|
Post by clemiethedog on Mar 27, 2010 15:01:39 GMT
Just another story confirming that the GOP is off-the-rails insane. As usual, Michelle Bachmann, who is the epitome of the modern Republican, sums it up: "When asked if she was going to denounce the attacks on members of Congress, Michelle Bachmann (R, ) balked, blaming Democrats for pushing an "unpopular" and "anti-American" health care bill. " (paste): Yesterday Rep. Eric Cantor (R, VA) announced his office had been shot at and pointed fingers at Democrats for escalating political rhetoric to the point of inciting violence. When asked if she was going to denounce the attacks on members of Congress, Michelle Bachmann (R, ) balked, blaming Democrats for pushing an "unpopular" and "anti-American" health care bill. Now Rep. Cantor's claim has unravelled. It turns out the office in question was neither shot at nor even in his Congressional district. So who is escalating the rhetoric now? The recent rise of domestic terrorism and extremist violence has been well documented by the Southern Poverty Law Center, and in an interview yesterday on National Public Radio, the connection between GOP lawmakers and the extremest right came into even greater focus. According to Mark Potok, editor of the investigative journal Intelligence Report mainstream GOP leaders are creating a very scary situation. A new poll from Harris interactive shows that 40% of Americans believe President Obama is a socialist while 14% say he may be the Antichrist. The modern Tea Party movement may not be to blame, but they are certainly at the center of this renewed vigor by right wing extremist groups. Potok mentioned the number of conspiracy theories circulating in their ranks, such as the Reconquista- a secret plan by Mexico to re-conquer the American Southwest or of FEMA secretly building a series of concentration camps for Americans who resist the coming martial law. The concentration camp theory was spun by Glenn Beck on three episodes of his show before he finally decided it was just a rumor. Follow that up with an off-the-cuff comment by Michelle Bachmann about President Obama and plans for "reeducation camps" and its easy to see how these ideas start to gain political traction. Not only is this situation spinning dangerously out of control, but ultimately, it is the American public that stands to lose the most. Democracy works best with a multitude of policy opinions, with an open and honest debate over the issues. The Republicans, currently lacking in any real policy initiatives other than to continue to bleed the country dry at the expense of the middle and working class, seem set to sit back and let the radical right drive the conversation. That means a return of racially tinged "literacy tests" for voting, flirtations with secession, and, worst of all, passive suggestions that violence against members of Congress is not only acceptable, but justified. Link: www.care2.com/causes/civil-rights/blog/gop-continues-to-fan-the-flames-of-hate/
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 27, 2010 16:44:19 GMT
Not only is this situation spinning dangerously out of control, but ultimately, it is the American public that stands to lose the most. Democracy works best with a multitude of policy opinions, with an open and honest debate over the issues. The Republicans, currently lacking in any real policy initiatives other than to continue to bleed the country dry at the expense of the middle and working class, seem set to sit back and let the radical right drive the conversation. That means a return of racially tinged "literacy tests" for voting, flirtations with secession, and, worst of all, passive suggestions that violence against members of Congress is not only acceptable, but justified.
of course, that is just the reality, in sum total. the republcians haven't had an intelligent idea in decades, and have done nothing but obstruct the right policies as long as i can remember, which is back to nixon
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 27, 2010 20:15:09 GMT
Your description is accurate Jumbo but you've got the parties reversed. It's only the Republicans who have America's best interests at heart. The middle class and working people continue to be exploited by the power hungry Democrats.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 27, 2010 21:20:13 GMT
Your description is accurate Jumbo but you've got the parties reversed. It's only the Republicans who have America's best interests at heart. The middle class and working people continue to be exploited by the power hungry Democrats. sorry lad. your dyslexia is obviously acting up, and making your grasp on reality ever more tenuous. reality doesn't change simply because you get your parties mixed up. it is ONLY the democrats who have EVER done anything for the real people. just the real world. sorry about your luck.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 28, 2010 13:57:35 GMT
Jumbo Im trying to recall the last good thing that the Democrats did for America. I guess it would have been Harry Truman's decision to drop the Atomic Bomb on Hiroshima.
I suppose you could argue that JFKs handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis was another good thing but that was pretty much cancelled out by his botching of the Bay of Pigs invasion.
Other than that, it's a blank page.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 28, 2010 14:09:48 GMT
Jumbo here is just one good example of what the Democrats have done to America:
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
1.) That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary,
No longer Voluntary
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program,
Now 7.65% (plus Employer pays 7.65%)
3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,
No longer tax deductible
4..) That the money the participants put into the independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and,
Under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and Spent
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.
Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put away' -- you may be interested in the following: ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --- Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---- Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, wit h Al Gore casting the 'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---------
Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?
A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! ------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- --------
Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 28, 2010 15:33:50 GMT
Jumbo here is just one good example of what the Democrats have done to America: Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised: 1.) That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary, No longer Voluntary 2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program, Now 7.65% (plus Employer pays 7.65%) 3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year, No longer tax deductible 4..) That the money the participants put into the independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and, Under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and Spent 5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income. Under Clinton & Gore Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put away' -- you may be interested in the following: ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --- Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it? A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- - Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding? A: The Democratic Party. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ---- Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities? A: The Democratic Party, wit h Al Gore casting the 'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants? A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! ------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- -------- Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away! for the most part, you are correct on the facts, except the last of course. dumbya is a republican, and he is the imbecile who dreamed up the imbecillic idea of privatizing social security, which is beyond ignorant on its face. you also neglect to list: which party began the moronic corporate deregulation that is responsible for the almost total meltdown of the economy? hint: it was the republicans which party passed the most unamerican legislation in history, known as nafta? yep. again, it was the republican congress and on, and on, and on
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 28, 2010 19:47:15 GMT
Privatizing Social Security is a great concept.
