should the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs of the world not be punished for their financial success, but they should be acknowledged for the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of jobs their particular vision, efforts, and success have produced. Probably both have single handedly made it possible for tens of thousands to move into the top 5% and/or 1%. Also they both have also given generously of their personal time, talent, and personal fortunes to the arts, to science, to scholarship funds, and to relieve suffering all around the world.

Without that 1%, a lot of the 5% would never have achieved that level of financial success. Without the top 5 to 10%, all of us would have far less opportunity and/or financial success than we have achieved.

Too many on the left want to kill the golden goose thinking then they will have all that lovely gold at once. It simply does not work that way, however. Kill or take down or unrich the rich, and we will all be significantly poorer for it.

 

[SAT]

Not only should the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs of the world not be punished for their financial success, but they should be acknowledged for the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of jobs their particular vision, efforts, and success have produced. Probably both have single handedly made it possible for tens of thousands to move into the top 5% and/or 1%. Also they both have also given generously of their personal time, talent, and personal fortunes to the arts, to science, to scholarship funds, and to relieve suffering all around the world.

Without that 1%, a lot of the 5% would never have achieved that level of financial success. Without the top 5 to 10%, all of us would have far less opportunity and/or financial success than we have achieved.

Too many on the left want to kill the golden goose thinking then they will have all that lovely gold at once. It simply does not work that way, however. Kill or take down or unrich the rich, and we will all be significantly poorer for it.

Taxes are not a punishment.

The nation can function very well without the current level of wealth disparity.

Please stop worshiping the rich.

 

[logical4u]

Not only should the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs of the world not be punished for their financial success, but they should be acknowledged for the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of jobs their particular vision, efforts, and success have produced. Probably both have single handedly made it possible for tens of thousands to move into the top 5% and/or 1%. Also they both have also given generously of their personal time, talent, and personal fortunes to the arts, to science, to scholarship funds, and to relieve suffering all around the world.

Without that 1%, a lot of the 5% would never have achieved that level of financial success. Without the top 5 to 10%, all of us would have far less opportunity and/or financial success than we have achieved.

Too many on the left want to kill the golden goose thinking then they will have all that lovely gold at once. It simply does not work that way, however. Kill or take down or unrich the rich, and we will all be significantly poorer for it.

Taxes are not a punishment.

The nation can function very well without the current level of wealth disparity.

Please stop worshiping the rich.

I saw no indication of worship. You on the other hand are using the same type of hate speech that was reserved for hate groups (hate those people because they are different). It is sad that the OWS consider hate speech "intellectual ideas".

 

[SAT]

Not only should the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs of the world not be punished for their financial success, but they should be acknowledged for the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of jobs their particular vision, efforts, and success have produced. Probably both have single handedly made it possible for tens of thousands to move into the top 5% and/or 1%. Also they both have also given generously of their personal time, talent, and personal fortunes to the arts, to science, to scholarship funds, and to relieve suffering all around the world.

Without that 1%, a lot of the 5% would never have achieved that level of financial success. Without the top 5 to 10%, all of us would have far less opportunity and/or financial success than we have achieved.

Too many on the left want to kill the golden goose thinking then they will have all that lovely gold at once. It simply does not work that way, however. Kill or take down or unrich the rich, and we will all be significantly poorer for it.

Taxes are not a punishment.

The nation can function very well without the current level of wealth disparity.

Please stop worshiping the rich.

I saw no indication of worship. You on the other hand are using the same type of hate speech that was reserved for hate groups (hate those people because they are different). It is sad that the OWS consider hate speech "intellectual ideas".

I see veneration of the rich in your post. It went well beyond admiration, and you take people to task for "punishing" them for assessing taxes on their wealth...even though Bill Gates certainly doesn't see it that way.

In prayer, we thank God for providing us with the bounty that we enjoy. Your post is one long praise of the rich for being the source of our blessings.

Hate speech is something entirely different from what I posted. I defended taxing the rich, I told you to stop worshiping them, and I told you that we could be a successful nation without this level of wealth disparity.

Please read this link:

Hate speech - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[logical4u]

Taxes are not a punishment.

The nation can function very well without the current level of wealth disparity.

