Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
TheBreeze
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]TheBreeze: “Faux” Republicans? What is a faux Republican, in your opinion?
And wouldn’t Clinton have been a “faux” Democrat?
I enjoy the polemical nature of your posts, this response should be interesting.[/quote]
The term is ‘faux conservative’. I consider a faux conservative to be someone who is voting for McCain while at the same time deriding Obama’s ‘socialist’ policies. I use the term ‘faux conservative’ because I consider McCain to be just as socialist as Obama, it’s just that McCain’s socialism would be directed more towards the super-rich as opposed to the poor.
Faux conservatives also criticize Obama’s tax increases on the super-rich while ignoring the fact that Bush has doubled the deficit to $10 trillion+. How is the deficit going to be reduced other than by paying it down with tax increases? Who should be made to pay for Bush’s $11 trillion in taxpayer money to the super-rich? The poor? Shouldn’t the super-rich be made to pay for their own bailout?
Republicans these days are no more fiscally conservative than Democrats. It’s just that Republicans have somehow convinced their constituency that being fiscally conservative means reducing or eliminating taxes on the super-rich while at the same time spending massively on socialism for the rich.
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]TheBreeze: “Faux” Republicans? What is a faux Republican, in your opinion?
And wouldn’t Clinton have been a “faux” Democrat?
I enjoy the polemical nature of your posts, this response should be interesting.[/quote]
The term is ‘faux conservative’. I consider a faux conservative to be someone who is voting for McCain while at the same time deriding Obama’s ‘socialist’ policies. I use the term ‘faux conservative’ because I consider McCain to be just as socialist as Obama, it’s just that McCain’s socialism would be directed more towards the super-rich as opposed to the poor.
Faux conservatives also criticize Obama’s tax increases on the super-rich while ignoring the fact that Bush has doubled the deficit to $10 trillion+. How is the deficit going to be reduced other than by paying it down with tax increases? Who should be made to pay for Bush’s $11 trillion in taxpayer money to the super-rich? The poor? Shouldn’t the super-rich be made to pay for their own bailout?
Republicans these days are no more fiscally conservative than Democrats. It’s just that Republicans have somehow convinced their constituency that being fiscally conservative means reducing or eliminating taxes on the super-rich while at the same time spending massively on socialism for the rich.
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]TheBreeze: “Faux” Republicans? What is a faux Republican, in your opinion?
And wouldn’t Clinton have been a “faux” Democrat?
I enjoy the polemical nature of your posts, this response should be interesting.[/quote]
The term is ‘faux conservative’. I consider a faux conservative to be someone who is voting for McCain while at the same time deriding Obama’s ‘socialist’ policies. I use the term ‘faux conservative’ because I consider McCain to be just as socialist as Obama, it’s just that McCain’s socialism would be directed more towards the super-rich as opposed to the poor.
Faux conservatives also criticize Obama’s tax increases on the super-rich while ignoring the fact that Bush has doubled the deficit to $10 trillion+. How is the deficit going to be reduced other than by paying it down with tax increases? Who should be made to pay for Bush’s $11 trillion in taxpayer money to the super-rich? The poor? Shouldn’t the super-rich be made to pay for their own bailout?
Republicans these days are no more fiscally conservative than Democrats. It’s just that Republicans have somehow convinced their constituency that being fiscally conservative means reducing or eliminating taxes on the super-rich while at the same time spending massively on socialism for the rich.
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]TheBreeze: “Faux” Republicans? What is a faux Republican, in your opinion?
And wouldn’t Clinton have been a “faux” Democrat?
I enjoy the polemical nature of your posts, this response should be interesting.[/quote]
The term is ‘faux conservative’. I consider a faux conservative to be someone who is voting for McCain while at the same time deriding Obama’s ‘socialist’ policies. I use the term ‘faux conservative’ because I consider McCain to be just as socialist as Obama, it’s just that McCain’s socialism would be directed more towards the super-rich as opposed to the poor.
Faux conservatives also criticize Obama’s tax increases on the super-rich while ignoring the fact that Bush has doubled the deficit to $10 trillion+. How is the deficit going to be reduced other than by paying it down with tax increases? Who should be made to pay for Bush’s $11 trillion in taxpayer money to the super-rich? The poor? Shouldn’t the super-rich be made to pay for their own bailout?
