YOUR arguement you gibbering rouge! You were the subject of the sentance, after all.
You ranted on and on how how one simply cannot deny that what he said was assholish. But you never explained why it was. Now you’ve tried… but failed. It’s not assholish to point out that someone who doesn’t work shouldn’t get huge tax breaks.
It may be wrong (taxes SHOULDN’T affect one’s choice to work or not work), but it’s not assholish. There’s nothing wrong with not working a day in your life. It’s what many many people aspire to.
For the love of sanity! here’s a real-life example of the tax cut argument. But first, a nugget of truth to the ignorant.
The poor don’t pay any income tax, simple as that. If you don’t pay tax, HOW DOES A TAX CUT AFFECT YOU? Oh, yeah, it’s redistribution of wealth (Socialism). On to the example.
A friend of mine is so anti-Bush, I may break ties with him. He has 3 kids and was PISSED when he heard the $400 per child REFUND was passed. He complained how the rich were getting the cut and the poor were screwed.
Guess what happened when I said tax cuts weren’t enforceable and he could elect to forego it? He said “Shit, but I need it!” After informing him he was benifitting and therefore rich, I asked to borrow $10 (as a lark). he said “I can’t afford it”.
And that “the poor don’t pay taxes” thing is a load of fucking horseshit. The working poor pay Social Security and payroll taxes as well as sales taxes. The middle class pay a more substantial part of their income interms of it’s real effect on individual households that than rich people do. The richest one percent are the ones who have all the loopholes and corporate tax dodges. It’s the middle class that takes it in the shorts. Tax relief, especially payroll tax relief, would be great for middle class and working poor households, but, man, fuck the rich. They don’t deserve shit.
There’s not a damn thing wrong with redistribution of wealth, btw. Jesus, for one, was all for it.
This idea of the rich not paying taxes is the biggest urban legend foisted on the ignorant.
Sales tax? Show me where the Federal Government has license on that. Washington can’t do a damn thing about it since it doesn’t collect it.
Payroll? 2 points here and the second might get this moved to the Pit.
First, the Dems have been bitching about the “trust-fund” (is Social Security a Republican?) for years. The last 5 House elections, maybe more, have been based on the fund. For all his talk, what did Clinton do to save it?
Now to the meat of this argument.
My father was a Senior VP of hospital admin for a Children’s Hospital. He paid the full payroll tax by Sept every year for 25 years. My mother paid payroll for 15 years hitting the max in mid-Nov. This is approx $5500 for each, times the years paid in Social Security. (Plus the Medicaid tax)
Dad died on 52d birthday, mom died in January at age 58. In each case we received $255 each in death benefits. Where the fuck is the rest of the money?!?
News to me, but it seems Desmostylus has cleared it up for you.
I respectfully feel that you also are using a strawman or at least a redirect. The argument was not concerning a simple statement of fact that a rich person would not get big tax breaks, and you know that. The argument was the way in which the statement of fact was presented, especially allegedly coming from a person who is the textbook definition of privledge and logical disconnect with the “average person” in society.
If a Republican had said it, I can guarantee there would have been 7 Pit threads started about it. Ten if on the weekend. Maybe 5 on a Monday; it’s hard to say, really.
It would be interesting to do a search on the threads of the frequent partisans posting here to see how they’ve commented on similar Republican “factual comments” on and about their wealth, but I’d rather spend my day cleaning the litterboxes and pulling slugs from tomato plants - I suppose it would be an equally palatable task. And even if I found clear and unambiguous evidence of one-sidedness, well, let’s face it - the lead anti-Bush partisan on this board posted in GD once that lying on issues and in debates was OK with him as long as it didn’t “hurt anyone”, so what’s the point? He’s happy being a filthy pathological liar, and no one sees fit to ban him for it…
But that’s not you. Regardless, there’s no point in discussing it. I feel that you either truly don’t understand how this would be insulting to someone without money and privledge (and not all Republicans are rich or middle class, just go South of the Tennessee River), or don’t care if it is or not, or are playing the “thing” of being an extreme liberal partisan on an internet message board. Whatever the case, there can be no agreement between us. I yield to you the last word and summary, if you must, unless you want to flame me over this.
No, this simply won’t do. You leave the audience panting in breathless anticipation, but without resolution. Who can Anthracite be referring to in a manner simultaneously coy and shrill? There are so many contestants for “lead anti-Bush partisan”, the man inspires so many, so many! Why, I can easily name a half-a-dozen hot contenders for the position! Even, I aver with blushing modesty, myself! I must certainly rank somewhere in the Top 50.
Whoever can she mean, the sly little vixen! With the subtle and sublime understatement that is so characteristic of the Right, she libels and smears all of them. But demurely, with decorous and mysterious modesty, like an unlikely hybrid of Anne Coulter and Emily Dickinson.
But we have a hint, a nugget of information amidst the vaporous innuendo, like a cherry garnishing a turd sundae. This miscreant in question has specificly endorsed lying on issues of import! Further, said treacherous corrupter of all that is decent and worthy, is a pathological liar. No, wait, a filthy pathological liar! Ah, well, that settles the issue. It could only be Diogenes the Cynic. (Frankly, I’m a bit relieved, for a moment there…but no, that’s so patently ridiculous, I won’t even mention it…)
Lets see if we can’t steer poor Dio away from this thread. If he catches wind of this, it will mean another miserable night of clutching his banky while he sobs himself to sleep, heartbroken and bereft. The prospect is alarming, lefty partisans being of such a delicate and fragile temperment, and all.
Unless of course she means ol’ Minty? But that would be pointless, the boy is a Texan, and Texans have no more sensitivity that a bag of K-Mart socks (white, $5.99 on sale). Might as well insult a road-kill armadillo!
Chompsky! Thats it, its Chompsky! Of course. Though it troubles me that she refers to no one seeing fit to ban the miscreant. Was he banned, or run out of town on a rail?
Can’t be Scylla or december, they are both tireless palladins of the privileged and fierce defenders of the uptrodden…
Hmmmmm. Well, I’m stumped. Perhaps there are some mysteries best left unresolved…
While I certainly appreciate your inquiry, no such position on my “staff” actually exists, at the present time. Your inquiry will be retained for six months, and if, in that time, such a staff position shall become open, or is even contemplated, rest assured you will be contacted further.
Again, thanks for your interest, and have a nice day.
They’re scared of the “f” word. Politics is supposed to be a family show. The context of the word was not especially important. If Kennedy had said “I like fucking picnics,” the DNC would have gotten their panties in a bunch just as much.
Remember when GeeDub called called a reporter a “major league asshole” right next to an open mike? Shrubs handlers worried for a few seconds that the remark would hurt Shrub but most Shrub supporters simply agreed with him and many thought it was cool and sort of humanizing that he vocalized it.
Political handlers are basically publicists and they have an irrational fear of anything that’s unscripted or out of their control. Profanity freaks them out. It’s really no more complicated than that.
Anthracite, if you are referring to me with that comment, please provide a link so that I may review the context and the exact phrasing that I used. I suspect that I said something about not caring if Clinton lied about a slob job and that you’ve taken that ball and run with it. Even if it isn’t me please provide a link. Don’t just paraphrase unnamed Dopers and then run away. I could just as easily claim that one of the main Bush supporters on this board once posted that he likes to molest poodles. Please tell us who you’re talking about and what I said.
