Why did Rachel lose?

[Truthmatters]

the right hates helping their fellow man


they want people poor and desperate

 

[DriftingSand]

When is Obama going to redistribute all of those record corporate profits?

Last I heard, there are a number of "filthy rich" Democrats. When are they going to put their "money" where their mouth is?:

1) Bill & Hillary Clinton are worth $85 million (Democrat progressives)
2) Al Gore is worth $100 million (Democrat progressive)
3) John Kerry is worth $193 million (Democrat progressive)
4) John Corzine is worth $375 million (Democrat progressive)
5) Michael Bloomberg is worth $27 billion ... yes ... billion (Extreme leftist, Democrat progressive).
The Top 10 Richest Politicians in the United States - TheRichest

They all want YOU and ME to pay our "fair share" while they horde their fortunes. But just listen to the hypocritical Dems scream and whine about the "greed" of the businessmen of the free-market-system.

Yeah, that doesn't answer the question at all.

Democrats are supposed to "put their money where their mouth is"? What does that even mean? Rich Democrats should give all of their money to poor people? But they're not doing that, nor is Obama redistributing any money except from the poor and working class up to the 1% who then funnel that money into overseas tax shelters.

This should tell Republican Teabaggers that Democrats aren't socialists and Obama isn't redistributing any money to poor people as part of some scary Communist right-wing nightmare, but Republican Teabaggers are fucking morons who don't understand reality.

If Obama is a Socialist, then why do rich people keep getting richer? Is that Socialism, or Capitalism?

Dems are "Socialist" where everyone else is concerned but practicing Republicans where their own lives are concerned (in most cases). I wonder how many folks were progressive liberals when they were begging for free handouts but conservatives when they pulled themselves out of the quagmire of socialist philosophy and became successful business owners.

If Obama and his cronies practiced what they preach then they wouldn't have fat bank accounts and you and I would be just a little bit richer.

 

[Iceweasel]

Democrats are supposed to "put their money where their mouth is"? What does that even mean? Rich Democrats should give all of their money to poor people? But they're not doing that, nor is Obama redistributing any money except from the poor and working class up to the 1% who then funnel that money into overseas tax shelters.

This should tell Republican Teabaggers that Democrats aren't socialists and Obama isn't redistributing any money to poor people as part of some scary Communist right-wing nightmare, but Republican Teabaggers are fucking morons who don't understand reality.

If Obama is a Socialist, then why do rich people keep getting richer? Is that Socialism, or Capitalism?

Due to your fixation of male genitalia you can't grasp what elitism is. Socialism is for the little people, there are always the few filthy rich in any kind of income redistribution sceme. It's the Golden Rule, those who have the gold make the rules. Try to quit dreaming of nads drapped across your lips and think about it.

 

[DriftingSand]

the right hates helping their fellow man


they want people poor and desperate

1) I'm conservative and align myself with the Tea Party (for the most part).
2) I work from check to check and am far from rich but I also realize that if I want more then I will have to work for it.
3) I routinely give to the Salvation Army; Habitat for Humanity; and the Denver Rescue Mission. Why? Because I care for folks who are worse off than I am. But I believe that charity is a choice and shouldn't be legislated.

 

[Votto]

What are Obama's collectivist policies if rich people have made 95% of the financial gains during the economic recovery since 2009?

Corporate America is a form of collectivism. Who did Obama and his cronies help protect and bail out during the credit crisis?

Obama and his filth need corporate America to fund them. Where else will they get their money? It's not like he or his ilk have ever done a hard days work in their collective lives.

Within corporate America, the move will always be to merge larger and larger corporations together until it is just one large heavily regulated corporate entity like the Fed.

 

[KNB]

Democrats are supposed to "put their money where their mouth is"? What does that even mean? Rich Democrats should give all of their money to poor people? But they're not doing that, nor is Obama redistributing any money except from the poor and working class up to the 1% who then funnel that money into overseas tax shelters.

This should tell Republican Teabaggers that Democrats aren't socialists and Obama isn't redistributing any money to poor people as part of some scary Communist right-wing nightmare, but Republican Teabaggers are fucking morons who don't understand reality.

If Obama is a Socialist, then why do rich people keep getting richer? Is that Socialism, or Capitalism?

Due to your fixation of male genitalia you can't grasp what elitism is. Socialism is for the little people, there are always the few filthy rich in any kind of income redistribution sceme. It's the Golden Rule, those who have the gold make the rules. Try to quit dreaming of nads drapped across your lips and think about it.

When is Obama going to take all of the money from rich people and give it to poor people, as Republicans have said that he is about to do for five years now?

