I was working on a post about how the Democrats need American failure in Iraq, the economy, etc. in order to win the next election. I was going to quote some one of their leaders who infamously stated that improvement in Iraq "would be bad for us (dems)" and i had some other stuff too, but then i saw Dennis Prager's article on TownHall.com. He says the same things except his stuff is well written so i'll just do my normal copy and paste and get back to work.
One of the two major political parties of the United States has linked all its electoral hopes on domestic pathologies, economic downturns and foreign failure.
continued
28 comments:
i think this guy is full of sh*t.
that being said, the OTHER major political part has all its hopes pinned on creating a two-tier society: the rich, and the not rich, as seen in current tax policies.
as my mother used to say, 'six of one, half a dozen of the other.'
Anita, how can you argue the logic? Think about it. If we're kicking ass in Iraq who benefits politically?
If the economy is going strong we know already that the whitehouse gets the credit no matter which party is in power, so which party is in the whitehouse now?
The other stuff is just as obvious by the way AND, unlike yourself who just says "full of shit" he backs it up with statistics.
Blacks vote overwhelmingly dem, single women vote overwhelmingly dem, etc. These are facts, and the other FACT is that for as long as blacks have been voting dem, they haven't moved up in society. They are perpetual victims and that's a good thing for the dems who tell them they feel their pain and they'll take care of them with social programs etc.
Finally, how do the republicans benefit from a two tier society? please explain because i don't see how that can help them?
Take it easy John Edwards. Stop drivin a wedge between the people of my Country, There will always be rich and there will always be not so rich.... deal with it stop exploiting the poor for political gain and try going about giving them a hand up not a hand out.
.... and you mean the tax system where 5% of the population carries 75%+ of the tax burden? Being poor doesnt mean you get to ride the bus for free. Stop being a socialist, I know you think its a nice idea of kumbaya and shared Coca Cola but its a failed system.
Prager speaks truth to power, and deep down you know it and that is why you cant refute him and resort to calling a blanket bullshit without making an actual point.
As they say, and you know who they are...
The only reason to vote Republican is the Democrats
yeah, they is Thomas Sowell. He's the man.
More importantly he's right. I don't really like any of them but i vote republican because they're the lesser of two evils.
We need a third party and term limits.
Bring back the Know Nothings!
... actually we need two new parties and term limits.
the middle class carries the bulk of the tax burden in this country. and that is a function of sheer numbers. and the middle class has been exempt from the bulk of the tax cuts that this administration has proferred.
there is a sizable and growing "black middle class," yet those gains are being wittled down by reductions in basic spending, funding for health care, schools, etc.
and so what if blacks and "single women" vote overwhelmingly democratic. what is your point? it is no mystery as to why that is. the democratic party provided much of the engine from which many, many people have risen OUT of poverty and INTO the middle class.
in fact, i would NOT have been able to attend college if it weren't for the substantial aid programs provided by the jimmy carter administration (which, by the way, were almost completely GONE by the time i graduated when ronald reagan was in office).
and who knows, if i hadn't gone to college i could possibly be a drug-addled single mother on welfare now ...
... or maybe its because blacks and women are the least informed voting block.
Anita, you're wrong about the tax burden, do some research.
My point is that Prager who you claim is "full of shit" backed up his stuff with stats AND
How do most successful people vote????? they vote republican! You know that's true. So what is the political incentive for the dems to help people become successful?????
The more poor people we have, the more votes the dems have. You can argue all you want but that's the fact. You want to argue that the dems don't intentionally keep people down? well that's your opinion and you're entitled to it, but you can't argue the logic.
Republicans benefit by more people being successful, married, rich, english speaking, assimmilated, business owners, big car drivers, homeowners, etc. etc. and its the opposite for the dems. FACT.
we ALL benefit from "more people being successful, married, rich ..." that is why many, many people vote democratic because helping people climb the ladder into the middle and upper classes is in everyone's best interest.
why have so many rich people (buffet, gates, etc.) come out AGAINST abolishing inheritance taxes (something the donkey's fav, theodore roosevelt fought for because he saw an inherent flaw or 'evil' in inhereted wealth ... i.e., it makes people lazy and dissolute)?
