invite response« First « Previous Comments 17 - 56 of 65 Next » Last » Search these comments
freak80
2012 Sep 4, 4:36am
A conservative is a statesman who is enamored of existing evils, distinguished from the liberal, whose wishes are to replace them with others - Bierce
That sums it up nicely, I think.
http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysphere.html
snip
That really annoying person you know, the one who's always spouting bullshit, the person who always thinks they're right? Well, the odds are that for somebody else, you're that person. So take the amount you think you know, reduce it by 99.999%, and then you'll have an idea of how much you actually know regarding things outside your Monkeysphere.
Tenpoundbass
2012 Sep 4, 5:13am
There's just not enough Likes and Dislikes in a Liberal biased website in the world that will get this Motherfucker reelected. You guys all know that right?
Right HRHMedia? The Liberal social media guru schill the Obama Super Pac money paid to come to Patnet, and abuse the conservative members, and indiscriminately dislike all their posts.
Dislike me all you want, my Shuddupbots will speak loud and clear come November.
errc, I'm proud to be an idiot, when compared to the educated lot in this country.
marcus
2012 Sep 4, 10:39am
I'm proud to be an idiot, when compared to the educated lot in this country
That pretty much sums up the attitude of the right winger.
"Just because I's stupid, that don't mean I isn't all equal and shit, and it don't mean I can't tell what's best for this country neither."
Bigsby
2012 Sep 4, 10:46am
errc, I'm proud to be an idiot, when compared to the educated lot in this country
Damn straight!
Romney Is Only Going To Win Because Obama Fucked Up
Congratulations. You are a pair of self-confessed idiots. Honesty is the best policy as they say.
It seems to me that Obama stuck his neck out to save manufacturing jobs in Detroit and also tried like hell to upstart a green manufacturing sector in the US with the stimulus plan, which may have had some slow growing effectiveness.
Manufacturing or were they Union jobs ?
Politics picking winners and losers..
there certainly was no help for Solyndra (non union jobs) and his personal pet project....
Dislike me all you want, my Shuddupbots will speak loud and clear come November.
Righteous !
There is nothing anti-jobs about supporting a living wage and environmentally sustainable industries. These "liberal" priorities just happen to be wise, while blind faith in instant dividends in the absence of social infrastructure are simply retrogressive.
is that the new technocrat word of the day.. Social Infrastructure. Our "infrastructure" was created by tax dollars created from jobs REAL jobs that rebuilt the world...
YOU NEED JOBS FIRST to get taxes to build and fix your roads...
No Jobs, No Taxes No Roads ...
and if you dont like it... you will not have a JOB like OBAMA very shortly because someone will the jobs and much much better... !
Vicente
2012 Sep 4, 1:52pm
YOU NEED JOBS FIRST to get taxes to build and fix your roads...
Where did the money for the interstate highway infrastucture come from? Which pieces were built by industrialists or banks? Was it the tremendous demand? Did we scrimp and save and build one little bit at a time as we came up with the cash for it? No.
Interstate highways were a massive defense and civil Federal project, a HUGE waste of money. A boondoggle of seemingly insane proportion. And secondarily as an investment in a more mobile future.
It fascinates me sometimes how the people who are so derisive of anything the government does, frequently drive on an Eisenhower highway on the way to their Teabagger rally.
Where did the money for the interstate highway infrastucture come from?
Jobs rebuilding Europe! Booming industries higher taxes collected ... thats how! Else no jobs, no taxes no highway...
Silicon Valley..New Industries New Markets New Jobs... more taxes collected... build a city/roads... this was at one time all farmlands... it certainly wasnt Govt that build the SouthBay cities.
Vicente
2012 Sep 4, 2:07pm
Booming industries higher taxes collected ... thats how!
Except industries found ways to evade taxes, so those "booming industries" did less and less for bottom line revenue. Tech industries are famously good at routing their profits through some country in Texas of offshore to hide from taxes. In recent decades middle class wages have stagnated as more and more goes to the 1%.