Republicans these days are no more fiscally conservative than Democrats. It’s just that Republicans have somehow convinced their constituency that being fiscally conservative means reducing or eliminating taxes on the super-rich while at the same time spending massively on socialism for the rich.
ParticipantOne thing you can be sure of: No matter which side wins, the government is going to get bigger.
I like how faux conservatives always fall back on Reagan. Reagan didn’t shrink the government. He just grew government in the areas of defense and corporate welfare as opposed to social welfare. Chimpy Bush has taken Reagan’s ideas to the extreme with his $11 trillion bailout of the super-rich.
Many Americans now feel like they are no longer benefiting from corporate welfare so they are ready to try policies that will grow the social welfare side of government.
ParticipantOne thing you can be sure of: No matter which side wins, the government is going to get bigger.
I like how faux conservatives always fall back on Reagan. Reagan didn’t shrink the government. He just grew government in the areas of defense and corporate welfare as opposed to social welfare. Chimpy Bush has taken Reagan’s ideas to the extreme with his $11 trillion bailout of the super-rich.
Many Americans now feel like they are no longer benefiting from corporate welfare so they are ready to try policies that will grow the social welfare side of government.
ParticipantOne thing you can be sure of: No matter which side wins, the government is going to get bigger.
I like how faux conservatives always fall back on Reagan. Reagan didn’t shrink the government. He just grew government in the areas of defense and corporate welfare as opposed to social welfare. Chimpy Bush has taken Reagan’s ideas to the extreme with his $11 trillion bailout of the super-rich.
Many Americans now feel like they are no longer benefiting from corporate welfare so they are ready to try policies that will grow the social welfare side of government.
ParticipantOne thing you can be sure of: No matter which side wins, the government is going to get bigger.
I like how faux conservatives always fall back on Reagan. Reagan didn’t shrink the government. He just grew government in the areas of defense and corporate welfare as opposed to social welfare. Chimpy Bush has taken Reagan’s ideas to the extreme with his $11 trillion bailout of the super-rich.
Many Americans now feel like they are no longer benefiting from corporate welfare so they are ready to try policies that will grow the social welfare side of government.
ParticipantOne thing you can be sure of: No matter which side wins, the government is going to get bigger.
I like how faux conservatives always fall back on Reagan. Reagan didn’t shrink the government. He just grew government in the areas of defense and corporate welfare as opposed to social welfare. Chimpy Bush has taken Reagan’s ideas to the extreme with his $11 trillion bailout of the super-rich.
Many Americans now feel like they are no longer benefiting from corporate welfare so they are ready to try policies that will grow the social welfare side of government.
Participant[quote=cooprider]
Well, if you’re not rich you likely work for someone who is, and if that person has to pay higher taxes, kiss that raise good bye. “Spread the wealth”
[/quote]Please masser’ rich person. Please give po’ Willie a raise. I’s dependent on yous’ graft.
Give me an effin’ break. Most people get paid based on the market for their skills. If someone is willing to work hard, they can always improve their lot in life. If the current rich asshole I’m working for won’t pay me for my skills, I’ll just go work for some other rich asshole.
[quote=cooprider]
Came across this info somewhere else and thought it a fitting preview of the liberal takeover:PART 1: Remember the election in 2006?
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.Since voting in a Democratically controlled Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.America voted for “change” in 2006, and we got it! Remember, it’s Congress that makes the law not the President. He has to work with what’s handed him.
[/quote]If you believe this, you are too mentally challenged to vote.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 2: TAXESblah, blah, blah …
[/quote]Taxes for the middle class will be lower under Obama as the super-rich will have to bear most of the tax burden. McCain will raise taxes on the middle class so that he can lavish more tax cuts on the super-rich. I’d prefer that the super-rich be made to pay for their Iraq War and for the $11 trillion in taxpayer money that Bush has given them.
[quote=cooprider]
Barack Hussein Obama (don’t you just love his middle name) will return to the higher tax rates.
[/quote]More evidence that you are retarded.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 3: Illegal ImmigrationYou think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this…(it goes on to say how illegal immigration costs the US over $300 billion/year.)[/quote]
McCain and Bush were the main supporters of comprehensive immigration reform. Didn’t McCain actually have his name on that bill? In any event, McCain wants to bring in immigrants as cheap labor. Obama pushed for a provision in the bill that would require immigrants to be paid at the prevailing union wage.
If we do end up with increased immigration, I much prefer Obama’s approach that requires that they be paid humanely.
Participant[quote=cooprider]
Well, if you’re not rich you likely work for someone who is, and if that person has to pay higher taxes, kiss that raise good bye. “Spread the wealth”
[/quote]Please masser’ rich person. Please give po’ Willie a raise. I’s dependent on yous’ graft.
Give me an effin’ break. Most people get paid based on the market for their skills. If someone is willing to work hard, they can always improve their lot in life. If the current rich asshole I’m working for won’t pay me for my skills, I’ll just go work for some other rich asshole.
[quote=cooprider]
Came across this info somewhere else and thought it a fitting preview of the liberal takeover:PART 1: Remember the election in 2006?
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.Since voting in a Democratically controlled Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.America voted for “change” in 2006, and we got it! Remember, it’s Congress that makes the law not the President. He has to work with what’s handed him.
[/quote]If you believe this, you are too mentally challenged to vote.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 2: TAXESblah, blah, blah …
[/quote]Taxes for the middle class will be lower under Obama as the super-rich will have to bear most of the tax burden. McCain will raise taxes on the middle class so that he can lavish more tax cuts on the super-rich. I’d prefer that the super-rich be made to pay for their Iraq War and for the $11 trillion in taxpayer money that Bush has given them.
[quote=cooprider]
Barack Hussein Obama (don’t you just love his middle name) will return to the higher tax rates.
[/quote]More evidence that you are retarded.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 3: Illegal ImmigrationYou think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this…(it goes on to say how illegal immigration costs the US over $300 billion/year.)[/quote]
McCain and Bush were the main supporters of comprehensive immigration reform. Didn’t McCain actually have his name on that bill? In any event, McCain wants to bring in immigrants as cheap labor. Obama pushed for a provision in the bill that would require immigrants to be paid at the prevailing union wage.
If we do end up with increased immigration, I much prefer Obama’s approach that requires that they be paid humanely.
Participant[quote=cooprider]
Well, if you’re not rich you likely work for someone who is, and if that person has to pay higher taxes, kiss that raise good bye. “Spread the wealth”
[/quote]Please masser’ rich person. Please give po’ Willie a raise. I’s dependent on yous’ graft.
Give me an effin’ break. Most people get paid based on the market for their skills. If someone is willing to work hard, they can always improve their lot in life. If the current rich asshole I’m working for won’t pay me for my skills, I’ll just go work for some other rich asshole.
[quote=cooprider]
Came across this info somewhere else and thought it a fitting preview of the liberal takeover:PART 1: Remember the election in 2006?
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.Since voting in a Democratically controlled Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.America voted for “change” in 2006, and we got it! Remember, it’s Congress that makes the law not the President. He has to work with what’s handed him.
[/quote]If you believe this, you are too mentally challenged to vote.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 2: TAXESblah, blah, blah …
[/quote]Taxes for the middle class will be lower under Obama as the super-rich will have to bear most of the tax burden. McCain will raise taxes on the middle class so that he can lavish more tax cuts on the super-rich. I’d prefer that the super-rich be made to pay for their Iraq War and for the $11 trillion in taxpayer money that Bush has given them.
[quote=cooprider]
Barack Hussein Obama (don’t you just love his middle name) will return to the higher tax rates.
[/quote]More evidence that you are retarded.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 3: Illegal ImmigrationYou think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this…(it goes on to say how illegal immigration costs the US over $300 billion/year.)[/quote]
McCain and Bush were the main supporters of comprehensive immigration reform. Didn’t McCain actually have his name on that bill? In any event, McCain wants to bring in immigrants as cheap labor. Obama pushed for a provision in the bill that would require immigrants to be paid at the prevailing union wage.
If we do end up with increased immigration, I much prefer Obama’s approach that requires that they be paid humanely.
Participant[quote=cooprider]
Well, if you’re not rich you likely work for someone who is, and if that person has to pay higher taxes, kiss that raise good bye. “Spread the wealth”
[/quote]Please masser’ rich person. Please give po’ Willie a raise. I’s dependent on yous’ graft.
Give me an effin’ break. Most people get paid based on the market for their skills. If someone is willing to work hard, they can always improve their lot in life. If the current rich asshole I’m working for won’t pay me for my skills, I’ll just go work for some other rich asshole.
[quote=cooprider]
Came across this info somewhere else and thought it a fitting preview of the liberal takeover:PART 1: Remember the election in 2006?
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.Since voting in a Democratically controlled Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.America voted for “change” in 2006, and we got it! Remember, it’s Congress that makes the law not the President. He has to work with what’s handed him.
[/quote]If you believe this, you are too mentally challenged to vote.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 2: TAXESblah, blah, blah …
[/quote]Taxes for the middle class will be lower under Obama as the super-rich will have to bear most of the tax burden. McCain will raise taxes on the middle class so that he can lavish more tax cuts on the super-rich. I’d prefer that the super-rich be made to pay for their Iraq War and for the $11 trillion in taxpayer money that Bush has given them.
[quote=cooprider]
Barack Hussein Obama (don’t you just love his middle name) will return to the higher tax rates.
[/quote]More evidence that you are retarded.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 3: Illegal ImmigrationYou think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this…(it goes on to say how illegal immigration costs the US over $300 billion/year.)[/quote]
McCain and Bush were the main supporters of comprehensive immigration reform. Didn’t McCain actually have his name on that bill? In any event, McCain wants to bring in immigrants as cheap labor. Obama pushed for a provision in the bill that would require immigrants to be paid at the prevailing union wage.
If we do end up with increased immigration, I much prefer Obama’s approach that requires that they be paid humanely.
Participant[quote=cooprider]
Well, if you’re not rich you likely work for someone who is, and if that person has to pay higher taxes, kiss that raise good bye. “Spread the wealth”
[/quote]Please masser’ rich person. Please give po’ Willie a raise. I’s dependent on yous’ graft.
Give me an effin’ break. Most people get paid based on the market for their skills. If someone is willing to work hard, they can always improve their lot in life. If the current rich asshole I’m working for won’t pay me for my skills, I’ll just go work for some other rich asshole.
[quote=cooprider]
Came across this info somewhere else and thought it a fitting preview of the liberal takeover:PART 1: Remember the election in 2006?
A little over one year ago:
1) Consumer confidence stood at a 2 1/2 year high;
2) Regular gasoline sold for $2.19 a gallon;
3) The unemployment rate was 4.5%.Since voting in a Democratically controlled Congress in 2006 we have seen:
1) Consumer confidence plummet;
2) The cost of regular gasoline soar to over $3.50 a gallon;
3) Unemployment is up to 5% (a 10% increase);
4) American households have seen $2.3 trillion in equity value evaporate (stock and mutual fund losses);
5) Americans have seen their home equity drop by $1.2 trillion;
6) 1% of American homes are in foreclosure.America voted for “change” in 2006, and we got it! Remember, it’s Congress that makes the law not the President. He has to work with what’s handed him.
[/quote]If you believe this, you are too mentally challenged to vote.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 2: TAXESblah, blah, blah …
[/quote]Taxes for the middle class will be lower under Obama as the super-rich will have to bear most of the tax burden. McCain will raise taxes on the middle class so that he can lavish more tax cuts on the super-rich. I’d prefer that the super-rich be made to pay for their Iraq War and for the $11 trillion in taxpayer money that Bush has given them.
[quote=cooprider]
Barack Hussein Obama (don’t you just love his middle name) will return to the higher tax rates.
[/quote]More evidence that you are retarded.
[quote=cooprider]
PART 3: Illegal ImmigrationYou think the war in Iraq is costing us too much? Read this…(it goes on to say how illegal immigration costs the US over $300 billion/year.)[/quote]
McCain and Bush were the main supporters of comprehensive immigration reform. Didn’t McCain actually have his name on that bill? In any event, McCain wants to bring in immigrants as cheap labor. Obama pushed for a provision in the bill that would require immigrants to be paid at the prevailing union wage.
If we do end up with increased immigration, I much prefer Obama’s approach that requires that they be paid humanely.
-
AuthorPosts