“GOP Redistribution is Fascism”
Since: Feb 07
#22 Jan 27, 2013
Gay marriage - As the child of Baby Boomers who got divorced (as was the fashion!) in the 80s and 90s, and for whom 50% of my friends had their homes broken by divorce in the critical years before age 18, I sure am unsympathetic to your caterwauling bullshit that “gays will destroy the sanctity of marriage.” Perhaps if everyone in your generation didn’t take the period of 1978 – 1995 to start surreptitiously banging their neighbors and coworkers, only to abandon their kids because “they just weren’t happy,” I would take your defense of marriage more seriously. The institution of Middle Class suburban marriage was broken by the generation of aging white Baby Boomers who populate what is left of the Republican Party, so your defense is wrongheaded and disingenuous. And moreover, as someone who got called “faggot” about 127 times a day from the years 1985 through 1991 – guess what – I grew up to be pretty good friends with actual homosexuals, whose sexual orientation is usually the least significant thing about them. The Republican perseveration on homosexuals as any sort of threat consigns them to history’s trough of intellectual pig dung.
That’s quite enough for one essay, wouldn’t you say? Now, given my initial description as a wealthy, hard-working, job creating, heterosexual, married suburban White Male – doesn’t your current platform look woefully insufficient to the task of gaining my vote? This doesn’t even get into the demographic tensions that show that people of my exact profile are going away permanently in America. You can’t even win on what you perceive to be “home field advantage.”
Uh oh, wait, I can already hear you through the web browser, dismissing all of my above points because THAT GUY WAS NEVER GONNA BE A REPUBLICAN ANYHOW, CUZ HE’S A LIBRUL WHO HATES AMERICA AND…
All right, let’s do one last point:
Meanness- Your party is really mean, mocking and demonizing everyone who does not follow you into the pits of hell. You constantly imply – as Mitt Romney did in his “47% speech”– that anybody who disagrees with you does so not by logic or moral conviction, but because they are shiftless, lazy parasites who want “free stuff” from “traditional Americans.” Wow, you guys managed to follow up a stunning electoral defeat with insulting the very people you wish to attract for a majority in the political system! Brilliant! You are losing elections because being angry and defensive and just-plain-mean is more important than being smart and winning elections – and thus you deserve everything happening to you.
If you want to know exactly where you failed in 2012, and will continue to fail, here it is. Look you assholes, I’m as traditional an American as it gets, and I do not “want free stuff.” I am a taxpayer, and ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. I got my first job – dragging bags of cow manure, horse feed and fertilizer around a farm store – when I was 12. I started my first company when I was 28. I have followed the vast majority of the rules set out for middle class white males (for good and for ill.) And if it weren’t bad enough that your policy positions are a complete clusterfuck for the reasons I lay out in great detail, you manage to follow up the whole exercise with insulting me, my wife, and my friends of every stripe who didn’t vote for your political party – all of whom are hard-working, taxpaying, job creating, law abiding, great AMERICANS of EVERY COLOR AND CREED.
From this white, Mayflower-descended strategic analyst, allow me to offer you the three strategic options you have before you:
1. You drastically moderate your platform to harmonize with the policy positions I present above
2. You disband the party and reorganize it to reflect current realities
3. You kick and scream and stamp your feet and call me and my friends names – and submit to several decades of one party rule
“GOP Redistribution is Fascism”
Since: Feb 07
#23 Jan 27, 2013
While I do not want a one-party system, I also don’t particularly care which of these options you choose. If you look carefully at the numbers on Tuesday, nobody else cares, either.
Just a word to the wise from one White Man to (presumably) another.
>>>END OF RANT
I don't necessarily agree with every opinion espoused above but do with the general arguments and tenor.
#24 Jan 28, 2013
Yes, now-days (since almost all married women work) lots of people handle their finances the way you do. If this works out good for you, who am I to say it is wrong?
In my husband's case, I was only 17 (and a senior in High School when we married). I remember him having to give me lunch money for school - we sure had a few laughs over that at the time!
I also remember trying to do my homework & studing my shorthand while sitting/laying on the bed in our 2 room apartment. This proved to be a little difficult with a good-looking husband right there beside me. But, although my grades suffered a bit - I did graduate with my class of 1961.