Except industries found ways to evade taxes, so those "booming industries" did less and less for bottom line revenue.
in the 1950-60s ? only the MOB was evading taxes.
Tech industries are famously good at routing their profits through some country in Texas of offshore to hide from taxes. In recent decades middle class wages have stagnated as more and more goes to the 1%
There were no tax heavens when CA tech companies started their boom years..
Again its Laughable to suggest "hiding profits" ... practically impossible!
Besides in the sales to foreign countries was all from US soil in USD audited and taxed.
As if somehow the IRS doesnt review/reconcile SEC filings to the IRS tax return.
marcus
2012 Sep 4, 2:43pm
only the MOB was evading taxes
Right. The top marginal rate was 90% and only the mob was evading taxes. Are you kidding ? Back then a lot of compensation to high level people was in the form of perks that were expenses to the company.
And tax shelters for individuals were huge.
Hey, that's another reason taxes should be raised. To increase investment in tax shelter vehicles that are productive. Reengineer the tax code to make the best tax avoidence investments also the most productive. Alternative energy, various types of r&d. I started this paragraph as a joke, but I think it makes some sense.
Some argue lower taxes increase investment. But if taxes are higher with big tax breaks for certain kinds of investments, wouldn't that be even better ?
tax shelter vehicles that are productive.
there are temporary and permanent tax difference.. not so much as the media calls shelters.
eventually you do pay the tax down the road.. it even might be at higher rates.
Majority of the Perm differences create higher taxable income, while temp only deffer them to a later date. Pay less in years 1-2 and more in years 4-5.
freak80
2012 Sep 5, 12:20am
In the end, it's all just apes fighting over limited resources. Its been going on for millions of years.
Meaningless! Everything is meaningless!
Dan8267
2012 Sep 5, 12:33am
And Liberals are the humanitarians they are.
They want to create destitute wards of the state out of the Middle class so they can join in on the Poor's plight.You Libs need to get out and see the world. The poor in this country live in Ritz Carlton compared to the poor in the rest of the world.
Once again, you are confusing liberal with the left. The left is pro-socialism. The right is anti-socialism. Liberal philosophy does not even address this issue as it's a cost distribution mechanism not a civil or human rights issue or a matter of freedom.
Except industries found ways to evade taxes, so those "booming industries" did less and less for bottom line revenue.
I think you mean avoid taxes not evade . Tax evasion is not paying taxes owed which is illegal. Tax avoidance is minimizing your tax bill buy all legal means (aka tax breaks) available.
marcus
2012 Sep 5, 1:06am
eventually you do pay the tax down the road.. it even might be at higher rates.
Majority of the Perm differences create higher taxable income, while temp only deffer them to a later date. Pay less in years 1-2 and more in years 4-5.
What, you think 401Ks are what I mean by tax shelter ? It must be because you are young and because tax rates are so low that you have no idea what a tax shelter is.
Are you a college student ?
freak80
2012 Sep 5, 1:25am
I think you mean avoid taxes not evade . Tax evasion is not paying taxes owed which is illegal. Tax avoidance is minimizing your tax bill buy all legal means (aka tax breaks) available.
According to Kent Brockman of Channel 6 News Springfield, tax evasion and tax avoision are the same thing.
