I don’t see how my thesis falls apart there. Conservative (non-wealthy) republicans are being duped wholesale. This is quite consistent with my thesis. The fact that they are participating in their own demise means they’re no different from the “values” Republicans who are doing the same. They’re just as stupid as the people who are willing to sacrifice their kids’ chances of getting into college to make sure two guys can’t married to each other.
Good point. In this one of the four attacks I listed, only middle class families are affected. Not poor families. I said “poor” but I should have said “middle class” in this instance. I stand corrected. Of course, middle class families ARE still affected by this attack, and poor families as well as middle class families are affected by the other three. So this would constitute little more than a nitpick, albeit an accurate one.
I’m having trouble understanding you. Perhaps if you got your face outta Dubya’s lap …
Look manhattan, I was very clear that the idiot gucks were the ones who voted Republican. Almost half of the American population voted Democratic, the majority of these people were voting WITH their economic interests, rather than against them, making them non-gucks. (Those few Republican voters who are wealthy are also not gucks, as they were voting for their own interests.)
Repeat after me, manhattan: Republican /= American. Republican /= American. Republican /= American. You’ll get the hang of it eventually.
Wave the bloody shirt much, manhattan? When come back, bring good argument instead fo cheap rhetoric.
It’s so consistent with all the rest of the class warfare. When will the American people awake from their media-induced snooze and realize they’re being put over a barrel and ridden hard? I honestly think a large part of the problem people have in admitting how badly the Bushies are rogering them is shame at having to admit how stupid they’ve been.
Nahh, I just said “poor” when I shoulda said “middle class.” You’re just disposed to believe it’s a lie because you’re a jerk.
I gotta ask, why is it so important to take someone’s car when they declare bankruptcy? I can understanding foreclosing on a house as a way of handling the debts or of “encouraging” someone to sell so they can pay their debts. Nobody is owed the right to live in a house vs. an apartment. But if you take someone’s wheels, how are they gonna get to work? How are the gonna look for work. It’s true, a lot of people get along without a car … I have at times … but it really LIMITS you in your attempts to find work or get to work. Unless we’re talking a new Hummer or something. I can see forcing someone to take a less pimped-up ride, but depriving them of their wheels entirely is counterproductive in a country where in many places there aren’t many options for getting around other than a car.
Ten posts in a row, E.C.?
Is that some sort of record for a single poster in a single thread?
You know, it is possible to put it all in one big post. 
On the subject of voting and class interests, i strongly recommend this book.
Well, I’m not making that long anticipated trip East this year, after all, so for us non-New Yorkers, can you explain what the Ten House is, and its significance with regard to the discussion here?
Just curious.
I would really, really like to believe that people will understand the problem well enough to be pissed about it. But on The Daily Show, Paul Krugman said he didn’t think most people won’t make the connection between this law and the perpetual poverty some of the will fall into. They’ll just think it’s a personal failing of their own, while Visa and MasterCard go K’Ching! K’Ching! K’Ching!
Oh, well, if you put it like that - why didn’t you say it was “obvious” to start with? Blimey. Those wealthy bastards, eh? Tch.
Returning to the real world, and some actual attempt at analysis, could you explain to me again why limiting everyone’s (that’s those evil wealthy bastards too, remember) pain and suffering damages is discriminatory? As far as I can see, it practically favours the poor* - I could live off my pain and suffering for a decade or more, but what’s a cool quarter mill to Bill Gates? What, pray tell, is the “effect” that you are measuring, and how exactly are the poor disadvantaged by it? Because frankly, it’s pretty fucking far from being obvious, when everybody is treated the same. Do you realise that not all doctors are in fact evil and wealthy, and that insurance companies are, by and large, staffed by schmoes just like you? Do you somehow believe that pain and suffering damages are supposed to be some major mechanism by which Joe Sixpack can put one over The Man? Are they supposed to be an agent of social change?
No, you’re just trying to make it sound less like a lie because you’re a weaselly git. But it’s fun watching that mythical bad guy become more and more ephemeral with your every post. Say - since the middle class by all accounts constitutes the vast majority of the American population, how do you explain that they keep voting for this supposed war on themselves? Oh, that’s right, they’re stupid, I remember. Of course, your theory (sorry, “thesis”) requires us to believe that pretty much everyone but you is stupid, whereas the alternative merely requires us to believe that you are. I’d give you Occam’s Razor, but I’m afraid you’d cut yourself.
- Yes, I am being facetious here. Possibly like a motherfuck, who knows.
What free money? The government is just NOT taxing people who make so little that taxation is a burden on an already burdensome econonic situation. Seems rather level-headed and practical to me. I’m all for rooting out those who game the system, but perhaps the government would be better served by going after wealthy corporation and individuals who get away with paying no taxes at all – they just might have some income to tax.
[/quote]
Point 2: Social security will not remain solvent in its present form. Bush is just daring to suggest that people take more personal responsibility for providing for their retirement.
[/quote]
The only thing Bush seems to care a flip is private accounts, which will weaken if not gut the SS system, and which won’t solve the insolvency problems. Unless courage somehow =stupidity I find your phrasing inaccurate.
If it’s so terrible, why is everyone so cool with Visa and MC offering it to everyone and (literally) his dog?
If you’d bothered to read the rest of the thread you’d have seen that this is a drop in the bucket … the majority of tort has to do with b2b lawsuits.
The bottom line is that Pubbie talking points do not equal an argument.
And how many times more than the average worker salary do CEOs get? The NASDAQ fell from 5,000 to 2,000. I’m sure you’ll show me that CEOs lost an equivalent amount of salary for this destruction of shareholder value, right? Or did you protest their big bonuses during the good years?
I’m still waiting for you to justify the bonus for the CEO in lavenderlemon’s company. The CEO is ultimately responsible, right? Or do you believe in the Bush model where the buck doesn’t stop anywhere near the top guy?
There are some CEOs who give themselves big paycuts when times are bad. But they’re not the majority.
Manhattan was taking his usual position that the tragedy of 9/11 excuses any and all of the current administration’s needless scaremongering, misallocation of resources, or illegal foreign adventures, and that criticism of administration policies in those areas can be rebutted with an appeal to dead firefighters.
The fact that he does this is pathetically exploitative of the very people he claims to hold in such high regard.
But there are times when nominal equality of treatment does not produce fair results.
“The law in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”
Anatole France
Oh, a firehouse. Now I get it.
Right, but I’d like someone to explain how exactly this is one of those times. Can you explain why a quarter of a million is somehow worth less to a poor person than it is to a rich person? Getting a quarter of a million is in no way analogous to sleeping under a bridge, and I fail to see why one’s net worth determines how much one suffers. I’m willing to be convinced, but so far no-one has even tried, save to declare it “obvious”.
I’m sure he is neglecting the fact that there might not have been any dead firefighters or policemen if Bush and friends paid attention to the evidence that something was afoot. But they didn’t have the flight and seat numbers of the terrorists, so nothing could be done.
It was unavoidable, just like that tragic terrorist incident at LAX for the Millennium - oops - that one got stopped with some leadership by a president who gave a shit, didn’t it?
With all due, nah. Clinton doesn’t deserve any particular credit, the foiling of the millenium plot was pretty much luck. As or 9/11, a similar perverse luck factor was in play, as well as thunderous cupidity on our own behalf - I mean, the cockpit door wasn’t even locked, fer cryinoutloud! We’ve been having planes hijacked for years and years, and the friggin’ door ain’t locked? We got attacked by the Keystone Kops of terror, and they pulled it off.