 

[Votto]

Democrats are supposed to "put their money where their mouth is"? What does that even mean? Rich Democrats should give all of their money to poor people? But they're not doing that, nor is Obama redistributing any money except from the poor and working class up to the 1% who then funnel that money into overseas tax shelters.

This should tell Republican Teabaggers that Democrats aren't socialists and Obama isn't redistributing any money to poor people as part of some scary Communist right-wing nightmare, but Republican Teabaggers are fucking morons who don't understand reality.

If Obama is a Socialist, then why do rich people keep getting richer? Is that Socialism, or Capitalism?

Due to your fixation of male genitalia you can't grasp what elitism is. Socialism is for the little people, there are always the few filthy rich in any kind of income redistribution sceme. It's the Golden Rule, those who have the gold make the rules. Try to quit dreaming of nads drapped across your lips and think about it.

Success in terms of socialism is making as many people poor as possible. The most successful that it can become is for one rich king to rule over a society of peasants.

You often hear of our collective salvation. For the leftist, this means purging sin (money) from us in order to wash us from our sins.

 

[DriftingSand]

What are Obama's collectivist policies if rich people have made 95% of the financial gains during the economic recovery since 2009?

If you support Obama yet his policies have helped the rich get richer then you shouldn't have anything against rich people getting richer -- that is -- if you support Obama, Bloomberg, the Clintons, Gore, and the rest.

 

[Votto]

Democrats are supposed to "put their money where their mouth is"? What does that even mean? Rich Democrats should give all of their money to poor people? But they're not doing that, nor is Obama redistributing any money except from the poor and working class up to the 1% who then funnel that money into overseas tax shelters.

This should tell Republican Teabaggers that Democrats aren't socialists and Obama isn't redistributing any money to poor people as part of some scary Communist right-wing nightmare, but Republican Teabaggers are fucking morons who don't understand reality.

If Obama is a Socialist, then why do rich people keep getting richer? Is that Socialism, or Capitalism?

Due to your fixation of male genitalia you can't grasp what elitism is. Socialism is for the little people, there are always the few filthy rich in any kind of income redistribution sceme. It's the Golden Rule, those who have the gold make the rules. Try to quit dreaming of nads drapped across your lips and think about it.

When is Obama going to take all of the money from rich people and give it to poor people, as Republicans have said that he is about to do for five years now?

Republican = Democrat in sheeps clothing.

They are nothing but a whipping boy for progressives to help explain why the government is so fucked up. God forbid they ever take accountability.

 

[KNB]

What are Obama's collectivist policies if rich people have made 95% of the financial gains during the economic recovery since 2009?

Corporate America is a form of collectivism. Who did Obama and his cronies help protect and bail out during the credit crisis?

Obama and his filth need corporate America to fund them. Where else will they get their money? It's not like he or his ilk have ever done a hard days work in their collective lives.

Within corporate America, the move will always be to merge larger and larger corporations together until it is just one large heavily regulated corporate entity like the Fed.

Now you're mad at Obama for saving the 1%? Do you fucking people even know what you believe anymore?

"He doesn't stand up for the working class, but he's a socialist who demonizes success and wants to redistribute the wealth."

"He's a weak mom-jeans-wearing sissy, who is a power-mad tyrant who is destroying the Constitution with executive orders!"

Do any of you have any idea how fucking stupid the Teabagger Republican party sounds?

 

[DriftingSand]

When is Obama going to take all of the money from rich people and give it to poor people, as Republicans have said that he is about to do for five years now?

If the rich keep getting richer under a Progressive President and Senate then perhaps you should rethink your philosophy if you're opposed to rich folks getting richer. Conservatives are all about helping the "have-nots" better themselves and and work for a better future. They're all about helping small businesses get up and running. They're more than willing to show poor folks how to gain wealth if that's what poor people want.

I find it odd that poor people decry the evils of wealth but are constantly begging for more. If wealth is evil ... why seek it?

 

[Votto]

When is Obama going to take all of the money from rich people and give it to poor people, as Republicans have said that he is about to do for five years now?

If the rich keep getting richer under a Progressive President and Senate then perhaps you should rethink your philosophy if you're opposed to rich folks getting richer. Conservatives are all about helping the "have-nots" better themselves and and work for a better future. They're all about helping small businesses get up and running. They're more than willing to show poor folks how to gain wealth if that's what poor people want.

I find it odd that poor people decry the evils of wealth but are constantly begging for more. If wealth is evil ... why seek it?

Nonsense. All they need is to give the same party another decade. Of course, when they fail it will be the result of the existence of the Tea Party. Just their mere existence has the power to thwart all the power progressives have in Washington.

 

[Truthmatters]

the tea party is fading


it will be gone in a few years.

the demographics will kill you racists power

 

[Votto]

the tea party is fading


it will be gone in a few years.

the demographics will kill you racists power

If they do go away they will just be replaced with another progressive boogie man to blame for all their failings.