For the first 5 years of our marriage - I did not work. We had our two sons during those years & I was a stay-at home mom. Perhaps, this had some bearing on the way we handled our finances from the beginning.
When I did go to work - I CHOSE to combine my money with his and that's the way it remained the rest of our lives together. All of our money went into one pot (a joint-bank account). I could spend money anyway I wanted & and he could too. He handled the checkbook. However, if any major purchases were made - we jointly made the decisions. This worked out well for us for 51 years!
Even today - his name (as well as mine) is still on the checks I write. I have not yet had his name taken off. Some day soon I'll have to do this (it just hurts too much right now).
#25 Jan 28, 2013
This thread started off on a bad food with a bad definition that needs to be corrected. One needs to study economics to understand what socialism is and as such, the best definition is in Merriam-Webster dictionary.
a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
That is definition of socialism. Take and economics class if you don't believe me.
This term is being applied to the left by the right because it appears that is what the left is going to do.
In short, those who are wealthy are being overly taxed and that money is being redistributed to the lower income brackets.
Every heard the phrase of paying your fair share or making the 1% pay their fair share. Tell me, what is their fair share. Before this recent tax hike, which hit all of us I might add, 1% was paying for well over 50% of the national budget each year (when we have a budget that is). Now the taxes have been raised I haven't seen an update of how much of the government's budget is paid for by the so-called 1%
There is another thing, the campaign was waged on taxing the top 1%, those who earn over one million a year. When the tax hikes came out, it was everyone making $450,000 or more were hit hard and all of the rest of us took a 2% hike. Why doesn't the so called main stream media talk about that.
Alumni, I see you are back. Again you attack the right and ignore the issues.
Did anyone hear of Phil Mickelson. He's a golfer and yes, he makes millions. He pointed out that when this new federal tax hike of 39.6% started that between state income taxes and all federal payroll taxes he was paying 62.3% of his income. That means for ever dollar he earns, he gets 37.3 cents and the state and federal government takes 62.3 cents. Is that fair?
Read that article and see the truth of these tax rates.
Please look at France right now. They raised the tax rate on their top 1% to 75%. Their richest citizens are giving up French citizen and fleeing to Russia which has a lower tax rate on the rich.
How long before the rich start abandoning this country for lower taxes in other countries?
#26 Jan 28, 2013
My maiden initials were (B.H.) No, I was not an honor student. But, I made very good grades in grade school & part of the way though Jr. High.
However, when Elvis came on the scene, I became a typical teeny-bopper & went nuts over Elvis, Rock & Roll & boys.(much to the horror of my parents & my two older brothers (my dad died when I was 13).
I have no doubt I COULD have been an honor student - but back then - making top grades was not a priority with me.(guess that's why they say "Youth is wasted on the young"...
Now, you've got my curosity stirred up. What were your initials when you were in high school. And are you male or female?
#27 Jan 28, 2013
I see you still don't comprehend English. The man said you husband would NEVER spend ANY money unless you said he could.
Obviously you should have taken some economics classes in college so that you truly understood what socialism was and then you would understand why the right accuses the left of being socialist.
I wonder why it is that no matter what the topic is you always manage to turn it back into something about you and your family or your marriage etc, etc, etc
#28 Jan 28, 2013
Thank you for posting this. I agree with every word. My hair was standing on end while reading - it touched me to the very core. How true, how true!
#29 Jan 28, 2013
Thank you, your comments warm my heart...
My dear husband, of 51 years, passed away one year ago this coming friday on, Feb 1, 2012.
#30 Jan 28, 2013
I see you're still at it - BASHING EVERY WORD I SAY. Obviously this gives you pleasure. So, who am I to deny anyone any of life's pleasures. So, Bash away - I'm tough enough to take it & I'M TOUGH ENOUGH TO DISH IT OUT - as you well know...
For your information, I never went to college. I did take a few writing classes while working at United Telephone/Sprint. My job (among other things) entailed composing business & collection letters to customers, My supervisor told me I had a (GIFT) in writing, and encouraged me to hone those skills & he enrolled me College English & writing classes.(Oh, by the way - I made an A in every class - in one class, I even made an A+!
If you don't want to read what I post, my only advice to you is - DON'T OPEN UP MY POSTS & READ THEM!
