patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,189,020 comments by 13,845 users - askmeaboutthesaltporkcure, DhammaStep, HeadSet, KgK one, Patrick online now
invite responseComments 1 - 26 of 26 Search these comments
indigenous
2015 Jan 4, 11:54pm
nope I just asked a question. But I will admit that you are an idiot and will bet 5k that you are an idiot.
Dan8267
2015 Jan 5, 12:07am
The Democrats are right, there are two Americas. The America that works, and the America that does not. The America that contributes, and the America that does not.
Americans that contribute:
Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web.
Edgar F. Codd, inventor of relational databases.
Scientists, mathematicians, engineers, doctors, migrant farm workers, janitors, restaurant employees.
Americans that do not contribute:
Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook
Larry Ellison, owner of Oracle
Everybody in the financial industry, particularly Goldman Sachs
Don Regan, former CEO of Merrill Lynch
The executives of Halliburton
Notice a pattern? The Americans who do contribute have incomes ranging from $10,000 to $250,000 a year. The Americans who do not contribute and are parasites have incomes in the tens of millions. That's the problem.
Dan8267
2015 Jan 5, 12:10am
My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do.
People aren't bitching that your doctor makes too much money. They are bitching that Wall Street parasites, bankers, senators who accept brides and conduct insider trading, and the other 0.1% are siphoning too much money from the rest of us. It's called Occupy Wall Street, not Occupy the doctor's office, for a reason.
indigenous
2015 Jan 5, 12:12am
People aren't bitching that your doctor makes too much money. They are bitching that Wall Street parasites, bankers, senators who accept brides and conduct insider trading, and the other 0.1% are siphoning too much money from the rest of us. It's called Occupy Wall Street, not Occupy the doctor's office, for a reason.
Yup and they don't realize that the Fed is the entire cause of this.
Dan8267
2015 Jan 5, 12:17am
Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web.
So Al Gore was lying?
No, Republicans were lying as usual.
1. The Internet and the WWW are two different things.
2. Al Gore never said that he invented the Internet.
3. What Al Gore claimed was that legislation he wrote open the field to the deployment of networks which allowed the Internet to grow rapidly in America. And he was right. His legislation was instrumental in the expansion of the Internet in America, which is why to this day America dominates the Internet and not India.
And by the way, Al Gore did more for wealth generation with his legislation than all Republicans in all of history put together.
indigenous
2015 Jan 5, 12:20am
And by the way, Al Gore did more for wealth generation with his legislation than all Republicans in all of history put together.
Yes the entire success can be attributed to Al Gore, gees...
And by the way, Al Gore did more for wealth generation with his legislation
than all Republicans in all of history put together.
Yes the entire success can be attributed to Al Gore, gees...
Dan was saying basically the same goofy crap on the Drill Baby Drill thread. He was trying to credit Obama and the Democrats for the massive increase in US oil production on private land by private oil companies - saying something to the effect that at least Government didn't get in the way and stop them from drilling.
Many Libs have a child-like belief that everything good comes from centralized Government planning.
indigenous
2015 Jan 5, 12:09pm
Many Libs have a child-like belief that everything good comes from centralized Government planning.
Sactly, I have been trying to say sactly that for 4 threads now, not a one of them realize that they are infected with a meme.
Not to say the Rs don't have their's as well, but it is more egregious with the Ds.
Dan8267
2015 Jan 5, 1:24pm
Dan was saying basically the same goofy crap on the Drill Baby Drill thread. He was trying to credit Obama and the Democrats for the massive increase in US oil production on private land by private oil companies - saying something to the effect that at least Government didn't get in the way and stop them from drilling.
Completely false.
Many Libs have a child-like belief that everything good comes from centralized Government planning.
Also completely false.
I'm all for decentralizing power structures including both governments and corporations, both of which are hierarchies and therefore centralized systems.
FortWayne
2015 Jan 5, 1:28pm
Don't forget a made up "war on women" that Democrats started. They can't seem to win any election by merit, so they start all kinds of gimmickry to piss off people and divide them in order to get elected.
I bet no Democrat can win today without cheating, it's just too bad their cheating usually ends up hurting our nation.
Completely false.
Actually - you are right. Sorry, I was confusing you with Hydrocarbon who said this trying to credit Obama for cheap oil prices:
"Horseshit. The federal government regulates all sorts of behavior on private lands. Obama did not stand in the way of fracking. That is, he did nothing, which is actually something: letting evil dirtbags have their way...."
HydroCabron
2015 Jan 5, 1:32pm
"Horseshit. The federal government regulates all sorts of behavior on private lands. Obama did not stand in the way of fracking. That is, he did nothing, which is actually something: letting evil dirtbags have their way...."
Because, in your mind, allowing more oil exploration is a nanny-state activity.
To you, when a Democrat allows unfettered fracking, it's an example of big government.
Fascinating.
By the way, that thread was asking the question "How will Republicans blame the damage to red-state budgets caused by low oil prices, on Obama?"
A question you were not at all eager to answer, but you're fleshing out the basis for some wingnut talking points here, I see.
For what it's worth, Obama has little to do with current low oil prices anyway.