Auntiegrav
2012 Sep 5, 1:54am
Saw a funny fake street sign today:
"Slow Thinkers Keep Right"
I like the implied humor, but disagree with the statement. I consider myself "so far right that I'm Left, and John Birch is a commie"(someone else told me that). If one follows the logic of the conservative point of view (self-made man, etc), then they have to follow it ALL the way through the costs and benefits, the needs and resources. When one does that, no matter if you start out believing that God put us all here to spread our word, then they would have to learn science and evolution and all of the natural processes that are involved in what a human being IS (not what they believe them to be). After a thorough examination of reality, one will see the absurdity of all human belief systems and the evils which come from belief in any "righteousness", as nature has no "meaning", no "right" or "left": just action and results, based on living organisms that cooperatively contribute more to their future than they consume in resources. All of the human System of systems and the political machinations are as temporary as our population explosion based on petroleum. In a petri dish where the pathogen doubles every 30 seconds, the dish is only half consumed at 30 seconds before doomsday. Conservatives as well as Liberals seem to believe that we can always 'fix' the last 100 years in the next 30 seconds: because they only see what was "accomplished" in the past, not what was consumed or the rate of consumption growth vs. the available resources. By the time humanity allows reality into its model of the universe (the fantasy we all live in), it is too late to become a different species (we are now Homo Consumpticus). There is actually very little difference between the Democrats and the Republicans on this. They are both trying to convince the public that no matter how bad things really are, "They" will continue the comforts of the status quo and expand them in some magical way, regardless of facts. The only logical response to overconsumption is a reduction in our economy. No sane politician can make that statement (sanity is relative to societal 'normal', not reality).
Evolution happens. Try to keep up.
Auntiegrav
2012 Sep 5, 1:59am
In the end, it's all just apes fighting over limited resources. Its been going on for millions of years.
Meaningless! Everything is meaningless!
Yes, but meaningless is not the same as pointless, nor is it hopeless or useless. We just seem to make it come out that way because humanity is all about the Dream, not the reality. Meaning is part of the marketing of dreams. It works great on the belief mechanism in the human brain: until the resources run out. We have invented mechanisms in the past to keep from doing things that are self-destructive, but for every "regulation", someone comes along to "deregulate" the regulations: usually with a mob or a pile of money they made by avoiding the regulations.
Auntiegrav
2012 Sep 5, 2:08am
The first big government project was only possible because of government backed bonds and land grants: the Transcontinental Railroad. Who was the first Champion of Big Government? The first Republican, Abe Lincoln.
How did it actually get built? By men who created fake companies and swindled the taxpayers. Thus it has been.
How did American companies get so much money to rebuild Europe after WWII? Pretty easily, since their weapons destroyed all of their competition, they had a monopoly on almost anything that had to be made in a factory.
Who created the EPA? Richard M. Nixon.
Who signed NAFTA into law? Bill Clinton
Tell me again how we are supposed to distinguish Left and Right in America? By made up rules about "Life" and "Choice" and tax rates on a minority of the population?
To what future's end are we actually working?
Shaman
2012 Sep 5, 2:32am
Auntiegrav said, " the Transcontinental Railroad"
Great show on AMC about that. Great writing and directing and acting! I like it.
Vicente
2012 Sep 5, 2:58am
Tax avoidance is minimizing your tax bill buy all legal means (aka tax breaks) available.
I go with evasion, because the INTENT is clearly to avoid paying that which you owe AT ALL COSTS even the risk of penalties. When an individual does it, they can go to jail. When a bunch of corporate officers do it, nobody goes to jail and the worst case is paying a penalty.
freak80
2012 Sep 5, 4:08am
Who created the EPA? Richard M. Nixon.
Who signed NAFTA into law? Bill Clinton
Tell me again how we are supposed to distinguish Left and Right in America?
Well put. Wasn't it Jesse "The Body" Ventura who said politics isn't much different than the WWF? It's a bunch of fake "us vs. them" entertainment where all of the contenders pretend to be rivals but then party together after the show laughing at all the suckers that thought it was for real.
Auntiegrav
2012 Sep 5, 5:25am
Who created the EPA? Richard M. Nixon.
Who signed NAFTA into law? Bill Clinton
Tell me again how we are supposed to distinguish Left and Right in America?
Well put. Wasn't it Jesse "The Body" Ventura who said politics isn't much different than the WWF? It's a bunch of fake "us vs. them" entertainment where all of the contenders pretend to be rivals but then party together after the show laughing at all the suckers that thought it was for real.
Good ole Jesse. Another "so far right, he's Left" fellow. Have you seen his interview about the visit he made to Cuba as governor? His Cuban handlers offered to help him lose his CIA tail.