Please stop worshiping the rich.

I saw no indication of worship. You on the other hand are using the same type of hate speech that was reserved for hate groups (hate those people because they are different). It is sad that the OWS consider hate speech "intellectual ideas".

I see veneration of the rich in your post. It went well beyond admiration, and you take people to task for "punishing" them for assessing taxes on their wealth...even though Bill Gates certainly doesn't see it that way.

In prayer, we thank God for providing us with the bounty that we enjoy. Your post is one long praise of the rich for being the source of our blessings.

Hate speech is something entirely different from what I posted. I defended taxing the rich, I told you to stop worshiping them, and I told you that we could be a successful nation without this level of wealth disparity.

Please read this link:

Hate speech - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

.... "Your post is one long praise of the rich for being the source of our blessings" ......... Would you care to give the example of where I "praised" the rich?
So now you want to declare that "hating" the rich isn't covered under "hate speech"? I was under the impression that any minority (the haters say 1%, that is a minority) targeted by hateful speech/actions was "hate speech". I guess that is "politically correct" to "hate" the rich.
I don't think I know any of the "1%" well enough to condemn them or "praise" them. But by all means, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

 

[ABikerSailor]

And this brings to mind the fact that ANY action for the public good is now called "leftist" by the Tea Bag crowd, and therefore is objectionable. Which is why the GOP controlled House is absolutely constipated.

No, shitstain. Any action proposed "for the public good" which any sane adult can see would have the opposite effect is called "leftist", because that sort of ass-backward thinking is the hallmark of the left. Furthermore, my personal rule of thumb is that any action touted by juveniles with latent homosexual tendencies (as evidenced by the belief that "Tea Bag" and "Tea Bagger" is the height of wit) should automatically be dismissed from any serious consideration.

Don't throw a hissy at me for correctly identifying your ilk just because you wish reality was different.

Any action proposed for the public good when it would have the opposite effect is "leftist".

Does that include the personhood bill in the south, or the union stripping in the north, or how about the drug testing of welfare recepients in Florida? All those are social engineering things proposed by the right that would SIGNIFICANTLY increase the size of the government while not doing much in the way of helping anyone.

But the GOP will tell you that they are protecting the rights of the people when it's actually their agenda for social engineering and the rich.

NOTHING has been done in DC since Boehner took over as Speaker of the House towards jobs, just right wing social engineering.

But........they tell us it's for our own good.

 

[likeabird03]

Actually, I'm an economic conservative and I support the middle class more than anyone. I believe that you can't strengthen the middle class by growing government though. Keeping the incentive for those to work hard and provide for themselves is the answer, not having people depend on the government for more and more of their needs.

 

[logical4u]

And this brings to mind the fact that ANY action for the public good is now called "leftist" by the Tea Bag crowd, and therefore is objectionable. Which is why the GOP controlled House is absolutely constipated.

No, shitstain. Any action proposed "for the public good" which any sane adult can see would have the opposite effect is called "leftist", because that sort of ass-backward thinking is the hallmark of the left. Furthermore, my personal rule of thumb is that any action touted by juveniles with latent homosexual tendencies (as evidenced by the belief that "Tea Bag" and "Tea Bagger" is the height of wit) should automatically be dismissed from any serious consideration.

Don't throw a hissy at me for correctly identifying your ilk just because you wish reality was different.

Any action proposed for the public good when it would have the opposite effect is "leftist".

Does that include the personhood bill in the south, or the union stripping in the north, or how about the drug testing of welfare recepients in Florida? All those are social engineering things proposed by the right that would SIGNIFICANTLY increase the size of the government while not doing much in the way of helping anyone.

But the GOP will tell you that they are protecting the rights of the people when it's actually their agenda for social engineering and the rich.

NOTHING has been done in DC since Boehner took over as Speaker of the House towards jobs, just right wing social engineering.

But........they tell us it's for our own good.

The number of "stimulus bills" has been reduced, since the republicans took the house (with the TEA party staying on their actions).

 

[Cecilie1200]

Not only should the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs of the world not be punished for their financial success, but they should be acknowledged for the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of jobs their particular vision, efforts, and success have produced. Probably both have single handedly made it possible for tens of thousands to move into the top 5% and/or 1%. Also they both have also given generously of their personal time, talent, and personal fortunes to the arts, to science, to scholarship funds, and to relieve suffering all around the world.

