how is this a clear issue. i dont see the GOP extolling the successes of welfare. its always cursing it. not this liberal. and ive never heard a liberal say anything like that (and ive lived in three of the most liberal towns in the country). are you talking about backroom discussions between Kennedy, Clinton and Dean? its pretty silly to base your political stance on some agenda that you think exists. i'll bet youre a big x files fan. there is just as much reason to believe that the GOP has Rove, Bush and Cheney in some backroom figuring out their strategery over how to get white rural votes using wedge social issues. you win. i'll believe your quip before i believe the US budget showing less than 30% goes to discretionary spending. its a typical response because its right. you brought up race. i didnt. sure minorities have been voting democratic for decades, theyre poor. the GOP pisses on the poor, why would poor people vote GOP? oh, i forgot---gay marriage and abortion. and "where has voting democratic got them"? where do you think? they dont get a lot of $$$. you should not expect there to not be any poor people anymore. there will always be the poor. lets just try to make the bottom less crappy.
I don't really know what thread to put this in, so I will stick it here. Everyone keeps talking about Obama's socialistic policies, but I have not seen much bitching about McCain's from the posters on the Republican team. When it comrs down to it there is not a heck of a lot of difference in these guys. Obama may well want to redistribute wealth in this country, but McCain wants the government buying mortgages. They both supported the bail out bill with all its pork. To me the Republican party stopped being conservative a long time ago, and John McCain is every bit as socialistic as Obama. That is why I am not voting for either of these clowns.
Since 1980 the bottom 20% of the taxpayers have earned less income (as a percentage of total US income) while the top 1% have gained income. According to CNN, $660 Billion went from the bottom 20% to the top 1%. Why is it that this is not labeled as a "redistribution of wealth". When the rich get less the republicans call it socialism. When the rich get more, then it is "capitalism", of course.
They aren't "getting" more. They are earning it with their existing capital -- not to mention being taxed less than ever before. Of course you want to take it away from them, Vanya. Quite the good apparachtik you are indeed.
They are "getting more" tax breaks! Why should fat cats who make their living off of their mostly inherited dividends and interest pay less tax than the 99% of us who EARN a living working for a salary or running a business for a profit. Why do some of the 99% shine the fat cats boots while paying more of a percentage of their income than la grasa de gato. Maybe you can be Paris Hilton's Chihuahua carrier some day.
Because it's THEIR money, Red. Money is money. You cannot base a tax system on where or how people get their money. Geez, seek help for this obsession.
bs. they are "earning" more for the same amount of work and the poor are earning less. or do you believe the rich are working harder and the poor are lazier than in previous years?