“Radical Islam! Radical Islam! ”
Since: Mar 08
#31 Jan 28, 2013
I beg to differ.
I do not think you were honor student material. I do think you could have made better than average grades, but not honor student. You seam to be the kind of girl who depended on her good husband to take care of all her major financial needs. You may have bought a few groceries, kicked some cash into the vacation fund and maybe a little on the children’s clothing and school supplies, but that was about it. Your husband managed the big ticket items.
Your lifetime penchant of financial dependency is why socialism, and therefore the Democratic Party, appeals to you during your waning days of productive activity stomping around on terra firma. Too much Elvis and not enough discipline was the root cause of all your socially maladjusted problems. It’s a good thing all of Caruthersville’s future pot dealers were still in grade school when you were enjoying your teen years
Don’t question my analytical conclusions; I was trained to spot malcontents, degenerates and future communists by the government.
#32 Jan 28, 2013
What I had said if you had bother to read it was that instead of writing classes at the college level, you should have tried taking an economics class.
I also see you ignored my comment about how you turn everything into comments about your family. Is this your form of the left's policy of don't answer questions, deflect to something else to talk about?
#33 Jan 28, 2013
you people have WAY too much time on your hands. PS I pooted again
#34 Jan 28, 2013
Are you suggesting I was a wild child, smoking & drinking when I was a teen? Just because I went Elvis, Rock & Roll & boy crazy does not mean that I was not a GOOD GIRL! I was at church every time the doors were open (my mom was even a Sunday School teacher)! I was raised with VERY GOOD VALUES. That is one reason, I have never (in my life) even smoked or drank and have always lived by the values I learned as a small child.
Yes, I don't deny I WAS a huge Elvis fan in my pre-teens & early teens - but I outgrew that idol worship several years before I reached 20. Although, I always have & still like to hear Elvis sing. I was not too impressed with any of his movies. I also lost a lot of respect for him when he got into drugs and skirt chasing.
Yes, my husband was a very good hard-working man - who was very generous with with me. But, I was also a hard worker and spent 37 yrs in the workforce while raising a family (part of that time) & maintaining our home.
Don't ever sell me short - because I definately did do my part! Yes, I bought groceries, our clothing (my husbands's included) and everything else needed to run a home & family. As I stated before, my paycheck went right into a bank account along with my husband's.
But, when I started working at the telephone company (because I was making more money than I had EVER made), I started having $400.00 per month taken out of my pay-check to go to my credit-union.
Back then, saving $400.00 a month was a lot of money! Of course, my husband was also having a precentage of his salary going into his savings (even before they had the 401 accounts). When the 401 accounts started - all his savings was transferred into his 401 (which his employer then matched by 50% until he retired.
After a few years of saving $400.00 a month, I had enough money saved up to pay CASH for the 4 acres that we lived on for 30 years (I still live on it). A couple of years later - as we could afford it (we were paying CASH as we went) we were able to have the land cleared, and had the water & sewer lines layed and then had our home placed on it. We did finance our home for 15 years (which has been paid off for many years).
Yes, my hard-earned money paid for our land and all the construction work of clearing the land & laying the water & sewer lines. My husband did not have to draw out any of his savings when we were in the process of buying our home.
So, I feel like I have contributed just as much as my husband did to our life together. Sure, he always made more money than I did - but we both know that men traditionally have made more money that women.
#35 Jan 28, 2013
I almost went to sleep trying to get through your long BORING post #25. Why do I feel like I've read this same thing before over & over & over? You didn't say much that you haven't said many times before.
The fact remains, people are paying LESS today in taxes than they've paid in decades. Yes, taxes raised 4-5% on people making $400-450 thousand a year & up. But, if a person is making that much money do you think paying 4-5% more in taxes is really going to hurt them? NO, IT IS NOT!!!
I could care less about the golfer you mentioned. I could also care less about the website you directed me to. You'll have to excuse me - I will NOT WASTE my time bringing it up. I can pretty much imagine what it will say.
I don't know if you're referring to the 2% raise in pay-roll taxes or not. But, if you'll remember that rate was lowered with the understanding that it was for one year ONLY! So, what's your point?
The fact is, the well-to-do need to pay their fair share of taxes. They've been given a pass ever since George Bush gave his big tax cuts,.