My guess is the blame will go to the "conservatives" in the democrat party.

In reality, you people need groups like the Tea Party worse than you realize.

 

[Sunshine]

Likely because what you think you know about liberals comes from what you are spoon fed by Fox.




Congresses and administrations of both stripes have supported education grants but mostly loans. Usually parents don't require their kids pay back their grants. Society does require that kids pay back loans.

Did you really need me to explain this to you or were you just pretending to be daft?

Well you think non liberals have liberals defined by what Fox says. How about you giving us a education as to what liberals are like.
You can start with what they believe and how they plan to run the future.

Why is it that every time someone on this site questions the powers that be in any way they think Fox news is behind it?

I guess the media has to have some token news organization out there that questions the powers that be every now and again. Otherwise it would just be like reading Pravda everyday. But to be honest, I hate Fox news. They don't cover half of what goes on.

I don't read Fox either. I read mainstream news and think for myself. Having been the sole breadwinner for a family for two decades helps with cracking the encryption.

 

[Iceweasel]

When is Obama going to take all of the money from rich people and give it to poor people, as Republicans have said that he is about to do for five years now?

That isn't what I've heard, those are left wing talking points making the accusation. The right (not Republicans, neccessarily) thinks is the working stiff Obama hurts and every stat I've seen confirms it. He blames the rich to rile up his base. The right speaks out regularly against cronyism but I seldom if ever hear it from the left.

 

[Votto]

Well you think non liberals have liberals defined by what Fox says. How about you giving us a education as to what liberals are like.
You can start with what they believe and how they plan to run the future.

Why is it that every time someone on this site questions the powers that be in any way they think Fox news is behind it?

I guess the media has to have some token news organization out there that questions the powers that be every now and again. Otherwise it would just be like reading Pravda everyday. But to be honest, I hate Fox news. They don't cover half of what goes on.

I don't read Fox either. I read mainstream news and think for myself. Having been the sole breadwinner for a family for two decades helps with cracking the encryption.

About the only good the main street media, like Fox news, is, is that it shows you the propaganda of the day. In other words, it shows you how they are trying to herd us into thinking.

 

[candycorn]

View attachment 29658

Why did Rachel Canning lose? In a world that has sold it's collective soul to redistribution, why should Rachel's parents not pay for her education?

What has surprised me is that most liberals I talk to think that she should lose. Why?

Likely because what you think you know about liberals comes from what you are spoon fed by Fox.

Her parents are much better off than she. In addition, most all of them think that society should pay for the education of our children in college. If so, then what is the difference between Rachel's parents paying for her education by letting her win the law suit verses a law saying that they should be taxed to help pay for it?

Congresses and administrations of both stripes have supported education grants but mostly loans. Usually parents don't require their kids pay back their grants. Society does require that kids pay back loans.

Did you really need me to explain this to you or were you just pretending to be daft?

Well you think non liberals have liberals defined by what Fox says. How about you giving us a education as to what liberals are like.
You can start with what they believe and how they plan to run the future.

I would never presume to speak for all liberals. My brand of liberalism is that all of us (all citizens) want more government than we're willing to pay for in some shape or form. I tend to be more pragmatic about my liberalism than many liberals are.

 

[candycorn]

View attachment 29658

Congresses and administrations of both stripes have supported education grants but mostly loans. Usually parents don't require their kids pay back their grants. Society does require that kids pay back loans.

Did you really need me to explain this to you or were you just pretending to be daft?

Your so right. Politicians simply lower interest rates as the loans just keep getting bigger and bigger and bigger. Then when they get out of school they come to realize that capitalism is dead and so is their ability to find work. Then they are stuck with a loan that will follow them to their death bed. In return, colleges around the country indoctrinate our children towards collectivism and big government policies which will produce larger and larger college loans. However, most libtards don't understand all this. All they know is that they have their man Obama in the Oval Office and everything's gonna be alright.

Those are incredibly stupid comments. I mean, seriously, are you as dumb as you are (hopefully) pretending to be?

 

[JakeStarkey]

View attachment 29658

Why did Rachel Canning lose? In a world that has sold it's collective soul to redistribution, why should Rachel's parents not pay for her education?

What has surprised me is that most liberals I talk to think that she should lose. Why? Her parents are much better off than she. In addition, most all of them think that society should pay for the education of our children in college. If so, then what is the difference between Rachel's parents paying for her education by letting her win the law suit verses a law saying that they should be taxed to help pay for it? Either way the little monster would have her schooling paid for her and her parents will have to help pay.

Your understanding of others and the world, Votto, is warped as well as your understanding of parental obligations and the social compact.

Reconsider your thinking.