Tax avoidance is minimizing your tax bill buy all legal means (aka tax breaks) available.
I would simply use the term "tax compliant"... since the laws clearly allowed for deductions/credits or other tax treatment in your favor for a reason to reduce your taxable income.
The media and public has really overused the term "avoidance" "Loop Holes" which gave it a different meaning.
It is not an exaggeration to say that I have never seen a criticism of a conservative policy that accurately portrays a conservative policy.
marcus
2012 Sep 22, 10:11am
It is not an exaggeration to say that I have never seen a criticism of a conservative policy that accurately portrays a conservative policy.
Gee. I wonder whether you label yourself as a "conservative."
Our politics is so deeply partisan that the words conservative and liberal have little meaning anymore.
What you really mean, is that there is this sort of team, or tribe, or cohort that call themselves the republicans. You identify with this political group, and feel that they have very legitimate policies that they endorse and try to move forward.
And these policies are in your view misrepresented by "liberals."
In my view, their biggest policy is hating it when power is in the hands of the other group. (hence CLintons impeachment for sex, and questions about Obamas birthplace etc..)
A lot of the same groupthink behavior occurs on both sides. But I really believe that the observation that republicans are currently dominated by a group of crazy people is correct.
When people on this forum talk about how Reagan would be a RINO now, or maybe even way too liberal to be a republican (see http://patrick.net/?p=1216676 ) , I never hear any argument from the local right wingers.
I assume this means that they (and you ?) are okay with that. You think that Obama, who would be extremely conservative by any sane measure is a dangerous socialist.
This is simply the result of propaganda. I think one absolute truism is that the authoritarian personality type is far more vulnerable to propaganda. They need someone to tell them a bunch of lies so that they can have strong emotions behind their unwavering support for their authority.
rootvg
2012 Sep 22, 11:02am
Every libbie thinks every conservative is a Nazi (or sociopath, have been hearing that term for about thirty years) and every conservative thinks every libbie is a Communist on the sly.
It doesn't matter. There are 160+ Electoral votes in states (59 percent of the amount required to be elected President) where the vast majority vote center or center-right and that's not likely to change anytime soon.
All this business about Texas becoming Democratic is nice fodder for the coffeehouses but I actually lived there for almost a decade and I'm telling you their brand of Democratism isn't anywhere near that of California or Massachusetts. This is why I say the DNC's being forced to include favoring gay marriage in their platform will destroy any chance they had of carrying something significant in the south this year. They don't have many leather festivals in Charlotte or Raleigh. There aren't very many in Columbus or Cincinnati, either.
One thought: if Right wingers are Sociopaths, Left Wingers are Marxists.
After all, Marxist grand scheme is to take what they didnt earn, and give it to those that didnt.
marcus
2012 Sep 22, 2:52pm
After all, Marxist grand scheme is to take what they didnt earn, and give it to those that didnt.
That's right. THere are only two options. Keep taxes too low, especially on the high levels of income, and let the government f%&K off and die (except for the military industrial complex, and the oil companies, and all the other industries that get special treatment from the govt).
You're either in that club, or you believe in total redistribution, everyone has the same lifestyle regardless of how hard or how well they work.
There is no in between !
THat's such lame BS. And it totally does not explain how we did so much better when tax rates were higher, without being anything close to a communist country.
It also doesn't explain how France, which is maybe a bit too socialist for my taste has a lower govt debt to GDP ratio than we do.
rootvg
2012 Sep 22, 4:00pm
Yes, it would be a rejection of everything I've ever been taught by all those people who taught Poli Sci for all those years plus all those business guys back in Ohio and Texas who made money and managed people for all those years.
That's why it won't happen. Life doesn't work that way.
Now I KNOW you're a kid.
You're learning, finally. Keep it coming.