That credit card George Bush put two (unfunded wars) on, and started the (unfunded) Part D Mediare has come due & the creditors are wanting to be paid. YES, IT'S TIME THE PIPER IS PAID FOR ALL OF GEORGE BUSH'S SCREW-UPS!
No, we are not asking for tax increases to pay for out Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. We are asking for tax increases to pay for GEORGE BUSH - RUNNING UP OUR CREDIT CARD & PLUNGING THIS COUNTRY TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN DEBT...
Oh, and by the way. Republicans traditionally have spent MORE MONEY when they have control of the white house. The stange thing is - they want to paint the Democrats as THE BIG SPENDERS - WHEN ACTUALLY THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE!
No, it is you who needs a history lesson - because it is true, our country was founded on both Socialists & Capitalist principals.
#36 Jan 28, 2013
its a shame you have to keep repeating yourself to these misfits alumni its apparent they can read it just takes some time to sink in you know.
#37 Jan 28, 2013
Ignore them 61. They are internet punks and nothing more. I invited one to meet me man to man. Guess he didnt have the guts to be a man. Ignore them. They have nothing to offer but lies and hate.
#38 Jan 29, 2013
I give up on you Alumni, I seriously do give up on you. You are so indoctrinated in the party line that you refuse to see the truth or even think for yourself. You simply dismiss anything that you don't agree with and that's it. I could go into all that is wrong with your argument. I could cite the increases of the number people on welfare and the increased spending that caused, you'd ignore it or have a glib answer for you. I could point out that you have history wrong but you'd ignore. I could prove that Welfare (what is now called social services) was started in 1935 by FDR (a progressive Democrat) and you would ignore it. I could point out the major expansions of the system were made by liberal Progressive Democrats (LBJ a progressive Democrat. I could tackle. I could point that Congress approved the wars and the Medicare changes and that was both Democrats and Republicans (Including the sitting president). Why? You won't listen and you won't debate honestly. Let's see how you feel in four years when taxes are even higher, when the rich start fleeing this country and your government benefits start being rationed. If you ever, and I mean ever want to take off the blinders and rose colored glasses to honest debate, and that includes at least listen to and looking evidence against your point of view, let me know.
#39 Jan 31, 2013
I certainly hope you've GIVEN UP ON ME FOR GOOD! It's time you got off my case & started bashing someone else for a change. But, I will make ONE MORE effort to answer your absurd comments.
1. Yes, there are more people on welfare now - because of the polices of the Bush administration which nearly plunged us into another great depression. It will take years to repair Bush's mess & put everyone back to work. Yes, it took trillions to save our financial, auto industry & shore up the economy - to keep us out of the depths of depression.
2. I have no quarrel with you that it was FDR & Progressive policies that gave us the welfare system, Social Security & Medicare & Medicaid. I AM VERY PROUD TO SAY THAT ALL THESE PROGRAMS WERE BROUGHT TO US BY THE DEMOCRAT PARTY!!!
Well, if the rich folks want to keep avoiding paying taxes (like many of them do) WE DON'T NEED THEM IN THIS COUNTRY IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!
In the future - I predict we will see rich people fleeing this country to keep from paying taxes.
I also predict we will see many manufacturing employees buying into the ownership of many businesses in this country. That way - employees will be the owners of the company they work for.
And that is exactly what I'd like to see happen in this country. Who needs the FAT CATS if they don't intend to pay their fair share anyway???
#40 Feb 1, 2013
Please, would you at least get the facts right. I never bashed you. I challenged what you said in an effort for you to see how inane your points were. I see now that you are so hopelessly brainwashed and so totally lack a grasp of economics and economic principals so you cannot possibly understand how inane your comments were. Trying to educate is the same as cast pearls before swine.
#41 Feb 1, 2013
I think you two really like each other.
Add your comments below
|Brandon and Brian||2 min||guest||3|
|Looking for job to contract.. CONTRUCTION||2 hr||Js ace skill||1|
|chrissy (Apr '15)||13 hr||Her Sister||21|
|Good Bye Friend: (May '07)||14 hr||JenJen||354|
|business in Cville.||16 hr||teach||8|
|Perfect bar||17 hr||Johnny||3|
Find what you want!
Search Caruthersville Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC