Right-Wing Media Launch Predictable Attacks On Obama's State Of The Union Address
Right-wing media have responded to President Obama's State of the Union speech with predictable attacks, calling it "class warfare" and claiming it was "transparently partisan."
Right-Wing Media Predictably Respond To Obama's Speech By Crying "Class Warfare"
Doocy: Obama Used "Warren Buffett's Secretary To Kick Off His Class Warfare Campaign." On the January 25 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy teased a segment about Obama's speech by saying, "The president us[ed] Warren Buffett's secretary to kick off his class warfare campaign in last night's State of the Union address." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 1/25/12]
Fox's Ramsey: "Last Night Our President Declared War On Success In The Name Of This Class Warfare Politics." Later during the January 25 show, Fox's finance expert Dave Ramsey said, "Last night, our president declared war on success -- in the name of this class warfare politics and this envy, he has come out and vilified the people who work like [millionaires do]." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 1/25/12]
Hannity: "Tonight, Instead Of Embracing An Opportunity To Bring America Together, [Obama] Elected To Invoke Class Warfare." On the January 24 edition of his Fox News show, which aired immediately after the State of the Union address, Sean Hannity said, "Tonight instead of embracing an opportunity to bring America together the president elected to invoke class warfare and further split an already deeply divided nation by focusing on partisan issues rather than pressing ones." [Fox News, Hannity, 1/24/12, via Nexis]
Hannity: "I Didn't Get Any Sense At All Of Any Grand Vision That [Obama] Has For The Country Short Of Igniting These Embers Of Class Warfare." Later on the broadcast, while interviewing Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Hannity said of Obama's speech: "One of the thing that really struck me tonight, if he's going to go out to America and travel across this country and make the case four more years, I didn't get any sense at all of any grand vision that he has for the country, short of igniting these embers of class warfare.I didn't hear anything too inspiring." [Fox News, Hannity, 1/24/12, via Nexis]
Wash. Times: "A State Of Class Warfare: President Ignores America's Heritage As A Land Of Opportunity." From a January 24 Washington Times editorial posted prior to the president's State of the Union address:
Whenever President Obama is in the same room as his teleprompter, expect to hear the class warrior emerge. Mr. Obama's words Tuesday were no exception.
In its sneak peak at the president's State of the Union remarks, the White House highlighted Mr. Obama's intention to say we can "either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while more Americans barely get by. Or we can build a nation where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules."
[...]
Jobs and prosperity won't grow as long as regulatory burdens stifle output, and our tax code is turned into an instrument to discourage and punish success. It's time for America to discard Mr. Obama's class-warfare message and reclaim our heritage as a land of opportunity. [The Washington Times, 1/24/12]
Hoft: "Let The Class Warfare Begin." In a January 24 Gateway Pundit post - also written before Obama gave his State of the Union address -- right-wing blogger Jim Hoft wrote, "Barack Obama will attack the rich tonight in his State of the Union address." The post was titled, "Let the class warfare begin... Obama SOTU Address -- January 24, 2012." [Gateway Pundit, 1/24/12]
Obama: "We Don't Begrudge Financial Success In This Country"
Obama In SOTU: "We Don't Begrudge Financial Success In This Country. We Admire It." From Obama's January 24 State of the Union remarks:
Tax reform should follow the Buffett Rule. If you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30 percent in taxes. And my Republican friend Tom Coburn is right: Washington should stop subsidizing millionaires. In fact, if you're earning a million dollars a year, you shouldn't get special tax subsidies or deductions. On the other hand, if you make under $250,000 a year, like 98 percent of American families, your taxes shouldn't go up. (Applause.) You're the ones struggling with rising costs and stagnant wages. You're the ones who need relief.
Now, you can call this class warfare all you want. But asking a billionaire to pay at least as much as his secretary in taxes? Most Americans would call that common sense.
We don't begrudge financial success in this country. We admire it. When Americans talk about folks like me paying my fair share of taxes, it's not because they envy the rich. It's because they understand that when I get a tax break I don't need and the country can't afford, it either adds to the deficit, or somebody else has to make up the difference -- like a senior on a fixed income, or a student trying to get through school, or a family trying to make ends meet. That's not right. Americans know that's not right. They know that this generation's success is only possible because past generations felt a responsibility to each other, and to the future of their country, and they know our way of life will only endure if we feel that same sense of shared responsibility. That's how we'll reduce our deficit. That's an America built to last. (Applause.) [WhiteHouse.gov, 1/24/12]
Right-Wing Media Have Previously Attacked Obama For Engaging In "Class Warfare"
Fox Responded To Obama's Speech On Inequality By Crying "Class Warfare." Fox News figures responded to Obama's December 6, 2011, speech on inequality in American by accusing him of engaging in class warfare. [Media Matters, 12/6/11]
Fox Attacked Obama's Jobs Bill As "Class Warfare." In September 2011, Fox figures responded to Obama's job plan by accusing Obama of engaging in "class warfare." [Media Matters, 9/13/11]
Fox Complained That A Proposal To Eliminate Tax Breaks On Corporate Jets Was "Straightforward Class Warfare." After Obama cited tax breaks for corporate jets as an example of tax loopholes that could be closed to raise revenue, Fox News personalities criticized the proposal as unfair and accused Obama of engaging in "straightforward class warfare." [Media Matters, 6/30/11]
Right-Wing Media Complain Obama's Speech Was "Transparently Partisan"
Hannity: The President's Address Was "Partisan." On his Fox News show, Hannity played an excerpt of Obama's address and said, "The president's partisan address this evening comes as the battle for the Republican nomination rages on with the Florida primary only one week away." [Fox News, Hannity, 1/24/12, via Nexis]
Fleischer: SOTU Shows Obama "Does Not Want To Work With [Republicans] To Get Things Done." On CNN's Anderson Cooper 360, former Bush White House press secretary Ari Fleischer claimed: "When it comes to doing the hard work of governing, [Obama] just likes to give speeches. That's the difference but then I think that's what Republicans heard tonight and why there is a sense that he work with us to get things done." [CNN, Anderson Cooper 360, 1/24/12, via Nexis]
Rubin: Obama's Address Was "A Transparently Partisan Kick-Off Speech For His 2012 Election Campaign." In her January 24 Washington Post column, Jennifer Rubin wrote:
President Obama's third State of the Union address was, as expected, a transparently partisan kick-off speech for his 2012 election campaign.
[...]
It was a painfully long and shapeless speech, designed to cheer Democrats and stick his finger in the eyes of Republicans. (He's not going to let them poison kids with mercury, thank goodness.) He talks about Washington being broken as if he were a passive observer -- which I suppose he is. He decries nasty partisanship, as if he had not accused Republicans of putting party over country. [The Washington Post, 1/24/12]
Fox Nation: "SOTU -- Too Long, Too Partisan, Too Barren Of Policy." On January 24, Fox Nation posted an excerpt from Rubin's Washington Post column under the headline, "SOTU -- Too Long, Too Partisan, Too Barren Of Policy." From Fox Nation:
[Fox Nation, 1/25/12]
They're such petty, irrational children, but condescending A-Holes at the same time.
Which kind of makes me wonder: are they that way because they're Republicans, or are they Republicans because they're that way?
I do have a problem with an incompetent, unqualified, corrupt Chicago gangster sitting in the White House. His giving a no-bid vaccine contract for $2 billion to billionaire supporter Ron Perlman and ex-SEIU Union Boss Andy Stern has given new meaning to the phrase "political payoff".
I will admit he has great taste while spending other people's money on his vacations and 94 rounds of golf.
Obama has ably proved his incompetence as reflected by the country's economy. The only thing the liberal-socialists have left is to shriek racism and to continue blaming Bush. They sure as he!l can't point to his "achievements".
I'm guessing the current crop of Obama worshipers are the children of the anti-establishment & liberal-socialists losers from the sixties. All that acid, booze & pot their parents ingested brain damaged their little kids. Now those kids are grown and are voting for anyone who promise them welfare programs.
You also have a problem with truth, facts and reality. How can a man reach his full potential, and how can a President do his job to the best of his ability when people in power, who is out to sabotage his Presidency, set up road blocks to impede his progress? This is a two Party system, which means, for it to work correctly, you must compromise and negotiate. Those who are out to sabotage his Presidency recorded a record number of filibusters while opposing everything. Name me a Republican faced with such resistance able to do his job to the best of his ability. There is no such Republican.
Obama has many accomplishments DESPITE the hate and round the clock attack and criticism he gets from the demons who are out to "make sure he is a one term President".
All your code words and Republican taking-points are nothing but empty rhetoric that does nothing to persuade or deter the President or his supporters from making sure he wins a second term. Those who support the Republican dark ideology that favors the rich are nothing but fools and suckers. The fact is Republicans don't give a da&* about you and I believe, despite what you said, you have a proble with a black man in the white house.
The on-going withdrawal of the United States militarily and diplomatically from Europe and Asia.
The abandonment by the President of Israel.