Guys, I just gotta say at this point, and I'm looking at you "Thomas":
"A new study by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service has found that over the past 65 years, tax cuts for the rich have not led to economic growth and instead are linked to greater income inequality in the United States.
The study found that cutting taxes for the rich does not increase saving, investment, or productivity growth. “The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie,†the study said."
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/business/0915taxesandeconomy.pdf
A breakdown:
http://patriotacts.com/wealthy-tax-cuts/
Man, Thomas, one of these days you're going to realize what an asshole you've been and the sound you'll make will be something like "...eep."
freak80
2012 Sep 24, 12:08am
Obama will probably win. Polling is pretty accurate these days.
I wouldn't interpret an Obama victory as a mandate for liberal policies. Romney is more liberal than conservative, except on tax policy. The only reason conservatives are voting for Romney is their greater dislike of Obama. It was exactly the same thing 4 years ago with McCain.
The country will still be about 50/50 liberal/conservative after the election.
Nothing changes on New Year's Day. Nothing changes on Election Day either.
Romney is more liberal than conservative
ha ha ha ha ha... The candidate who was chosen and forcibly placed into the candidacy by the republican party is now suddenly a liberal. JHC christ freak, do you and your gang even listen to yourselves?
I have nothing to contribute to these conversations other than dull mockery at this point, I'm totally aware of that and I'm comfortable with it. What more is needed?
Did you hear about Maxine Waters? She threw her grandson under the bus. Some non-sociopath.
http://atlantablackstar.com/2012/09/21/waters-cleared-of-charges-by-house-ethics-committee/
« First « Previous Comments 17 - 56 of 65 Next » Last » Search these comments
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/09/02/sociopathic/
Ayn Rand and the Sociopathic Society or ‘How I Learned to Stop Loving My Neighbor and Despise Them Instead.’
A fat, smug bastard friend of mine (that’s his chosen nickname, The FSB) pointed out to me some time ago that pretty much ALL conservative politics are selfish at their core. Take any conservative position on a social or economic issue and boil away all the rhetoric and what you are left with is “I got mine, screw you.â€
I thought about that for a while. I suppose its simplicity struck me as being a little too easy, a little too sound bitey. So I sat down and made a list:
No gay marriage – Homosexuality makes me uncomfortable (due to misguided religious influence or poor upbringing or both) so gay people should be punished because of my beliefs. Stoopid homos…
No welfare, food stamps or Medicaid – I’m not poor enough to qualify for these programs so my tax dollars shouldn’t pay for it. Stoopid poor people and by poor I really mean black…
No health care reform – Why should I help pay for other people who are sick when I’m not? Stoopid sick people…
No environmental protection – Environmental laws makes things more expensive for me and that’s bad. I also don’t understand the concept of long term impact; I want cheap gas and gadgets now! Stoopid…ah, you get the idea…
Don’t raise my taxes – EVER. The government can find its own money to pay for stuff.
Medicare – Young conservatives: Why should I help pay for old people and the disabled?
Older conservatives: Keep your government hands off my Medicare!
Social Security – Young conservatives: Sacrifices need to be made, people should take care of themselves, not depend on handouts from people like me.
Older conservatives: Sacrifices need to be made BUT DON’T YOU TOUCH MY SOCIAL SECURITY!
No abortion – The government should tell women what to do with their bodies because I don’t like abortion.
No prayer in school? – GOVERNMENT OVERREACH!! I like The Jesus™ so everyone should have to listen to my prayers. No Muslim prayers, though. That’s indoctrination.
This list goes on for some time. The more I thought about it, the more obvious it became. A conservative society is a borderline sociopathic society.
Dictionary.com defines a sociopath as: a person, as a psychopathic personality, whose behavior is antisocial and who lacks a sense of moral responsibility or social conscience.