Tenpoundbass
2015 Jan 5, 1:35pm
I bet no Democrat can win today without cheating, it's just too bad their cheating usually ends up hurting our nation.
It's not cheating it's just their SOP.
They put Liberal Filth on everything. If they can't get segment of Voters votes, then they will study that group and find out what makes that group tick. The things they like and the things they dislike. Then they start a smear and shame campaign and will make every aspect of that segment's life a filthy dirty crime against humanity. Complete with activist judges that will rule those folks the dregs of the Earth.
You can't fight that kind of politics, all you can do is wait until people get disgusted by the Liberals and grow tired of being ear fucked by them. It happened in November, I would have thought that the Democrats learned their lesson. But NO, they're going to ratchet it up a knotch and kick it into over drive as they try to sell Hillary Fuck'em in the Nutz Clinton as the New New Hope and Change.
It's going to be quite comical actually.
With the impending doom and gloom about to be dropped on the big Liberal donors who have backed the do nothing green initiative while betting Oil goes to $200 a barrel. Are now bent over that barrel and are going to be ass raped by the reality of no jobs can't support $200 a barrel Oil. These fucknuts have lost their collective asses and the age of campaign donation records is solidly behind us and in the rear view mirror. They are in the middle or road screaming... "We had a FUCKING DEAL!!!!!!"
But this is my "give a shit" look...
HydroCabron
2015 Jan 5, 1:37pm
then they will study that group and find out what makes that group tick
Every Frank Luntz focus group has at least 3 members chosen for their low-information, stuck-on-transmit thinking. This is so that they can market Republican ideas to you.
Because, in your mind, allowing more oil exploration is a nanny-state
activity.
To you, when a Democrat allows unfettered fracking, it's an example of big
government.
Fascinating.
Not sure what you are babbling about here. It makes no sense. Also, I notice how you seem to frame everything about the government "allowing" us to this or that.
For what it's worth, Obama has little to do with current low oil prices
anyway.
There you go.
Therefore, per my initial response to you - Obama will get no blame (since he gets no credit) for cheap oil prices if Red States suffer due to low energy prices.
Tenpoundbass
2015 Jan 5, 1:46pm
for cheap oil prices if Red States suffer due to low energy prices.
That's NOT going to happen. The red states are going to lose about 1,000 jobs, but are going to gain 10's if not 100's of thousands of jobs, and a reduction of welfare outlay.
Dan8267
2015 Jan 5, 1:49pm
Don't forget a made up "war on women" that Democrats started.
Oh, we already got started on it.
Finally, you conservatives tried to pass legislation that would have literally raped women seeking abortions. And by literally, I mean literally meeting the legal definition of rape.
"The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim." The definition is used by the FBI to collect information from local law enforcement agencies about reported rapes.
So yeah, war on women is the correct term to use.
So please, let's discuss.
Dan8267
2015 Jan 5, 1:54pm
Completely false.
Actually - you are right. Sorry, I was confusing you with Hydrocarbon who said this trying to credit Obama for cheap oil prices:
That's just one of many things you said that were factually incorrect.
As for Hydrocarbon, he is correct in stating that "Obama did not stand in the way of fracking". He is also correct in his assessment that Obama has not protected the environment.
By the way, I thought the whole "drill, baby, drill" motto was dropped after the giant BP gulf oil spill that happened during the height of that motto and showed how incredible stupid the idea was.
HydroCabron
2015 Jan 5, 3:16pm
The red states are going to lose about 1,000 jobs
Do you wear a helmet in case you walk into things?
Tenpoundbass
2015 Jan 5, 3:27pm
Do you wear a helmet in case you walk into things?
There's only 1,000 people left working.
That's why you can't have $200 Oil and $20,000 DJIA.
indigenous
2015 Jan 5, 3:59pm
The fundamental conservative philosophy is that the ends always justify the means, so lying is never a problem as long as it furthers your political agenda.
That is good to know, I did not know that about me, I thought my political agenda was to end politics...
The Democrats are right, there are two Americas. The America that works, and the America that does not. The America that contributes, and the America that does not. It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the dos and the don'ts. Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society, and others don't. That’s the divide in America.
It’s not about income inequality, it’s about civic irresponsibility. It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed, and victimization in order to win elective office. It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country.
That’s not invective, that’s truth, and it’s about time someone said it. The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income inequality.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just. That is the rationale of thievery.
The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. Vote Democrat. That is the philosophy that produced Detroit.
It is the electoral philosophy that is destroying America. It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.
The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have enslaved them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope. The president’s premise – that you reduce income inequality by debasing the successful – seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.
Because, by and large, income variations in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibly have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income. You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.
You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course. Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.
My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant income inequality between us. Our lives have had an inequality of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in equality of effort. While my doctor went to college and then devoted his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant. He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine. Does that mean he cheated and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.
It is not inequality Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail. There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure. The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy. Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and short sighted decisions.
Barack Obama and the Democrats preach equality of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring inequality of effort.
The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.
Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster equality through mediocrity. He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the votes of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts.
It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.
What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow. Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the truth to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.
"Life is ten percent what happens to you and ninety percent how you respond to it."
Bob Lonsberry
#politics