Without that 1%, a lot of the 5% would never have achieved that level of financial success. Without the top 5 to 10%, all of us would have far less opportunity and/or financial success than we have achieved.

Too many on the left want to kill the golden goose thinking then they will have all that lovely gold at once. It simply does not work that way, however. Kill or take down or unrich the rich, and we will all be significantly poorer for it.

Taxes are not a punishment.

The nation can function very well without the current level of wealth disparity.

Please stop worshiping the rich.

When one's taxes are raised for no other reason than that someone has decided that one has too much money, then yes, it is a punishment.

Furthermore, I realize that the left is incapable of considering anything wrong unless it directly affects them or defending others unless they are slavish cult followers of that person, but please understand that the right does not labor under these character defects. It requires no "worship" for us to defend someone simply because it is the right thing to do.

 

[Ropey]

Please explain Americans why you Republicans support the wealthy over your own middle class?

I could never understand why the misguided mouthpieces in the Republican Party continue to make excuses for the top 1% wealthiest while dissing their own in the middle class. Cowards and Traitors, the bunch of ya. While the middle class is trying to unite against the wealthiest, some in the middle class are playing the Benedict Arnold role - all in the name of the Grand Ol' Party.

Shameless Cowards - the lot of you

-----

1) The top 1% are not the same people year to year. Most of the top income earners are in that bracket only temporarily through the sale of an asset like a home or the inheritance of a business, or a temporary investment windfall. So I assume you are talking about the permanent 1%, the Bill Gates/Steve Jobs of the world.
2) The top 1% didn't steal the money. They earned it. They shouldn't be punished for doing so.
3) The earnings of the top 1% doesn't effect my ability to earn. In fact, in many cases, the top 1% of earners don't do it alone. They take other people with them on the way up.

So I have a question for you. Why do feel you must be "against" the wealthy? Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, et al, employ 100s of thousands of people worldwide who make very nice incomes as employees of these companies. Their innovations have indirectly created opportunity for thousands of people outside of their companies through the use and sale of the products/services they make. They navigated through endless regulation and a punishing tax code to make their companies a success. And this is what you are "Against"? For all the good these people have done, directly and indirectly, you want to punish their success. And you call conservatives 'traders'.

Instead of looking up with envy, why don't you look down in shame? There are able bodied poor in this country who, despite a free education, free housing and free food as they grew up, remain dependent on the middle and upper class for their daily existence as adults. This, too you, is acceptable. These folks, to you, are victims of the evils of the rich. Their squandered opportunities are somehow the fault of those who didn't squander their own. America guarantees you opportunity, not outcome.

Your anger is ignorant and misplaced.

Not only should the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs of the world not be punished for their financial success, but they should be acknowledged for the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of jobs their particular vision, efforts, and success have produced. Probably both have single handedly made it possible for tens of thousands to move into the top 5% and/or 1%. Also they both have also given generously of their personal time, talent, and personal fortunes to the arts, to science, to scholarship funds, and to relieve suffering all around the world.

Without that 1%, a lot of the 5% would never have achieved that level of financial success. Without the top 5 to 10%, all of us would have far less opportunity and/or financial success than we have achieved.

Too many on the left want to kill the golden goose thinking then they will have all that lovely gold at once. It simply does not work that way, however. Kill or take down or unrich the rich, and we will all be significantly poorer for it.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLD6VChcWCE]What We Believe, Part 1: Small Government and Free Enterprise. - YouTube[/ame]

While one side is getting back to its base, the other side is being pulled in an entirely new direction....

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

When one's taxes are raised for no other reason than that someone has decided that one has too much money, then yes, it is a punishment.

When is that happening?

Furthermore, I realize that the left is incapable of considering anything wrong unless it directly affects them or defending others unless they are slavish cult followers of that person, but please understand that the right does not labor under these character defects. It requires no "worship" for us to defend someone simply because it is the right thing to do.

Have it your way. Send Donald Trump, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet a big check from your bank account.

 

[Unkotare]

When one's taxes are raised for no other reason than that someone has decided that one has too much money, then yes, it is a punishment.

When is that happening?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8]Obama: Raise Taxes, Capital Gains - "For Purposes of Fairness" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Chris]

And this brings to mind the fact that ANY action for the public good is now called "leftist" by the Tea Bag crowd, and therefore is objectionable. Which is why the GOP controlled House is absolutely constipated.

No, shitstain. Any action proposed "for the public good" which any sane adult can see would have the opposite effect is called "leftist", because that sort of ass-backward thinking is the hallmark of the left. Furthermore, my personal rule of thumb is that any action touted by juveniles with latent homosexual tendencies (as evidenced by the belief that "Tea Bag" and "Tea Bagger" is the height of wit) should automatically be dismissed from any serious consideration.

Don't throw a hissy at me for correctly identifying your ilk just because you wish reality was different.

Any action proposed for the public good when it would have the opposite effect is "leftist".

Does that include the personhood bill in the south, or the union stripping in the north, or how about the drug testing of welfare recepients in Florida? All those are social engineering things proposed by the right that would SIGNIFICANTLY increase the size of the government while not doing much in the way of helping anyone.

But the GOP will tell you that they are protecting the rights of the people when it's actually their agenda for social engineering and the rich.

NOTHING has been done in DC since Boehner took over as Speaker of the House towards jobs, just right wing social engineering.

But........they tell us it's for our own good.

Social engineering for the rich.

Exactly.

From union busting to tax breaks for big oil and the wealthy to eliminating the EPA, the entire Republican agenda is social engineering for the rich.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Uncensored, focus. I didn't say that there are no rich Democrats. I said that your idea of their influence over Democrats is entirely imaginary.

It's not "influence," it's outright ownership. When one of the 10 richest people in America decided to put her man in the White House, that was all there was too it. Oprah wanted Obama to be president, she directed the party to make him the candidate, they obeyed. Hillary was shit out of luck, one of the owners of the party had decided.

Again, this is in your imagination. Everyone knows that Oprah is rich. No one ever said otherwise.

But she is "good rich" not "bad rich," right?

Hypocrisy so thick you can cut it with a knife...

Again, this is imaginary. Where are you getting the idea that anyone said that NBA players are not rich? That George Soros is not rich? That Oprah is not rich?

So why aren't the Shitters protesting in front of their homes? Demanding that they "give back?"

We know why, we all do. It's pure partisanship. One set of rules for the elite of the party, a vastly different set for everyone else.

Again, your imagination is working overtime.

You keep repeating yourself, yet say nothing.

Your idea here is so crazy you can't even articulate it.

George Clooney is politically active, but he's not up on stage with any Democrats.

Right.....

 

[Uncensored2008]

And this brings to mind the fact that ANY action for the public good is now called "leftist" by the Tea Bag crowd, and therefore is objectionable. Which is why the GOP controlled House is absolutely constipated.

What you mean is any action for the good of public employees. The actual public derives no good from what you on the left push, they just pay the tab. The left serves the public employee unions against the public. The GOP does a marginally better job of promoting the public interest, though they are no prize either.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And this brings to mind the fact that ANY action for the public good is now called "leftist" by the Tea Bag crowd, and therefore is objectionable. Which is why the GOP controlled House is absolutely constipated.

No, shitstain. Any action proposed "for the public good" which any sane adult can see would have the opposite effect is called "leftist", because that sort of ass-backward thinking is the hallmark of the left. Furthermore, my personal rule of thumb is that any action touted by juveniles with latent homosexual tendencies (as evidenced by the belief that "Tea Bag" and "Tea Bagger" is the height of wit) should automatically be dismissed from any serious consideration.

Don't throw a hissy at me for correctly identifying your ilk just because you wish reality was different.

I have to assume that your preoccupation with shit stains is that you find them so hard to get out of leather.

You're still not being clear as to how you define leftist. Are you some sort of anarchist?

As for Tea Bagging, hey, the right wingers brought it up.

The HuffingGlue picture is from a good two years after the leftists started calling those who dared protest Wall Street and corrupt government "Teabaggers."

Still better to be a Teabagger than a Shitter...