Yes, we ALL benefit. The whole country is better off if we are successful etc. We all benefit if we win the war in Iraq as well but for some reason the dem leaders are admitting that it would be bad for them.
You're not looking at this from the POLITICAL point of view.
Think about it logically, not emotionally and you'll understand where prager is coming from.
Politically it's better for the dems if we lose the war, if people are poor, if they're on welfare, etc.
Again, I believe that the dems are purposely keeping people down because they want to remain in power. You don't have to believe that, but you can't deny the fact that NONE of these welfare programs has lifted people out of poverty.
In fact, you can't even explain why we KNOW that cutting taxes leads to higher tax revenue but the dems want to raise taxes anyway because they claim they need more money????? Simply put, the dems are either stupid, or they're doing stupid things intentionally.
Either way they are the reason that i vote for the other idiots.
oh, and as for buffet and gates, i can't pretend to know the motivation of a couple of individuals who's families will be billionaires for the rest of eternity but if they don't want to leave anything to their children they are more than welcome to donate every last penny to charity but i don't think they should tell the guy who built up his dry cleaners from one store to a whole chain, working his whole life for 15 hours a day 6 or 7 days a week, paying income taxes and every other tax imaginable in order to give his family a better life that he should have to pay a DEATH tax so that the lazy people who didn't work that hard can have welfare.
This is just me, but personally i would tell warren buffett to go fuck himself.
it's not that i'm looking at things from a purely EMOTIONAL viewpoint, it's that you and donkeyhauser look at things ONLY from a political point of view. you are ENTIRELY cynical ... your "logic" is getting in the way of looking at "reality" ... and it makes no sense, NONE AT ALL, based on any facts that i see ... or that you have presented ... that democrats AS A PARTY want to keep people down. i think there are people in BOTH PARTIES who want to keep one side or another down. there is no doubt about that.
and to say that entitlement programs have failed COMPLETELY to bring more people into the middle class is insulting to millions of people who have, in fact, risen up with some government aid. you focus on negative. i prefer to focus on the positive.
also, bill gates father is very eloquent about why he and those of his ilk believe the inheritance tax makes sense. they believe they were the lucky ones. and they have an obligation to give back to the country that gave them such amazing opportunties. and that goes, in my opinion, for the dry cleaner guy you mentioned.
Hmm.. so we have one party that supposedly benefits from "domestic pathologies, economic downturns and foreign failure" and the other party that is causing those conditions.
Although to some extent the party out of power does benefit politically when things are bad, that has always been the case.
As for Iraq, if you think that the surge is working, and that we can win, then you're just an idiot.
Some superwealthy such as Gates Buffett and Turner are just flat out pussies and obviously attempting to alleviate their insecurities from knowing full well that without daddy's riches they in all likelihood wouldnt have amounted to a hill of beans, so what do they do.... they try to buy off their guilt.
It always cracks me up how people like that preach equality in all things except for their own lifestyle and how suckers like you buy into it.
I will echo Rhino's sentiment. They can go fuck themselves.
Anita, lets clarify what we're doing here. We're commenting on the prager article which is about POLITICAL POWER and the fact that one party benefits more POLITICALLY than the other if things are bad.
So for you to say that we're only focused on that is correct, because thats the focus of the post.
Now lets examine the situation. If, as you say, both parties are trying to keep someone down, please explain to me WHO the republicans are trying to keep down and why? POLITICALLY not emotionally. like don't tell me that republicans are evil and racist and they want blacks to be poor forever because they're the devil. That may or may not be true but it's not politically expedient so give me a real reason.
