Please Educate me!

[olevetonahill]

Im NOT a fan of Doctor Carson
Yet I find him a breath of Fresh air
But WHY do ANY of you LIBS think That Billiary would be better?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Im NOT a fan of Doctor Carson
Yet I find him a breath of Fresh air
But WHY do ANY of you LIBS think That Billiary would be better?They are brainwashed Leftists who are programmed to think Constitutionalists are wrong, and any democrat nominee is more capable of good government leadership than any old constitutionalist, or even a sometimes constitutionalist.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Im NOT a fan of Doctor Carson
Yet I find him a breath of Fresh air
But WHY do ANY of you LIBS think That Billiary would be better?

Hi Vet. Lib here.

I don't actually think it would have a snowball's chance of passing, but Carson's 10% flat tax plan is grossly unfair to the middle and lower classes.

Imagine a family of four that grosses $35,000 a year. $3500 is a much bigger dent in their income than $35,000 would be to someone grossing $350,000 a year. Would someone making $350 million a year be as deprived for having to pay $35 million as that family earning $35,000 a year would be, having to pay their $3500? That's a lot of rent and groceries and shoes for the kids in their world.

On both sides, I am the scion of dirt-poor forebears who, despite working their asses off, never accumulated much wealth as their hard-earned cash went for basics like food and clothing.

I just don't think people like they should have to pay taxes at the same rate as, say, someone who never worked a day in their life and whose vastly greater income derives from their parents' investments that they were fortunate enough to inherit.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

They are brainwashed Leftists who are programmed to think Constitutionalists are wrong, and any democrat nominee is more capable of good government leadership than any old constitutionalist, or even a sometimes constitutionalist.

A Constitutionalist is one who strictly adheres to the Constitution, am I right?

Article 6 of the Constitution: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Ben Carson:


Carson, meanwhile, was asked Sunday whether a president's faith should matter to voters.

"I guess it depends on what that faith is," he said. "If it's inconsistent with the values and principles of America, then of course it should matter. But if it fits within the realm of America and consistent with the Constitution, no problem."

Asked whether Islam is consistent with the Constitution, Carson said: "No, I don't -- I do not."

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/20/politics/ben-carson-muslim-president-2016/

So to summarize: the Constitution specifically states that there is no religious test required to hold public office. Ben Carson, who as president would have to swear a vow to uphold that selfsame Constitution, doesn't seem to quite agree with that particular part of the document.

I interpret this to mean he isn't exactly a Constitutionalist, per se.

So back to Vet's original question. I haven't seen Hillary openly make statements that hint as President she might just disregard the Constitution. Until I do, that's why I think she'd be better than Carson.

[rock on sooner]

Hi Vet. Lib here.

I don't actually think it would have a snowball's chance of passing, but Carson's 10% flat tax plan is grossly unfair to the middle and lower classes.

Imagine a family of four that grosses $35,000 a year. $3500 is a much bigger dent in their income than $35,000 would be to someone grossing $350,000 a year. Would someone making $350 million a year be as deprived for having to pay $35 million as that family earning $35,000 a year would be, having to pay their $3500? That's a lot of rent and groceries and shoes for the kids in their world.

On both sides, I am the scion of dirt-poor forebears who, despite working their asses off, never accumulated much wealth as their hard-earned cash went for basics like food and clothing.

I just don't think people like they should have to pay taxes at the same rate as, say, someone who never worked a day in their life and whose vastly greater income derives from their parents' investments that they were fortunate enough to inherit.

Small point of correction...Carson's own words...it is closer to a 14.5% flat tax, even more
regressive on low and middle incomers.....

[olevetonahill]

Small point of correction...Carson's own words...it is closer to a 14.5% flat tax, even more
regressive on low and middle incomers.....

See Rock! No one can stay on topic, I said I wasnt a Fan of Carson, And Simply asked about "The Bitch" no one has replied to that yet.

[rock on sooner]

At a big risk, I'll offer this...Carson is a COMPLETE unknown and something of a
"not quite all there" (imo) and HRC is just the opposite. Granted, there are many
who don't want any more of Clinton and Obama, that's fair but in the overall
scheme of things, this dangerous world is too much for a non-political neophyte.
Cough, Cough, Gulp...I could handle, um, Rubio over Carson, Trump or Fiorina.

[yermom]

It's a false dichotomy to begin with. Carson being a moron doesn't mean HRC is the only other option.

Have they both won the nomination?

Are you saying Carson is the best/only choice out of the GOP? I just hope that isn't true.

[rock on sooner]

It's a false dichotomy to begin with. Carson being a moron doesn't mean HRC is the only other option.

Have they both won the nomination?

Are you saying Carson is the best/only choice out of the GOP? I just hope that isn't true.

Of course, neither has one their party's nomination. But, one most likely will and the other won't.
Carson is neither the best or only choice for the GOP, but he is the one being most talked about at
the moment.

[olevetonahill]

It's a false dichotomy to begin with. Carson being a moron doesn't mean HRC is the only other option.

Have they both won the nomination?

Are you saying Carson is the best/only choice out of the GOP? I just hope that isn't true.

Has nothing to do with Who wins the Nominations, I simply asked Yalls opinion of hilliary.
Everyones jumping on Carson. I want to know what yall think of HER.

[yermom]

Meh, I'd rather see Sanders

[olevetonahill]

Meh, I'd rather see Sanders

OK, Ill type slow LOL
WHAT do think of hilliary?