At the moment my Social Security account, which I've paid into all of my life, contains zero dollars and zero sense. That's because of LBJ and the Democrats who raided my account and spent the money replacing it with an IOU. I'd much rather have my own money back and safely into a 401K that I manage. Thank You.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 28, 2010 21:32:07 GMT
Privatizing Social Security is a great concept. At the moment my Social Security account, which I've paid into all of my life, contains zero dollars and zero sense. That's because of LBJ and the Democrats who raided my account and spent the money replacing it with an IOU. I'd much rather have my own money back and safely into a 401K that I manage. Thank You. it's an abjectly stupid concept, for the very reason that you gave. YOU do not manage your 401k. it is done for you by investment bankers, or brokers, same same, for profit. don't be daft
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 28, 2010 22:49:20 GMT
That's entirely incorrect Jumbo. I transferred my 401K account to Schwab and I am the only one making any investment decisions. I want no part of an insurance company/pension administrator/government making decisions for me.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 29, 2010 10:37:06 GMT
That's entirely incorrect Jumbo. I transferred my 401K account to Schwab and I am the only one making any investment decisions. I want no part of an insurance company/pension administrator/government making decisions for me. what's the difference? now you're paying some clown at schwab to make decisions for you.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 29, 2010 22:03:45 GMT
No Jumbo - I get zero investment advice from Schwab. Their only role is to execute orders that I give them. I manage my own investments and dare say I've been doing a bit better lately than the government. My two largest holdings are Apple (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL) and IMAX (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=IMAX).
The stock market is a bit moody like a beautiful woman. She can make you very happy when she's in the mood. But she can also ruin your day in a hurry when that's her mood.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Mar 29, 2010 22:16:39 GMT
No Jumbo - I get zero investment advice from Schwab. Their only role is to execute orders that I give them. I manage my own investments and dare say I've been doing a bit better lately than the government. My two largest holdings are Apple (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL) and IMAX (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=IMAX). The stock market is a bit moody like a beautiful woman. She can make you very happy when she's in the mood. But she can also ruin your day in a hurry when that's her mood. OTOH, I hardly think you're representative of the folks who have to depend on SS for their retirement income.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 30, 2010 11:19:21 GMT
No Jumbo - I get zero investment advice from Schwab. Their only role is to execute orders that I give them. I manage my own investments and dare say I've been doing a bit better lately than the government. My two largest holdings are Apple (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL) and IMAX (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=IMAX). The stock market is a bit moody like a beautiful woman. She can make you very happy when she's in the mood. But she can also ruin your day in a hurry when that's her mood. i suppose that it's a pretty good analogy, except that with a woman, you have the ability to semi regulate her moods, called bribery. flowers, candy, and hugs almost always relieve the bitchiness. the stock market on the other hand, you have NO control over. it is manipulated by clowns like bernie madoff, who is the rule rather than the exception. after almost two years, your apple stock is not worth as much as it was three years ago.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 30, 2010 11:21:32 GMT
No Jumbo - I get zero investment advice from Schwab. Their only role is to execute orders that I give them. I manage my own investments and dare say I've been doing a bit better lately than the government. My two largest holdings are Apple (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL) and IMAX (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=IMAX). The stock market is a bit moody like a beautiful woman. She can make you very happy when she's in the mood. But she can also ruin your day in a hurry when that's her mood. OTOH, I hardly think you're representative of the folks who have to depend on SS for their retirement income. how quickly you forget hon. das don't thing anyone should get social security. he's said so many times that, if you aren't a millionaire, you should be relegated to the soup kitchen
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 30, 2010 23:47:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 30, 2010 23:52:29 GMT
OTOH, I hardly think you're representative of the folks who have to depend on SS for their retirement income. Beth - please tell me what this has to do with being representative? Are you so medicated and anesthetized that you imagine a world where everyone is equal in all things? Everyone eats the same government rations, wears the same government uniforms, sleeps with a government provided wife, and distributes income on a level basis (no more rich people, the local homeless person has the same income and lifestyle as Bill Gates). Is that your utopia?
|
|
|
Post by beth on Mar 31, 2010 0:39:51 GMT
Das, you seem to be out of touch with the average middle class wage slaves. While you may benefit from setting up and managing your own retirement account, most would not be as secure without gov. run social security - and you know it. Surely you know it. Sadly, you don't seem to care.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Mar 31, 2010 2:41:05 GMT
I certainly don't believe there is a proper role for government in feeding, housing, clothing, and medicating citizens. That's a welfare state and that's the road to ruin for any country.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 31, 2010 19:25:10 GMT
so, you bought it for $100 in jan 07, and in jan 09, it was worth a hundred. now, thanks to obama, it is worth $250. you truly are an ungrateful chap
|
|