As to bill gates and his father, they may feel that it was luck that they are successful, but i haven't had any winning lottery tickets. The people that get hurt from the death tax is not the gates and buffetts of the world. they could be taxed 50 billion dollars and they would still be billionaires for the rest of time. Its the dry cleaner who's family has all their money tied up in the family business who get hurt. I would tell bill gates father to keep his hands out of my pockets and if he feels so fortunate he can give all of his money to the homeless but don't go spending my money for me.
Besides which, why would we want to give ANY more money to the government??? They will waste it on pork barrell projects like the bridge to nowhere in seal fuck alaska and shit like that!!! Why would you be in favor of that unless you're just bitter because you are a have not?
seal fuck alaska?
i'm not bitter ... well, only as regards el guapo donko and his outright rejection of my flirtatious advances. but other than that, absolutely, i'm not bitter.
and, i do not, i say NOT, see myself as a 'have not.' i'm quite lucky in fact.
and i have john f. kennedy, lyndon johnson, jimmy carter and bill and hillary clinton to thank for that.
amen, brothas.
and, by the way, what is the problem you guys have with "emotion" ... ? you talk about it as if it were something to be pitched to the depths of hell.
"George Bush dont care about black people!!" lol
Well if you ever showed up for one of the Aurorathans or D'tactular Karaoke Explosions......
Thank Jimmy Carter for what?
For what???
... and what is this ""emotion"" that you speak of?
well, if you read one of my previous posts rather than "ranting before reading" i wouldn't have to answer your question as to "thank jimmy carter for what" ...
George Bush don't care about black people and neither do I.
Never liked them coloreds!
Actually its just you, George Bush dont care about you Warlike or your African Booty Scratching Crenshaw Mafia.
What up Rhino? I know you are kidding. How are things? I heard we missed a reunion extravaganza last week.......lol...yeah right--you know without us that shit was destined to be wack.
Back to the issues.....The ruling party will always bite the bullet for anything that goes wrong. There definetely needs to be a new party with some new and original agendas.
The Republican's problem is that there aren't enough rich people to give them a majority. So they have to convince people that boys kissing boys and girls kissing girls is somehow a threat to the Republic.
More importantly....
Anita, so when you want to get this done?
Yeah i saw the pics of the reunion and i only recognized 3 people! It was scary looking actually.
We need to get together soon. I've got a trathlon this weekend (mini) but i'm free after that so maybe i'll shoot into the city and we can have a gentleman's dinner.
It's always clear that the lefties who comment on this blog, have never met actual poor people. They think that poor people are just like, well, educated lefties sans cash.
Most of the poor have no interest in the things that lefties care about. In fact, they are often poor because they have no interest whatsoever in reading or education or working hard, or even working at all.
My experience living amongst the poor is pretty much encapsulated in the very true experiences of Gerry Charlotte Phelps, former Commie, leftist revolutionary, born again Christian, who actually has run various anti-poverty programs. Her blog about helping the poor is probably the most honest telling of what the poor are like I have ever read. She served hard time for armed robbery and her blog about her time in prison is really interesting too.
http://www.gerrycharlottephelps.com/chapter_4_what_the_poor_are_like/index.html
On the other hand Fred's recent column explains that the majority of humans are stupid and there is not a damn thing we can do about it. The other day in the jury room we were talking about the judge and how she does not seem soured on humanity like say, Judge Judy. So I said that Judge Judy does not make allowances for people to be stupid. She, like most of the educated elite, expects others to think as she does. She, being of very high I.Q. would not make stupid decisions, because she is not stupid. She got a law degree, so she's on the very tiny portion of the Bell curve for intelligence but she expects people of low I.Q. to make the same decisions she would make. Other people can only use the brains they've got and most of them don't have very many.
Anyway, one of the other jurors is a teacher and she told me that as a teacher she has to believe that people are not limited by their intelligence. I happen to agree that maybe in her profession she can't afford to admit the truth, if she did she might have to give up. She needs to feel like she can make a difference in kids lives.
Post a Comment