[yermom]

Again, meh. I'm fairly sure I've likely never touted her for anything.

Other than saying that the Benghazi/email **** is trumped up BS I'm fairly sure I haven't talked about her much.

[BoulderSooner79]

Hillary would be same ol same ol. Similar to Bush41, Bill Clinton, Obama. Better than Bush 43. She would start too many wars, but less than a republican. She cut corporate taxes, but not as much as a republican. She would cut social security indirectly by changing some of the rules, but not as much as a republican. Breaking through the gender barrier would be a good thing as it would widen the pool of future candidates, but I kinda think the voters already accept that even though it hasn't happened.

Summary: You pretty much know exactly what you would get and if you are looking for big changes, look elsewhere. You can just change the name of this forum to HClintonfest and continue your bitching and moaning for another 4 years.

But you asked specifically why someone would prefer her over Carson. For me, I think Carson is a moron and a loose canon and nobody knows what in the heck they would get. That doesn't sit well with many people.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

A Constitutionalist is one who strictly adheres to the Constitution, am I right?

Article 6 of the Constitution: "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Ben Carson:



So to summarize: the Constitution specifically states that there is no religious test required to hold public office. Ben Carson, who as president would have to swear a vow to uphold that selfsame Constitution, doesn't seem to quite agree with that particular part of the document.

I interpret this to mean he isn't exactly a Constitutionalist, per se.

So back to Vet's original question. I haven't seen Hillary openly make statements that hint as President she might just disregard the Constitution. Until I do, that's why I think she'd be better than Carson.Carson's concern over moslems is justified. The moslem religion is unique among any religions that I know of in that it espouses sharia law, which usurps the Constitution.

[Serenity Now]

Sharia law. LOL

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

See Rock! No one can stay on topic, I said I wasnt a Fan of Carson, And Simply asked about "The Bitch" no one has replied to that yet.

I thought I was on topic. The question was, "But WHY do ANY of you LIBS think That Billiary would be better?"

I think Clinton would be better than Carson because she's not proposing a tax plan that is grossly unfair to the middle and lower classes.

Also, I personally would prefer having a president with the balls to endure 11 hours of BS partisan questioning than any one of those sissies who couldn't even answer snippy debate questions without whining about it. I can just envision Putin's face when President Trump says to him, "That's not a very nicely asked question, Vladimir." LMAO.

By contrast, Clinton didn't whine and cry when Anderson Cooper asked her, "Will you say anything to get elected?"

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Carson's concern over moslems is justified. The moslem religion is unique among any religions that I know of in that it espouses sharia law, which usurps the Constitution.

I guess you missed THIS particular Christian saying his religion should usurp the Constitution (spoiler: it's Huckabee):


I have opponents in this race who do not want to change the Constitution. But I believe it’s a lot easier to change the Constitution than it would be to change the word of the living God. And that’s what we need to do is amend the Constitution so it’s in God’s standards rather than trying to change God’s standards so it lines up with some contemporary view of how we treat each other and how we treat the family.

Video proof here:

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/01/15/18870/huckabee-amend-the-constitution-to-gods-standards/

[yermom]

But it's the true religion, so it's okay

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

But it's the true religion, so it's okay

I know. It's that double standard thing that boggles my mind.

For example, take the Ben Carson West Point thing, substitute the name Hillary Clinton, and the same people who have been parsing and splitting hairs to try to make it seem less than what it is--he lied--would be going bat guano crazy over the lying bitch.

[olevetonahill]

Again, meh. I'm fairly sure I've likely never touted her for anything.

Other than saying that the Benghazi/email **** is trumped up BS I'm fairly sure I haven't talked about her much.

Obfuscate much? I simply asked what You and the other left leaning folks Thought of her. Not what ya thought of Carson nor if you have ever spoken of her.
Simply your thoughts on her being a viable candidate!

[yermom]

That's not what you asked. You said why is she better than Carson. I rejected the premise.

I'll ask you. Why is horse **** better than bull ****?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I guess you missed THIS particular Christian saying his religion should usurp the Constitution (spoiler: it's Huckabee):



Video proof here:

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2008/01/15/18870/huckabee-amend-the-constitution-to-gods-standards/Lemme get this straight. You complain about Carson's objection to islam, consequently you're giving Sharia law a pass. Then you complain that Huckabee wants to amend the constitution rather than simply ignore it like the democrats do?

[hawaii 5-0]

I pretty much go along with BoulderSooner79's post #14.

Not a fan of Hillary by any means but I'm still waiting to see someone better come along. So far the yahoos put up by the Repubs are still lacking.

It's the lesser of 2 evils. Another small factor is that with HRC you also get Bill. Besides his inability to keep his fly zipped (who's to blame him?) he was pretty good for the Country.

5-0

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I pretty much go along with BoulderSooner79's post #14.

Not a fan of Hillary by any means but I'm still waiting to see someone better come along. So far the yahoos put up by the Repubs are still lacking.

It's the lesser of 2 evils. Another small factor is that with HRC you also get Bill. Besides his inability to keep his fly zipped (who's to blame him?) he was pretty good for the Country.

5-0that's SO phkced up! Maybe some day you will realize it.

[yermom]

Ha-ha!

[hawaii 5-0]

that's SO phkced up! Maybe some day you will realize it.

Another well-thought out, fully explained intelligent response. I'm totally convinced. Thank you.