Conservapedia says a sociopath is “someone with a personality disorder characterized by an antisocial behavior and an absence of moral responsibility or social conscience.†(I would have cited Wikipedia but we all know they’re a liberal front for George Soros, I think I heard that on Glenn Beck)
The key words here are “moral responsibility†and “social conscienceâ€. Conservative politics lack these essential characteristics. In their place we find greed, hate, lies, an inability to empathize and an overblown sense of entitlement and self importance. In other words: all the indicators of a seriously disturbed person. Except it’s a political philosophy and it has millions of disciples.
But Justin, you filthy liberal scum, how can you say that?
Well, that’s kind of easy. Who is the guiding light of conservatives (and Libertarians) all the way from corrupt CEOs down to easily manipulated Tea Party fanatics? Ayn Rand.
Ayn Rand’s specific worldview was that “The pursuit of his (man’s) own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.â€[i] This is in direct opposition to a functional humane society where the whole must be cohesive in order to provide for its weakest and most vulnerable. You’ll notice my inclusion of the word “humaneâ€. You can have a perfectly functional society without a shred of humanity in it. Take, for example, the Industrial Age societies. They literally built the foundations for the world we know and yet they allowed or even encouraged child labor; essentially the slavery of children. Speaking of slavery, they had THAT, too, and no matter what Haley Barbour, Pat Buchanan and the other apologists revisionists would have you think, it was horrible and inhumane.
Ayn Rand’s ideal world is one where society has no say in your actions short of you physically assaulting another person. “The only function of the government, in such a society, is the task of protecting man’s rights, i.e., the task of protecting him from physical force.â€[ii] One is forced to wonder what she would make of Wall Street’s Epic Fail. Rand was a big champion of no regulation at all. Close your eyes and imagine what Wall Street could do with even less regulation than it had before. Think of all the possibilities. Taste the freedom.
Are you done vomiting yet?
Do you know why Rand’s laissez-faire utopia would fail? It’s the exact same reason a socialist utopia would fail; people are imperfect. We are greedy, envious, petty and selfish. There will always be some among us who will better themselves specifically to the detriment of others because they simply don’t care. There will always be those who, as they gain power and wealth, will want more at any expense. We saw this in action in communist Russia. It was rife with the kind of corruption described so very well in George Orwell’s Animal Farm. Everyone was equal, but some were more equal than others.
We see it today in that bastion of capitalism: America and its budding Oligarchy. As wealth and power becomes ever more concentrated, the rest of us suffer. Any attempts to remedy the situation by imposing restrictions on the rich and powerful to keep them from fleecing the country is met with howls of class warfare, Socialism and government overreach. Any attempts to remove any of the sweetheart deals in place allowing those same anti-government rich and powerful to pay less taxes (or no taxes at all) or to reap billions in unnecessary subsidies are also met with howls of unfair treatment.
Now that’s what I call having your cake and eating it, too.
These people are sociopaths, pure and simple. As long as they get what they “deserveâ€, it doesn’t matter what happens to anyone else. Homeless families are not their problem. Malnourished children are not their problem. Uninsured sick people are not their problem. The elderly reduced to abject poverty (as they were before the advent of Social Security) are not their problem.
Ayn Rand and her delusional rantings provide a rationalization for this immoral behavior. After the Enron scandal and again after the crash in 2008, CEOs started to reread Atlas Shrugged. “CEOs put the book down knowing in their hearts that they are not the greedy crooks they are portrayed to be in today’s business headlines but are heroes like the characters in Rand’s novel.â€[iii]
Heroes? Really? Is that so?
I would love to walk a group of Wall Street executives out to a Tea Party rally and have them explain to the crowd all the ways these “heroes†have stolen away the TPers money and future. Then announce that it’s OK because Ayn Rand says self interest and greed are good so whatever these “heroes†do in pursuit of that goal is morally just, even necessary. I figure the cognitive dissonance would make at least half of the crowd’s heads explode.
Mahatma Ghandi said a society is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable. By this very simple criterion, the conservative sociopathic society would be found wanting and yet the conservative movement claims to be the party of God, family and human decency. It is none of these things as we’ll examine in my next liberal descent into madness, “Republican Jesus.â€
#politics