The worldwide view that America is a weak nation under the punk-in-chief
The prez’s cutting rather than expanding of the U.S. military in the face of a rising and more aggressive China.
The continued decline of America’s economic basis for America's global power through outragous deficits, burdensome regulations and taxes on private-sector companies.
Encouragement of a culture of dependency and actively seeking to prevent our energy independence through blockage of oil drilling permits and the XL pipeline while promoting his failed green-energy agenda.
Lets start the debunking:
1. Military spending overseas is bloated and unnecessary. Defense however, is important and will continue to be funded.
2. The President said no one will mess with Israel, did ya watch the speech?
3. He said multiple times how strong we are and how amazing we are, he's got faith in us, it's you that doesn't.
4. China wont take us over, they need our money lol. That's just my opinion. Others can comment on the china thing.
5. President Obama talked about changing regulations, its not his fault the house wont even vote on regulation they like just cuz the president brought it up.
And I'll leave with this, there is nothing wrong with the Republican Party IDEALS, it doesn't fully align with my viewpoints but that's fine. What's wrong is the hatred for the opposing party by a few people in very high power that want more power and money and will do so at the cost of america...that's what's fu*ked up. Take your chain e-mail somewhere else.
Yeah there is. "Tax cuts create jobs" is no longer an opinion, it's a false statement. "socialized medicine doesn't work" is another example. Conservatism wasn't always a collection of lies, but after performing a process called learning, it is now.
Ah, a list. Good. I LIKE lists.
We may be reducing troop levels in Europe and Asia, though I have seen literally no news about it. Even if it is true, it's also a good idea. Germany and Japan have had us in their backyards for long enough. About time that we brought our troops home from Europe and Asia. World War 2 is long since over. No need to keep paying to have troops stationed where they are not needed.
Whatever the situation militarily, we are most definitely not withdrawing diplomatically from either Europe OR Asia. This is simply a lie.
Again, I have seen nothing in the news about the United States of America abandoning Israel. We still support them to the tune of several billion dollars a year. Israel is the single largest beneficiary of American government largesse. Unless you have some kind of actual proof, I'm calling this a lie as well.
May I remind you that Obama inherited a very poor world view of America from the Bush/Cheney & Co. regime? They turned us into a nation that tortures innocent people to death. Ending the torture was an excellent start by Obama in his attempt to rebuild the worldwide opinion of our nation. You may call him punk-in-chief if you see fit, just remember that at the end of the day he is still your president. As a person, he deserves far more respect than Dumbya ever did.
The United States military does need to be streamlined, and especially modernized. The odds of a conventional war between America and China is so remote as to be inconceivable. While China is growing as a world power, I have seen no evidence that they are growing more aggressive. Again, you failed to provide any proof of this assertion, so I'm ruling it a lie. You're really bad at this but don't worry! You're still a new troll. I'm sure you will figure it out eventually.
If you're so concerned about deficits, then where have you been for the last 30 years or so? Of the $15 trillion in debt we currently carry, over $12 trillion can be traced directly to Republican presidencies. It's actually the Republicans who are the big deficit spenders, not the Democrats.
Also, small business owners have been surveyed, and they do not feel over regulated. This is simply a Faux Con/Republican talking point that sounds good, but has no basis in reality.
Lastly, the corporate share of federal income taxes in the 1960s, about the last decade where our economy was really strong, was about 30%. The corporate share of federal income taxes currently is about 6%. Corporations have gotten to keep quite a lot more of their profits, and they have done nothing for America as a whole for a very long time.
This culture of dependency you speak of, could it involve food stamps, unemployment insurance, and Medicare/Medicaid? Or is it some other culture of dependency?
Oil drilling has gone up under Obama, as has domestic oil production. There are thousands of leases for drilling permits that are simply sitting idle. Even IF we drilled all the oil we would ever need, IT IS SOLD ON THE OPEN MARKET TO THE HIGHEST BIDDER. More domestic production DOES NOT equal lower gas prices. Never has, and never will.
The Keystone pipeline was killed by Republicans in the state of Nebraska over environmental concerns, if you want the truth of the matter. The Republicans in Congress finished off the pipeline by forcing a deadline on the decision which was too short to actually address the concerns that the state of Nebraska raised in the first place.
That's a whole lotta fail in one post, brdt7107. Please try again.
Let's just take ONE of the ridiculous statements you copied from the GO(T)P talking point that showed up in your e-mail....which country? Libya? Which people? Bin Laden, Al-Awaki? Who says we are weaker, aside from Roger Ailes?
Your dumb statements, without any facts or proof to back them, lead us to believe your Mommy needs to monitor your Internet access!
Another stupid statement: The Chinese just finally launched their first aircraft carrier (purchased from Russia, never used and almost 20 years old, and refitted).
The USA has 11 carrier-led battle groups!
Worried about a land war with China? Planning to join the army as it MIGHT be the only job you are qualifed for?
Makes your e-mailed talking points look REALLY dumb,huh?
...Also, You have made me remember the captain crunch commercials that inundated my brain for a decade of my childhood. For this, you must be destroyed... Just as soon as i'm done with Skyrim.
Im sure it'll be any day now.
It makes me so angry that such ludicrous talking points, based primarily on outright ignorance and racism get thrown around.
In what universe has any talk of "abandoning Israel" by anyone in the Executive office or the halls of Congress taken place?
In what universe has anyone even suggested we stop sending them billions of dollars, stop arming and helping to train their military, or stop supporting them politically as a close ally occurred?
You know who created this absurd talking point? Right wing hacks who play on the racism of ignorant fools who need to believe President Obama is some secret Muslim or Kenyan national. Because it would destroy their childish and fictitious world-view to face the reality that an American born, mixed race individual is no less capable or patriotic then any other president.
It's an outrage to make us suffer such foolishness!
You are a LIAR, you are a brainwashed punk and you are a worthless piece of garbage. Most of what you posted are just outright lies that pathetic morons like you spew because you were told to think them and because you KNOW you are far too stupid to think for yourself. You are pathetic and ignorant beyond belief
You are a LIAR, you are a brainwashed b!tch and you are a worthless piece of garbage. Most of what you post are just outright lies that pathetic morons like you spew because you were told to think them and because you KNOW you are far too stupid to think for yourself. You are pathetic and ignorant beyond belief.
I am sorry but you are mentally defective. You are just far too stupid to do a decent impression of me. You are a pathetic brainwashed moron and that is all you will ever be. It isnt my fault that I punk you mercilessly. You are stupid. You are easy. You are pathetic. It is a moral imperative to just rip your ignorance to shreds. You can take it personally if you want but at least put some effort into it or it is too easy and becomes boring. Either raise your game up a bit or STFU and stop humiliating yourself
I am sorry but you are mentally defective. You are just far too stupid to challenge me. You are a pathetic brainwashed b!tch and that is all you will ever be. It isn't my fault that I punk you mercilessly. You are stupid. You are easy. You are pathetic. It is a moral imperative to just rip your ignorance to shreds. You can take it personally if you want but at least put some effort into it or it is too easy and becomes boring. Either raise your game up a bit or STFU and stop humiliating yourself
I would say we need republicans and conservatives to contribute to the political process. Unfortunately spokesmen and politicians of that party have become so ideological they become irrational and are no help. Belief trumps facts or context. In that regard they have become political fundamentalists with all the faults of religious fundamentalists. Arrogant, Dogmatic, and intolerant.
CBS poll says 91% 0f Americans approve of the Presidents SOTU speech.
They must have only polled HuffPo readers or something.....
Well this one was better anyway.
He laid out an agenda for stimulating manufacturing job growth, infrastructure development, for increased equality, and for investments in the future through energy policies, education, and publicly funded research.
Using the Seal Team as an example of people of all kinds helping each other reach a common goal was very powerful. The way he circled back to the start of the speech, using the killing of Bin Laden, was very clever.
He was able to shine a light on the GOP's declared obstructionism without resorting to actual accusations. He even offered support for a couple of GOP proposals - yet pointing out where he was not willing to go.
The tone was positive throughout the speech. That spirit is his best weapon against the GOP in this election year.
Obama's delivery was flawless as usual.
I get so tired of hearing from the RW circus. It was great to hear my from candidate for a change.
Too much Newt or Mitt can only hurt their chances at the presidency.
I enjoy the good discussions, but the exchanges with jimmy can't be beat.
You mean to say that I don't pretend your abject idiocy is worthy of consideration and engage you in discussions as if you were even moderately intelligent, and that I constantly go after your dishonest tactics, so you take your ball and, like a petulant child, quit the game.
1. Your cutesy meanderings areintellectually challenging thing to him, but they're also boring.
2. Thinking is boring.
But I'm sure i completely misinterpreted Jimmy with my exact quote.
Let me check my closet and see if I can find some.
Just like "will", which doesn't mean "will" to him at all.
"jamesB/tommy/right ON/JamesBond/etc" 'threatens' someone with the dreaded "I'll ignore you"!
And then gives himself 3 thumbs up for good measure.
Why in the WORLD would anyone waste something intellectually challenging on YOU? You are a MORON. A brainwashed moron incapable of understanding anything more complicated than mud. You are only capable of regurgitating what you were told to think over and over and asking the STUPIDEST questions ever written in the English language
That's when you prove your point, undeniably and objectively ( ex: Your facts are correct, you're smarter than Wingbot, he can't explain his position), you've established some specific truth... and he generously tells you it's OK for you to "believe' that thing that has just been proven, if it makes you feel good / you need that.
That one always makes me smile.
This is the one where the software reads your comment or question, then interprets them in a manner insistent that you asked or claimed something different. It does this by omitting, or replacing, key words and/or phrases from the original comment, thereby altering its meaning, and then insisting that the original comment didn't mean what it meant.
"So you're saying..." or just "So...?"
" If you believe..."
Oh, I see..
"Got it..."
"Let me get this straight..." or
" In other words.."
It also interfaces so nicely with the "So you agree with me..."
Small businesses are allowed to write off their expenses, that's a tax break; eliminating that benefit would absolutely CRUSH our economy, as mom and pop shops usually operated on a shoestring and simply cannot afford to pay more in taxes. Struggling families are allowed to write off their mortgage interest, that's a tax break; eliminating that benefit would betray the millions of Americans who bought their homes SPECIFICALLY because of the mortgage deduction that was intended to encourage homeownership. Income earners get deductions for their dependents, that's a tax break; eliminating that benefit would put millions of American families in jeopardy of having to forego necessities to pay their bills.
Eliminating ANY of these middle class benefits would not only put a deep hurting on a lot of people who are just hanging on by their fingernails, but would also send this country ROARING back into recession as those affected cut back their spending to deal with the loss of income. Why do you hate middle class Americans so much, tommy?
Why can't you just take simple, absolute, extreme, dogmatic positions on everything!!! You liberals just don't get it, real Americans shoot first and ask questions never, real Americans use a rocket launcher to kill a fly!
Why couldn't you just give jamesb what his oversimplified gotcha premise demanded?
Such as?
Which tactic will you choose?
Choose wisely.
shag to jimbob 54 minutes agojimbob 45 minutes ago......and then 22 minutes ago......I suspect he's burning up the google right now looking up heritage foundation and cato to learn what he thinks.
The fact that attorneys exist back up your claim that attorneys benefit from tax laws?
My GOD but you are stupid. You actually think that is a point dont you? He didnt back up your pathetically stupid comment. YOU are just so stupid you cant begin to understand simple reality. You didnt even TRY to refute the argument that the complexity of the tax law is for fairness.
that is insane. i have seen in the past how much the left loves the irs but this is crazy. ever heard of lobyists? they work to get breaks for their clients, rich clients. no disrespect to your daughter but unless she went to liberty law school or it was backwards day, she is wrong.
The fact you are too stupid to understand something is not evidence that it doesnt make sense. The reason for the complexity is so those who do things that benifit socieyty can take advantage but those who just want the tax advantage without giving the benifit cannot. This isnt that hard to understand UNLESS you are stupid or just too simple to look beneath the bumper sticker surface of things which amounts to the same thing
In this case, he even forgot that it's "jamesB" who fails to use capitalization.
Instead of creating an alter, how about just not acting in a way that everyone finds obnoxious?
Will you respond to me dressed up as riverdog?
You think he has costumes or fake mustaches ?
Like I said before, jimmy. You fascinate me.
Aren't these same wingnuts always whining that they can't keep up here because they're outnumbered ? That they're losing their arguments not due to the weakness of their arguments, but because there are so many people picking on them ?
But when those 'libs' laugh at the wingnut floundering under different names, that's evidence of them being intellectually tapped out ?
Seems a bit backward to me.
James gets what james deserves. How many times are we supposed to hear the same exact ignorant Randinista talking points and PRETEND it is an actual discussion? James is a troll. He is ridiculed because he is a troll who deserves ridicule
My GOD but you are stupid. Shaggles is ten times smarter than you will ever be on the best day of your pathetic life. You cant even DREAM of being as bright as Shaggles.
Apparently arguing with himself...
jimbob to n c p......to which n c p replies......and jimbob comes back with......you can't make this sh!t up! Thanks for the laughs you pos a-hole jimbob/tommy/righton...
Unless his really bizarre misinterpretations and misunderstandings are the result of a brain tumor, which wouldn't be funny.
Jimmy asks if someone agrees with him. That someone says, "Maybe if I understood what the hell you were talking about, I could answer you."
To which jimmy replies, "Then you agree with someone else." and then has a brief tantrum.
Yeah, I really want your respect.
It is astonishing how stupid you are punk
He tried it with me here.
He always needs to use some bizarre false dichotomy, like the one here between competing with a communist dictatorship or having different labor costs, but it's still interesting.
When your mom asks if you want Spaghetti-Os for lunch, do you demand that she ask each and every little "O" if they want to be eaten by you?
She replied to the questioner that he should ask Mr. Wingnut that question. About whether or not she agreed with his statement.
There is some serious personality disorder stuff going on here.
Your turn.
I'm giving you every opportunity to engage in honest conversation. All you have to do is back up what you say. It really shouldn't be this difficult for any functional adult.
In which jimmy demonstrates that "playing the victim" is yet another phrase whose meaning he doesn't get.
How is repeating your own quotes a "word game"? You wanted to know how the two things were different, so explain to me how any demonstration of that would not be a "word game".
For someone who uses the word "baby", you are awfully petulant.
now if you can demonstrate to me why they are different, do so. otherwise, yes, you are playing stupid word games for whatever dishonest motivation is behind it. your call.
The context here is your concern about raised prices. Your concern. Your concern. Got that part? Good. So, I asked you what you believed the cause of that price hike would be. You...what you believed...still with me? Good. The point would be, obviously, is that you can't legitimately be concerned about actions taken for the sake of greed. You can't factor that in to anything, to consider a change of course because of it. This was made more than clear.
None of this is in any way comparable to asking you to "answer for" anyone else, to divine the actual financial status of any corporation, because the actual numbers have no relevance to what you believe and how that influences what you are concerned about.
I don't mean to be condescending, but when you refuse to understand clear, multiple explanations, you don't provide much choice. Now, either explain what is unclear about this, or tell me how I'm wrong. Your call.
Let's hear it, if you really aren't smart enough to know when to shut up.
Accountability...
That is two sentences, unless you count this one as a third for some reason.
You never did answer the question.
"there is no misrepresentation" is just another on your stack of assertions.
Do you have anything new or substantial to offer here?
If your answer is that some do it for greed and some don't, then what I said applies; you can't use that as a basis for evaluating policy decisions. Therefore your concern about it makes no sense, and the question remains why you posted in the first place.
Which is exactly what I've wanted to know from the start.
See, this is the problem;you say something from an emotional, reactive viewpoint. "prices will go up!" There's no way to apply that to anything. You yourself won't say to base policy on it, and having Obama mention it in a speech makes no sense at all. It would be like "we're going to insure safety for all workers by closing loopholes in the regulations, but prices may go up." That's sheer absurdity on the face of it. Either he has to spend time making it clear that companies are going to do it out of pure choice, or he associates himself with higher prices. Either way, the media would tear him to shreds.
You want to criticize others for not using "common sense", but all I'm doing is demonstrating how you're not thinking about what you're posting very clearly.
"Lipstick on a pig"? Now, that's interesting. You're not saying that corporations wouldn't raise prices out of greed, yet the idea of them raising prices for any reason makes the added cost to business a "pig". Are there any proposals you would favor, for health, environment, safety, whatever, if businesses might say "hey, this costs us money, we'd better pass that on to the consumer!"?
I got the part about your naive expectation for total honesty to the point of taking responsibility for things one can't possibly be held accountable for. I'll just have to live with working under a lower "standard", I suppose.
Your a conservative? All I see is that you're nonsensical. Conservatives have a position. You pretend to have a position. Conservatives announce the leadership they respect and their mentors. Who have you named? Conservatives' values and goals can be looked up and generally defined. You define nothing.
The best I've ever seen from your prose is I-believe-what-I-believe-so-there. You're not even a hack; a hack carries the water for somebody. Your non-points-of-view are groundless, spinning in space. You have no flag to fly.
But I do see evolution in the exchanges. Once jamesB makes a non-point that can't be defended, sort of like defending the shades of blue found in yellow, jamesB's tactics are now exposed.
Remember to apply that in the real world, folks. It's not enough to note that I-am-wasting-my-time-discussing-anything-with-you thinks that government should do stuff without being funded to do the stuff. Debunking is good--necessary--but it doesn't much restrict the flow of BS. It's important to also point out that people like this are bringing cheerleader slogans to the table, not solutions, and they're bringing the slogans because they are not honest.
This is how he declares victory, by admitting that he's too stupid to understand you.
Finally: less than an hour to go.
you.
you're in great company. like minds
classic stuff.
Since you are just too stupid to know the difference between those two things you are just flat out too stupid to be in this conversation
He is not playing the victim moron he is punking you mercilessly
Your pathetic ignorance is hilarious
OH MY GOD.
In answer to
One of the saddest things I have ever seen is that you REALLY ARE this stupid that you think those two things are the same
you're right about that, look at all these idiots like old benny around today.
You go so far as to tell me that you're never going to talk to me again because I'm so mean, yet you can't even give me a shout out while naming idiots?
I'm offended, jimmy.
fixed
He called you "gnatlike", and when jimmy calls you a gnat, it means you're not challenging him intellectually any longer and he's just about through with you.
And when I say "guy" I don't actually mean "guy," as he has yet to discover.
Posting here transfers much of his ire to the community, though it's at best a half measure while he's stuck with this job. Which is why he's been interspersing his comments with dreams of the day he gets to be the boss of a company even Romney would admire, by which time either all those annoying regulations he argues against will have been dismantled OR increased to the point that he almost wishes he were someone's employee again.
Bolstered by his own advocacy, he's betting on the former.
His inability to state his own opinions when asked, coupled with his distaste for being asked to do so, compels him to respond in a manner so convoluted and inane that he hopes we'll all just give up and let him be.
That we don't exasperates him so much that all he has left is to either ignore us completely, or to call us babies and wimps.
Even still, you don't "win" on a technicality, because n'est-ce pas caught YOU with a technicality of his own!
n'est-ce pas wrote:
"...in the thread you just referenced."
Looks like your cheap "gotcha" backfired! Liberals are known to be readers and fact checkers, so be more careful before attempting another silly "gotcha".
Fail.
9-9-9!!!!
His previous comments were solely to distract us from the actual topic - the failure of the rightwing to be honest. He gets nothing from posting on a thread where the proof that the rightwing wasn't honest is provided.
Sure, Obama should have embraced the discredited Randinsta nonsense you have been brainwashed with. Look we all know you are stupid and brainwashed and think your Randinista dogma was given you by GOD. That is because you are a MORON and rational adults are glad that Obama is NOT.
I'd like to hear a Troglodyte tell us what's wrong with Obama's proposal to adjust the tax system so that Corporations who create jobs at home are taxed less than those who ship jobs overseas. I think that makes perfect sense. Of course, we all know that the Teabag Congress will never enact it. In fact, there isn't a snowball's chance that they'll vote on anything he talked about last night.
We know that, and the Troglodytes know that. What are they whining about?
The first three words of Brabantio's question are key, jimmy. Read them again. And again if you need to.
Here they are again in case you can't see them:
It's funny, because you make statements like you did above all the time that reveal your thoughtless takes on these issues, and then when you're asked a simple question about your belief in something, you do what you just did.
Your dishonesty would be aggravating if you weren't so humorous in your ineptitude.
Also, how do you think we can be competitive if we take away people's jobs here, making those people less powerful economically? If you're concerned about the cost of products, you surely have to be concerned about the number of people who have disposable income as well, right?
I'll answer for you since you lack the spine.
Companies outsource overseas to increase profits.
See how easy that was? And nothing bad happened to me for saying it.
Why are you so afraid of your own beliefs, jimmy?
What I'm saying is that's the only way raising prices would be justified. Otherwise, they don't have to do it, therefore it can't possibly be taken into consideration when evaluating courses of action.
Your logic would apply to anything a business doesn't want to comply with, such as environmental, safety or health concerns. You could just as easily argue that we should allow corporations to do anything and everything they want to do, because otherwise they'll raise prices. If they can stay in business by charging people more money for the same products, then they can do that. Or they'll have to suck up the cost because their competitors will get some of their business.
Either way, why should that have any influence on policy?
Help me to help you; should we or should we not consider the possibility of corporations charging more money when making tax policy? If so, why? If not, why bring up the possiblity at all?
Which of those options seems like a good idea to you?
i doubt if there will be any changes. no moderates left on the right. "moderate" is the new "liberal" as far as labels go. gridlock.
Brabantio said:
Which, when jimmy read it, became:
Let's play that Find-the-Differences picture game, jimmy. Only this time with words. Your parroting back of Brabantio's comment contains one difference. Can you find that difference?
Since only profits are taxed, jamesB, it should not affect the cost of consumer goods.
I'm curious about what you mean exactly when you say 'simplify the tax code'.
I guess this is one more for the memory banks, tommy. Right along with the time you said it should be legal to lie on the news and the time you said it's okay to disenfranchise poor and minority voters because they typically vote Democratic. Thanks!
Isn't that punishable by imprisonment according to the GOP caucus?
Either way, you're now on record as saying that America, the home of the blah, blah, blah, can't compete with a nation that forces their workers into indentured servitude. That's not gonna play well back at wingnut headquarters, tommy. Not well at all.
Hey, what did they think was going to happen when we started destroying decades of common sense foreign and domestic trade policy for the sole benefit of the top investment and executive class?
What did they think was going to happen when we decided to throw away decades of a solid foundation of Keynesian, New Deal domestic policy? Why do they keep insisting that the supply side experiment hasn't been a total failure?
Concerned person: "Little Johnny Republican, if you eat all those cookies, you won't be able to finish your dinner, don't you remember what happened yesterday?"
Little Johnny Republican: "Mmm, these cookies are good! My cookies!"
Hasn't the globe been in a "global economy" since the Silk Road, or did this global economy start when Saint Reagan used the term in one of his scripts?
iQue sopresa!
Has anyone here ever spent all day at a right wing site entertaining themselves by saying I know you are but what am I over and over?
You can't tell me some of the trolls here aren't being paid per post. I lost count at 70 posts in this thread for JimmyB. And that doesn't even count the posts when he was wearing his riverdog suit.
1) tax breaks for billionaires only. tinkle-down economics! (What? Everyone in America doesn't like golden showers?)
2) destroy what made America great. Unions, libraries, universities, safety nets, etc.
3) second amendment solutions. You know, so the country can look like the scene at Gabby Giffords massacre, only everywhere someone wants to take the law into their own hands with firepower.
4) no regulations. After all, billionaires can afford shipped in pure water, food and filtered air where ever they can go. too bad for the poor people, they should just die since they were too lazy to be born billionaires.
5) lie about literally EVERYTHING. With no remorse, no empathy and no conscience!
There. That is how it looks to me!
He keeps bragging about GM and he has also bragged on the Chevy Volt which is a joke and was designed to fail so as not to threaten the oil companies. GM built a fleet of EV cars in California that were much better than the Volt and were true electric cars that could go around 100 miles on a charge. GM also bought a majority ownership of Ovonics a company that developed NiMH battery which would go 150 or more miles on a charge and looked to be the answer to the electric auto. GM then had all EV cars crushed and then sold their majority share of Ovonics to Texaco who was then soon bought out be Chevron and they now hold the patents to the NiMH batteries and refuse to allow anyone to use this battery design. Then GM comes up with the Volt which uses batteries that will only go 40 miles on a charge and need a gas generator to be at all practical. You see the oil companies are not going to allow electric cars until they have sucked every drop of oil out of the ground and sold it and our government including Obama support them.
Then if Obama is going to quote Lincoln he should at least get it right espicelly since he is reading a TelePrompTer.
And last Michelle complains about being labeled an angry black women but if you look at here facial expressions the few times she had the camers on her she looked like she was not a happy camper. She has a life most can only dream of, lavish vacations, eating the very best foods and being able to give your children anything they need and oh yea the best health insurance money can buy so why does she always look ticked off.
My GOD but you are pathetic alt. We have heard all the ignorance Rush told you to think. You have always been a punk alt. Now you are just sad. Mentally inferior, morally retarded and just sad
kab you are a liar because I don't like or listen to Rush. And what I say is true.
You see big oil has deep ties to our government and left wingers like you seem to think that it was Bush and Chaney that did their biddings but Obama also does the biddings for big oil. The Obama administration did everything they could to minimize the cost of the Gulf oil spill to BP.
If Obama and the government truly wanted to end our dependency on oil they could but they do what the oil companies want. That is what happened with GM and the batteries. They had a battery design that made electric cars viable and the oil companies would not let that happen.
We know it is YOU that is mentally inferior, morally retarded and pathetic. So prove me wrong or STFU.
Instead, this site has become the noise. I can't believe this page has almost 300 comments of complete and utter bu11sh!t.
If I hated the Media Matters for America website, and I wanted to make it into some sort of joke, I would hire a bunch of people to log in and start a bunch of pointless, incoherent and incomprehensible conversations. It appears to me that is exactly what has happened.
I've been reading this site for a while now and I usually enjoy the comments and even try to participate occasionaly, but I think something has gone terribly wrong here.
Seriously, the Trolls are winning. I am losing my motivation to read the comments on this site.
It makes me sad and frustrated.
He was also lying in his campaign, I mean, State of the Union speech. You know how I can prove it? His lips were moving.