5-0

[olevetonahill]

That's not what you asked. You said why is she better than Carson. I rejected the premise.

I'll ask you. Why is horse **** better than bull ****?

So in yer opinion is Hillary the Horse **** or Cow ****?

[Curly Bill]

So in yer opinion is Hillary the Horse **** or Cow ****?

She's a shrill, evil, nasty old shrew, who because she's promising lots of "free" sh*t, the losers on the left would lap it right out of her anus if she'd let them.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Another well-thought out, fully explained intelligent response. I'm totally convinced. Thank you.

5-0see #29 if my response disappointed you.

[Curly Bill]

The left can throw out all the high-sounding talking points they want to, but we know what really motivates those handwringing sacks of sh*t, and it's the promise that big government is going to help them do what they can't or want do for themselves.

[yermom]

So in yer opinion is Hillary the Horse **** or Cow ****?

How many times do I have to say I don't like Hillary?

That doesn't mean Carson isn't nuts. I think Trump is probably less objectionable than Carson

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Lemme get this straight. You complain about Carson's objection to islam, consequently you're giving Sharia law a pass. Then you complain that Huckabee wants to amend the constitution rather than simply ignore it like the democrats do?

Carson said he would not support a Muslim for president based solely on that person's religion.
I interpret that to mean he's assuming said Muslim would, unconstitutionally, try to implement his Muslim beliefs on the nation. That's a pretty big leap of logic, in my opinion.

However, going by that logic, a Christian like Huckabee should be equally disqualified for office because not only has he not stated he would keep his religious beliefs separate from his work as president, he has also said flat-out, not in the video I posted, that he would ignore the Constitution (i.e., the Supreme Court) because God is a higher power than the Supreme Court.

I would never support a Muslim presidential candidate who stands up and says he will try to change the Constitution to reflect Islamic beliefs because Allah's law supersedes it.
By the exact same logic, I would never support a Christian presidential candidate who stands up and says he will try to change the Constitution because God's law supersedes it.
They are both saying the SAME THING.

So I personally don't give a rat's *** what religion a candidate follows, as long as he or she vows to uphold the Constitution whether their religious views align with it or not.
But when they start talking about changing the Constitution to follow THEIR religion, I care very much indeed.

ETA: And, in Carson's case, state that someone should not be entitled to Constitutional protections (not having to pass a religious test to hold office) because of their religion.

[rock on sooner]

Okay, okay, as I channel flip all the undefeateds getting the shat scared out of 'em...
Here's why I think Hillary is better than any of the Pubs or Dems....since she got into
college she has advocated for underprivileged kids, women's rights and protection, even
in law school and as a law partner, did research then pro bono work to help those who
needed it. When she got into the Senate, same thing. As Sec of State, travelled the
world advocating for women's/children's rights and protection (stood up to China, the
Taliban, India's hierarchy) the biggest offenders. Worked tirelessly with numerous
counterparts in Europe (even China and Russia) to inflict stringent sanctions on Iran
(which,btw, brought them to the table to negotiate (right or wrong, the deal slows down
the Ayatolah (sp?) Yeah, she's got warts...who among all of 'em don't. Her old man
didn't/couldn't keep it zipped but worked with the Pubs (actually took their own ideas)
and put them in place, to the tune of a balanced budget and giant surplus,,22m added
jobs...all to set up W to royally screw things up. So, yup, I'd prefer that legacy over
a blustery buffoon, nutcase doctor, failed private sector CEO, flip flopping one term
senator, filibustering one term senator, isolationist one term senator, Baptist preacher
who supports a federal law breaker, a sitting governor whose own state wants him gone,
a former governor saddled with W's legacy and the other hopeless also rans.

At least the above provides some reasoning, most of which, I'm sure on this board has
created some excitement (!?). So, as I get another brew (anyone want one while I'm
up?) and get ready for tonight's main event, flame away!!!!! Boomer!

[hawaii 5-0]

see #29 if my response disappointed you.


I'm sure you can make an argument that the Country didn't prosper under Bill Clinton.

Name calling of HRC by a Bored Lightweight doesn't hold water.


5-0

[Curly Bill]

I'm sure you can make an argument that the Country didn't prosper under Bill Clinton.

Name calling of HRC by a Bored Lightweight doesn't hold water.


5-0

You have a HRC tattoo right next to your butterfly one don't you?

[hawaii 5-0]

You have a HRC tattoo right next to your butterfly one don't you?


...and you're aware that the REAL Curly Bill was pistol whipped by Wyatt Earp and later shotgun blasted by the same personage.

My only tattoo is a multi-color dragon covering my right shoulder.

5-0

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Carson said he would not support a Muslim for president based solely on that person's religion.
I interpret that to mean he's assuming said Muslim would, unconstitutionally, try to implement his Muslim beliefs on the nation. That's a pretty big leap of logic, in my opinion.

However, going by that logic, a Christian like Huckabee should be equally disqualified for office because not only has he not stated he would keep his religious beliefs separate from his work as president, he has also said flat-out, not in the video I posted, that he would ignore the Constitution (i.e., the Supreme Court) because God is a higher power than the Supreme Court.

I would never support a Muslim presidential candidate who stands up and says he will try to change the Constitution to reflect Islamic beliefs because Allah's law supersedes it.
By the exact same logic, I would never support a Christian presidential candidate who stands up and says he will try to change the Constitution because God's law supersedes it.
They are both saying the SAME THING.

So I personally don't give a rat's *** what religion a candidate follows, as long as he or she vows to uphold the Constitution whether their religious views align with it or not.
But when they start talking about changing the Constitution to follow THEIR religion, I care very much indeed.

ETA: And, in Carson's case, state that someone should not be entitled to Constitutional protections (not having to pass a religious test to hold office) because of their religion.Translation: I will vote for Donald/Daisy Duck, D, Anystate USA, with a nod and a wink, knowing the illegal and unconstitutional hanky panky that will be delivered.

[Curly Bill]

...and you're aware that the REAL Curly Bill was pistol whipped by Wyatt Earp and later shotgun blasted by the same personage.

My only tattoo is a multi-color dragon covering my right shoulder.

5-0

Ohhhh! A dragon? And all this time I thought you were the exact opposite of a bad ***! My mistake!

[hawaii 5-0]

Ohhhh! A dragon? And all this time I thought you were the exact opposite of a bad ***! My mistake!


I'm sure it can't compete with your Donny Osmond tramp stamp.

5-0

[hawaii 5-0]

Translation: I will vote for Donald/Daisy Duck, D, Anystate USA, with a nod and a wink, knowing the illegal and unconstitutional hanky panky that will be delivered.


Nothin to add. All politicians are crooks. I'll vote for the least evil one most likely.

5-0

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

The left can throw out all the high-sounding talking points they want to, but we know what really motivates those handwringing sacks of sh*t, and it's the promise that big government is going to help them do what they can't or want do for themselves.

You got that right. I'm on the left and I readily admit there are a lot of things that I want big government to help me do--or, dare I say it, just do on its own--because I can't or won't do it for myself. Just off the top of my head, these things include:

Regulating air traffic control (so my plane doesn't crash into another when I go back to OK to visit my family)
Funding interstate road maintenance (so as a hardworking citizen I can get to work every day on safe roads)
Establishing and enforcing food safety standards (so that I can be reasonably certain that the food I purchase at the supermarket won't sicken or kill me when I eat it)
Maintaining a strong military to provide for our common defense (no explanation needed)
Providing basic healthcare services for my less fortunate fellow human beings through Medicaid (because there but for the grace of God go I)

Of course I'm just a handwringing sack of **** though. So carry on.

[Curly Bill]

I'm sure it can't compete with your Donny Osmond tramp stamp.

5-0

No tattoos for this fellow, and for the same reason you don't put bumper stickers on a Ferrari.

[Curly Bill]

You got that right. I'm on the left and I readily admit there are a lot of things that I want big government to help me do--or, dare I say it, just do on its own--because I can't or won't do it for myself. Just off the top of my head, these things include:

Regulating air traffic control (so my plane doesn't crash into another when I go back to OK to visit my family)
Funding interstate road maintenance (so as a hardworking citizen I can get to work every day on safe roads)
Establishing and enforcing food safety standards (so that I can be reasonably certain that the food I purchase at the supermarket won't sicken or kill me when I eat it)
Maintaining a strong military to provide for our common defense (no explanation needed)
Providing basic healthcare services for my less fortunate fellow human beings through Medicaid (because there but for the grace of God go I)

Of course I'm just a handwringing sack of **** though. So carry on.

Except for that last one that is what government is supposed to do. If they'd stop at that we'd be a lot better off, but we all know that's not where you handwringers want them to stop!

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Translation: I will vote for Donald/Daisy Duck, D, Anystate USA, with a nod and a wink, knowing the illegal and unconstitutional hanky panky that will be delivered.

Translation: I will now go off on some kind of weird *** tangent invoking cartoon characters that doesn't in any way rebut anything you said, much less rebut it with facts.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Except for that last one that is what government is supposed to do. If they'd stop at that we'd be a lot better off, but we all know that's not where you handwringers want them to stop!

Please, do tell me where I want them to stop. You seem to know much more about what I want them to stop than I do.

[Curly Bill]

Please, do tell me where I want them to stop. You seem to know much more about what I want them to stop than I do.

Well, if you want them to stop at those things you listed, minus that last one, you really aren't a leftist which you indicated you are, so with some reasoned thinking I naturally assume you want govt. to do more than only what you listed. But maybe you're the rare leftist who only wants govt. to do what it was originally meant to do?

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Well, if you want them to stop at those things you listed, minus that last one, you really aren't a leftist which you indicated you are, so with some reasoned thinking I naturally assume you want govt. to do more than only what you listed. But maybe you're the rare leftist who only wants govt. to do what it was originally meant to do?

Leftist. You keep using that word. But I don't think it means what you think it means.

Joke aside.

Seriously.

I think we define "leftist" differently. So maybe a good starting point for a civil discussion would be for you to define that term as you see it? Then I will compare that with my definition and who knows, we might find that we actually share a lot of common ground.

[Curly Bill]

Leftist. You keep using that word. But I don't think it means what you think it means.

Joke aside.

Seriously.

I think we define "leftist" differently. So maybe a good starting point for a civil discussion would be for you to define that term as you see it? Then I will compare that with my definition and who knows, we might find that we actually share a lot of common ground.

Leftist = someone who lacks the strength of character, or ability to stand on their own, and as such thinks that government (ie..other people - taxpayers) should be their safety net. As such they feel no moral qualms about reaching into other's pockets to help them along the way, though lacking the strength of character (as mentioned above) to be brazen enough to openly take from others themselves, they depend on the government to do the thievery for them.

You can now define it how you want, but I whittled it down to the nuts and bolts for you already. My guess is that your definition will be filled with metaphorical unicorns, rainbows, and such.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

I don't think that way, and none of the lefties I know think that way either.

That being said, however.

A few years ago I was laid off from my well-paying job. I received a letter from the state requiring me to attend a seminar about job retraining or risk losing my unemployment.

I was selected for this because the state had concluded--correctly--that it would be difficult for me to find new employment in my industry. (I might add, much less one that paid what I had been making.)

As a result I applied for and was accepted into a retraining program. The deal was that the state would pay my tuition and continue paying my unemployment as long as I kept my grades up. Attendance was counted as part of the total grade so I couldn't just do the work and not show up. I finished the coursework with a 99.9% grade. The .1% was deducted because I got sick throwing up the first day of class and had to leave early, so I didn't have perfect attendance.

Afterward I was hired in my new field literally at entry level--doing scanning and opening mail. I worked my way up and now have an excellent job although it still does not pay as much as the one I was laid off from.

Having heard this story, would you define me then as someone lacking the strength of character or ability to stand on my own?

[Curly Bill]

I don't think that way, and none of the lefties I know think that way either.

That being said, however.

A few years ago I was laid off from my well-paying job. I received a letter from the state requiring me to attend a seminar about job retraining or risk losing my unemployment.

I was selected for this because the state had concluded--correctly--that it would be difficult for me to find new employment in my industry. (I might add, much less one that paid what I had been making.)

As a result I applied for and was accepted into a retraining program. The deal was that the state would pay my tuition and continue paying my unemployment as long as I kept my grades up. Attendance was counted as part of the total grade so I couldn't just do the work and not show up. I finished the coursework with a 99.9% grade. The .1% was deducted because I got sick throwing up the first day of class and had to leave early, so I didn't have perfect attendance.

Afterward I was hired in my new field literally at entry level--doing scanning and opening mail. I worked my way up and now have an excellent job although it still does not pay as much as the one I was laid off from.

Having heard this story, would you define me then as someone lacking the strength of character or ability to stand on my own?

I would describe you as someone who took advantage of a government program that should not have existed. I don't know that I blame you, so much as I blame government for going above and beyond what should be its scope.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Leftist = someone who lacks the strength of character, or ability to stand on their own, and as such thinks that government (ie..other people - taxpayers) should be their safety net. As such they feel no moral qualms about reaching into other's pockets to help them along the way, though lacking the strength of character (as mentioned above) to be brazen enough to openly take from others themselves, they depend on the government to do the thievery for them.



From that well-known liberal rag Forbes:


The Fortune 500 corporations alone accounted for more than 16,000 subsidy awards, worth $63 billion – mostly in the form of tax breaks.

Think about that. The largest, wealthiest, most powerful organizations in the world are on the public dole. Where is the outrage? Back when I was young, people went into a frenzy at the thought of some unemployed person using food stamps to buy liquor or cigarettes. Ronald Reagan famously campaigned against welfare queens. The right has always been obsessed with moochers. But Boeing receives $13 billion in government handouts and everyone yawns, when conservatives should be grabbing their pitchforks.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/03/14/where-is-the-outrage-over-corporate-welfare/

So where you at on this? Is it okay for corporations to reach into taxpayers' pockets with government help? Just not hardworking people who find themselves unemployed or underemployed through no fault of their own?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

From that well-known liberal rag Forbes:



http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/03/14/where-is-the-outrage-over-corporate-welfare/

So where you at on this? Is it okay for corporations to reach into taxpayers' pockets with government help? Just not hardworking people who find themselves unemployed or underemployed through no fault of their own?Why do you think conservatives approve of crony capitalism/fascism? I assure they do not. Democrats and RINOS do, though.

[yermom]

Yet you worship all the crony capitalist politicians.

You guys defend Mr. Shooting Safety Cheney against any slight, and he's the worst of them.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Because they keep voting for the guys that want to give tax cuts to the already-rich.

Because they complain about welfare mom moochers but rarely do I see them complain about corporate moochers.

[REDREX]

Because they keep voting for the guys that want to give tax cuts to the already-rich.

Because they complain about welfare mom moochers but rarely do I see them complain about corporate moochers.---The "already rich" ---pay the vast majority of the tax today-----I was in a QT last weekend and say a woman buy 10 bags of ice on a food stamp card----Should that make me mad? , Is that the intended purpose?

[Curly Bill]

From that well-known liberal rag Forbes:



http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/03/14/where-is-the-outrage-over-corporate-welfare/

So where you at on this? Is it okay for corporations to reach into taxpayers' pockets with government help? Just not hardworking people who find themselves unemployed or underemployed through no fault of their own?

Nope! That's not okay either.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

---The "already rich" ---pay the vast majority of the tax today-----I was in a QT last weekend and say a woman buy 10 bags of ice on a food stamp card----Should that make me mad? , Is that the intended purpose?

The EBT rules are weird. Not only do they allow her to buy the ice, they also allow her to buy Cokes, Rolos, and Oreos. But not a rotisserie chicken. I think those rules are whole 'nother issue.

My answer to the original question ("Why do you think conservatives approve of crony capitalism/fascism?") wasn't very clear so I'll try again. This is just an illustration of what I am trying to say using Walmart as an example.

Tax cuts for the rich would, presumably, benefit the owners of Walmart who are already billionaires.

At the same time, Walmart employees earn so little that they qualify for food stamps, costing taxpayers billions. Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-low-wage-employers-cost-taxpayers-153-billion-a-year/

To me it makes no sense to cut taxes for someone who won't even pay their employees enough that they can stay off the public dole. That's already a tax cut, since the taxpayers are having to make up the difference.

But conservatives tend to vote for the guy who advocates cutting taxes for the rich and against the guy advocating raising the minimum wage.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

Nope! That's not okay either.

Thanks.

[REDREX]

The EBT rules are weird. Not only do they allow her to buy the ice, they also allow her to buy Cokes, Rolos, and Oreos. But not a rotisserie chicken. I think those rules are whole 'nother issue.

My answer to the original question ("Why do you think conservatives approve of crony capitalism/fascism?") wasn't very clear so I'll try again. This is just an illustration of what I am trying to say using Walmart as an example.

Tax cuts for the rich would, presumably, benefit the owners of Walmart who are already billionaires.

At the same time, Walmart employees earn so little that they qualify for food stamps, costing taxpayers billions. Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-low-wage-employers-cost-taxpayers-153-billion-a-year/

To me it makes no sense to cut taxes for someone who won't even pay their employees enough that they can stay off the public dole. That's already a tax cut, since the taxpayers are having to make up the difference.

But conservatives tend to vote for the guy who advocates cutting taxes for the rich and against the guy advocating raising the minimum wage.---How many Billionaries are in this country?----I pay a great deal of tax and don't have a Billion $-----I don't get any special perks from the Gov't-----I have many employees and the lowest paid one makes almost twice the min wage and all have health insurance----Its funny when people think you can hire an employee that can be given much if any responsibility and pay them min wage----Try and think about all the people in the high tax bracket that don't have anywhere near a Billion $$s

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Thanks.haha, did you not understand this?:

"Why do you think conservatives approve of crony capitalism/fascism? I assure they do not. Democrats and RINOS do, though."

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

I said I was using that as an example. I wasn't talking about billionaires, or even Walmart per se.

Sounds like you treat your employees well and good for you. Many others don't.

[REDREX]

I said I was using that as an example. I wasn't talking about billionaires, or even Walmart per se.

Sounds like you treat your employees well and good for you. Many others don't.----True ---But most do-----Ever think that Walmart may be the only job many of these people can find?

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

haha, did you not understand this?:

"Why do you think conservatives approve of crony capitalism/fascism? I assure they do not. Democrats and RINOS do, though."

ha ha, Did you not understand this?


The EBT rules are weird. Not only do they allow her to buy the ice, they also allow her to buy Cokes, Rolos, and Oreos. But not a rotisserie chicken. I think those rules are whole 'nother issue.

My answer to the original question ("Why do you think conservatives approve of crony capitalism/fascism?") wasn't very clear so I'll try again. This is just an illustration of what I am trying to say using Walmart as an example.

Tax cuts for the rich would, presumably, benefit the owners of Walmart who are already billionaires.

At the same time, Walmart employees earn so little that they qualify for food stamps, costing taxpayers billions. Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-low-wage-employers-cost-taxpayers-153-billion-a-year/

To me it makes no sense to cut taxes for someone who won't even pay their employees enough that they can stay off the public dole. That's already a tax cut, since the taxpayers are having to make up the difference.

But conservatives tend to vote for the guy who advocates cutting taxes for the rich and against the guy advocating raising the minimum wage.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

----True ---But most do-----Ever think that Walmart may be the only job many of these people can find?

Maybe it is, I don't know. Does that mean they don't deserve to earn enough to live on without having to get food stamps?

[REDREX]

Maybe it is, I don't know. Does that mean they don't deserve to earn enough to live on without having to get food stamps?---Maybe Walmart is all they can handle----No one makes them work there-----If The economy would produce more than just service jobs they might be able to improve themselves-----More Taxes and more regulation will not produce more good jobs---It will produce less

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

ha ha, Did you not understand this?Downsizing government and having the government perform activities it is supposed to do are what conservatives want from government. Conservatives do NOT want the govt. to grow by leaps and bounds, including unauthorized activities and cumbersome new constraints on business, which sucks the life out of incentive in the private sector, and keeps the economy from growing.

[yermom]

Downsizing government and having the government perform activities it is supposed to do are what conservatives want from government. Conservatives do NOT want the govt. to grow by leaps and bounds, including unauthorized activities and cumbersome new constraints on business, which sucks the life out of incentive in the private sector, and keeps the economy from growing.

the government should stick to making war and spying on us, amirite?

[yermom]

---Maybe Walmart is all they can handle----No one makes them work there-----If The economy would produce more than just service jobs they might be able to improve themselves-----More Taxes and more regulation will not produce more good jobs---It will produce less

or maybe unchecked corporate greed lets Walmart squeeze out local businesses and manufacturers by lowballing everyone with cheap plastic crap from China

all while educating their employees on how to use public assistance since they aren't going to be able to survive on what they make there

[REDREX]

or maybe unchecked corporate greed lets Walmart squeeze out local businesses and manufacturers by lowballing everyone with cheap plastic crap from China

all while educating their employees on how to use public assistance since they aren't going to be able to survive on what they make there--That sounds like the party line-----I have never seen anyone keeping the workers at Walmart from leaving if they don't want to work there.---------If they can find a better job why would they not take it-----Too bad the Obama economy only produces low paying jobs

[yermom]

the Obama economy... like the Bush economy was so great?

Walmart specifically isn't the issue, it's letting companies rape the country, and pay less taxes in the process.

[REDREX]

the Obama economy... like the Bush economy was so great?

Walmart specifically isn't the issue, it's letting companies rape the country, and pay less taxes in the process.----Yea Capitalism is to blame for every problem---90% of the people in the world would love to come to this country and live as well as the poor people do here

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

the Obama economy... like the Bush economy was so great?

Walmart specifically isn't the issue, it's letting companies rape the country, and pay less taxes in the process.no, it's growing the government exponentially while also enacting onerous regulations and other impediments to stifle economic activity.

[SanDiegoSoonerGal]

---Maybe Walmart is all they can handle----No one makes them work there-----If The economy would produce more than just service jobs they might be able to improve themselves-----More Taxes and more regulation will not produce more good jobs---It will produce less

You didn't answer my question.

[FaninAma]

the government should stick to making war and spying on us, amirite?

And who on the left has stood up to Obama's NSA policies?

[FaninAma]

the Obama economy... like the Bush economy was so great?

Walmart specifically isn't the issue, it's letting companies rape the country, and pay less taxes in the process.
Obama and the Democrats did what to stop that? It was the GOP that voted down the first attemtp to bail out the bankers in 2008. The Dems were lock step in line. Then Hank Paulson and Bernanke told them we would have the end of the world if they didn't vote for the bailout.

RINOs and Proggies are 2 peas in a pod. The difference is that there is at least a growing part of the GOP that understands this and is trying to do something about it while the low information voters on the left are goose-stepping in unison behind Pelosi, Reid and Obama.

The Bush RINO GOP dynasty is dead. How about the Clinton cronyist party dynasty on the other side? How's that working out for you yermom, 5-0, and SN?

[REDREX]

You didn't answer my question.---I did answer your question----They must work there because they cannot find a better job---they are free to do so ---- Why is Walmart the villain?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

---I did answer your question----They must work there because they cannot find a better job---they are free to do so ---- Why is Walmart the villain?Walmart is always a villain to the Left. It doesn't matter to the Left that Walmart has the lowest prices on most everything, continually saving countless millions for the country by competition.

[Tear Down This Wall]

or maybe unchecked corporate greed lets Walmart squeeze out local businesses and manufacturers by lowballing everyone with cheap plastic crap from China

all while educating their employees on how to use public assistance since they aren't going to be able to survive on what they make there

Hmmm. Has Obama pulled out of any trade treaties with the Chinese?

[Tear Down This Wall]

No tattoos for this fellow, and for the same reason you don't put bumper stickers on a Ferrari.

That's awesome!

[Serenity Now]

---I did answer your question----They must work there because they cannot find a better job---they are free to do so ---- Why is Walmart the villain?

They're the villian because they purposely work many of their workers "part time" so they don't have to provide them benefits. Then they facilitate them going to the public sector to get "assistance". They got $6.2 billion in federal subsidies in 2013. They also close down small businesses when they come to town.

They're a great example of why "trickle down" doesn't work. They take all of these steps to save costs and they don't spread those savings out.

[yermom]

And who on the left has stood up to Obama's NSA policies?

I'm not giving Obama a pass. My cutesy nickname for him is W 2.0. He didn't undo ****. Tranparent administration? Lol.

He didn't start the problems we have, but he didn't do much to help either. We should probably focus on his birth certificate instead though.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

They're the villian because they purposely work many of their workers "part time" so they don't have to provide them benefits. Then they facilitate them going to the public sector to get "assistance". They got $6.2 billion in federal subsidies in 2013. They also close down small businesses when they come to town.

They're a great example of why "trickle down" doesn't work. They take all of these steps to save costs and they don't spread those savings out.They stay in business because they offer the lowest prices around on most everything they sell, and the general public (their customers), even including government employees, benefit directly from the low prices at Walmart stores. No one is forcing people to take jobs at Wal Mart, either.

[REDREX]

They're the villian because they purposely work many of their workers "part time" so they don't have to provide them benefits. Then they facilitate them going to the public sector to get "assistance". They got $6.2 billion in federal subsidies in 2013. They also close down small businesses when they come to town.

They're a great example of why "trickle down" doesn't work. They take all of these steps to save costs and they don't spread those savings out.---Why would anyone work there if they could get another job?-----And your trickle down statement is just stupid and makes no sense---show your source on subsides

[Serenity Now]

We should probably focus on his birth certificate instead though.That was true UNTIL they learned that Ted Cruz was ACTUALLY born in a foreign country. LOL.

[Ton Loc]

Im NOT a fan of Doctor Carson
Yet I find him a breath of Fresh air
But WHY do ANY of you LIBS think That Billiary would be better?

She's horrible.

Ben Carson is breath of crazy fresh air. But come on, he's a little nuts with some of his beliefs. He's a brain surgeon not a lawyer, teacher, politician, etc. I don't know why people think Brain Surgeon equals smart person who is qualified to run a country.

Besides, we live in Oklahoma. The GOP nominee is going to carry the state.

[FaninAma]

She's horrible.

Ben Carson is breath of crazy fresh air. But come on, he's a little nuts with some of his beliefs. He's a brain surgeon not a lawyer, teacher, politician, etc. I don't know why people think Brain Surgeon equals smart person who is qualified to run a country.

Besides, we live in Oklahoma. The GOP nominee is going to carry the state.

Where has electing only career politicians gotten the country over the past 75 years?

[Curly Bill]

She's horrible.

Ben Carson is breath of crazy fresh air. But come on, he's a little nuts with some of his beliefs. He's a brain surgeon not a lawyer, teacher, politician, etc. I don't know why people think Brain Surgeon equals smart person who is qualified to run a country.

Besides, we live in Oklahoma. The GOP nominee is going to carry the state.

Brain surgeon > community organizer

But maybe that's just me?

[Ton Loc]

I'm ready to vote whoever into the role of president. Seems like it could be a good time with Trump. At least he's ran his share of businesses. Some successfully and some into the ground but whatever. Maybe it would get more people involved than just the extremely sad percentage of people who actually turn out to vote followed by the large percentage of those people not giving two squirts of **** after the fact.

[Curly Bill]

I'd take Trump. I detest political correctness and the typical politician type. He might be great, might not be, but he'd be a change.

Maybe that's what Obama meant: After him we'd be hoping for a change?!?!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'm ready to vote whoever into the role of president. Seems like it could be a good time with Trump. At least he's ran his share of businesses. Some successfully and some into the ground but whatever. Maybe it would get more people involved than just the extremely sad percentage of people who actually turn out to vote followed by the large percentage of those people not giving two squirts of **** after the fact.The guy is pro business, and loves America, it seems. He knows open borders is unquestionably insane. Kudos to you.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Maybe that's what Obama meant: After him we'd be hoping for a change?!?!I thought it was that after he was gone, we'd be left with change.

[champions77]

Give me a President that is honest, that will engage the DEMs in Congress in serious negotiations, looking for common ground, will uphold the Constitution to the highest degree of respect, will surround himself with accomplished experts in their fields, will reduce the size, scope, power and authority of the Federal government, will reduce the red tape and regulations that have strangled the life out of entrepreneurs, that will adopt "Zero Based" budgeting and accounting practices and will enforce ALL federal laws, and will ignore and reject one of the biggest frauds to ever besiege this nation...Climate Change. Will initiate a crusade to greatly reduce fraud, waste and abuse throughout the Fed, including the DOD. Will greatly reduce or eliminate the department of education and energy, will enforce the border, and fine any employer $10,000 caught employing an illegal alien, will withdrawal all federal dollars to sanctuary cities immediately, maintain a strong military, and will promise to only engage our enemies in a manner in which their total annihilation can be the ONLY objective in such engagement, will uphold ALL of the Amendments to the Constitution, and will require that any government assistance will be granted only if able bodied individuals give back to his or her community in some form. The days of someone being subsidized for sitting around and being lazy...are over!

That's a good start.

[TAFBSooner]

. . . will promise to only engage our enemies in a manner in which their total annihilation can be the ONLY objective in such engagement, . . .

That's a good start.

Because the world is so much better off with no England, Mexico, (Hah! I have to give you points for the CSA-That-Is-Not!), Spain, Germany, or Japan.

Or did you mean, that objective is so asinine that we would never go to war outside our borders? If so, kudos for subtlety.

[Serenity Now]

Give me a President that is honest, that will engage the DEMs in Congress in serious negotiations, looking for common ground, will uphold the Constitution to the highest degree of respect, will surround himself with accomplished experts in their fields, will reduce the size, scope, power and authority of the Federal government, will reduce the red tape and regulations that have strangled the life out of entrepreneurs, that will adopt "Zero Based" budgeting and accounting practices and will enforce ALL federal laws, and will ignore and reject one of the biggest frauds to ever besiege this nation...Climate Change. Will initiate a crusade to greatly reduce fraud, waste and abuse throughout the Fed, including the DOD. Will greatly reduce or eliminate the department of education and energy, will enforce the border, and fine any employer $10,000 caught employing an illegal alien, will withdrawal all federal dollars to sanctuary cities immediately, maintain a strong military, and will promise to only engage our enemies in a manner in which their total annihilation can be the ONLY objective in such engagement, will uphold ALL of the Amendments to the Constitution, and will require that any government assistance will be granted only if able bodied individuals give back to his or her community in some form. The days of someone being subsidized for sitting around and being lazy...are over!

That's a good start.
Funny.

[hawaii 5-0]

Anyone else noted the vast number of Chinese laundries suddenly opening up in Syria ?

"You want starchee " ??

Those Arab robes are certainly looking crisper and whiter.

Someone, I'm not saying who, must have some insider information.


5-0

[TheHumanAlphabet]

5-0, You laugh, but the ChiComs are everywhere and you should not underestimate them or their ability to eventually get their way. I have no idea if they are in Syria, if there is construction going on there, probably. But do not think they are just workers over there, everyone is likely a party member in some way.

[champions77]

5-0, You laugh, but the ChiComs are everywhere and you should not underestimate them or their ability to eventually get their way. I have no idea if they are in Syria, if there is construction going on there, probably. But do not think they are just workers over there, everyone is likely a party member in some way.

Alpha we are dealing with the same folks that went along with their hero about Isis being the JV, or Libya will be better off without Gadhafi. They think they have access to the same sources as a Presidential candidate. So we must remind ourselves to consider the source from time to time.