Originally posted by rogerstigers
Oh, good grief. I really wish ya'll could get past the name calling. It's really below ya'll. I have seen just about all of you have perfectly rational and intelligent conversations without resorting to name calling.

It's pretty hard not to call someone a fascist that wants to marginalize, disenfranchise, and take away your right to express yourself in the political spectrum; depending on your income.

What name would you prefer?

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by rogerstigers
Oh, good grief. I really wish ya'll could get past the name calling. It's really below ya'll. I have seen just about all of you have perfectly rational and intelligent conversations without resorting to name calling.

It's pretty hard not to call someone a fascist that wants to marginalize, disenfranchise, and take away your right to express yourself in the political spectrum, depending on your income.

What word should be used?

First, I wasn't talking about how you reference the author. I was talking about how you reference each other. Second, any name or label is, as I mentioned, a diversion from the conversation. If you tell someone you disagree with their idea and why, they may even reconsider their concepts or at least learn something. If you start with name calling, the debate is over.

The real crimes are the ones that politicians have done to create this situation in the first place, with the goal of using it to their advantage in order to firmly root themselves and empower themselves into the system, making it practically impossible for them to ever be pushed back out..

Politicians have engineered this current state of affairs to empower their futures, not any of yours...

I wish I could say that we are, as a culture, growing up and getting past this and these are just growing pains... I am just not certain. The biggest test of our resolve is not what we are willing to fight against happily but what we are willing to fight for even when it hurts. Until it becomes normal and easy for the general public to fight for what is right even when it hurts, we'll never get past being panicky pack animals that can be easily herded.

The guy referenced by the OP is yet another example of one of those would be herders.

The big problem I see is that we have the "feel good" progressives, keeping classes separated with artificial benefits and structured monies from the government. It perpetuates itself over and over again. The so-called "leaders" need this class dependent on them. It keeps them in power.

These are whom they vote for.

Now you have folks like me. Tea Party, conservatives who want better for this "class". To get these folks off the dependence of government. To provide the oppourtunity for them to be free of governmnt dole.

And what happens?

Progressives get/feel threatened. They resort to name-calling, distortions, outlandish accusations. So they can keep the status quo.
From my perspective, it is the progressives, that'll fight tooth and nail to keep things "separate". To insure a segregation of the classes, to perpetuate their power base.

it would seem to be more correct to say it is "bad for the top 2% that the GOP truly represents"

Originally posted by beezzer
What needs to be done is to get them NOT to be poor anymore.

I agree with this

However, the difference between progressives and conservatives
Progressives see the way for them to not be poor anymore is through free education, social programs to free up their resources and spend on investment verses survival
Conservatives see the solution of no more poor by them simply being dead.

Lets face facts. livable wages for uneducated jobs simply don't exist anymore in america. they all went to china, india, etc..and they won't come back.
So, the solution, educate..mass education...try to get everyone a specialized skill. Let the rest of the world have manufacturing, we can have administration, consulting, innovative invention, etc.
The conservatives are stuck in some 1920s mindset that somehow we still have this mega booming dirty blue collar labor force job market...we don't, stop kidding yourselves.

Poor people should be pushed to middle class..that makes them good consumers, and when there are good consumers, corporations make a bundle...seriously, why does the right fight this simple fact. corporations like making sales, and their sales are directed at middle class. kill the middle class, and you kill corporations.

Explain in a bit of detail the conservatives view on how to eliminate, or at least make a dent in, the poor...because the poor spiked when GWB took over...
Look dude:

Its a statistical fact that conservative politics creates more poor people...they just do, their economic model is made of fail that only favors the very elite.
its why the must employ nationalism to get the idiot lessers to also back them...blind them with patriotism so they stop looking at the cold facts of their model.

So...whats new then? What sweeping new ideas do cons have (good name for them btw, cons.) that will somehow do as you idealistically said, make them not poor?
Does it involve some new brilliant economic philosophys, or the same tired old and scientifically proven flop ideas?
They got nothing...they never had anything, they never will have anything...because conservative politics = corporatist politics. the two are absolutely identical in practice.

I assume that now I showed you the facts, your entire perspective has changed and you now accept the failure of conservatism...great...oh...wait, nevermind, you will just ignore the facts as usual.

Originally posted by beezzer


Now you have folks like me. Tea Party, conservatives who want better for this "class". To get these folks off the dependence of government. To provide the oppourtunity for them to be free of governmnt dole.

So how exactly does keeping the poor from voting like the conservative Mr Vadum recommends; provide opportunity for the poor to go back to work, get an education and become productive members of society.

But let's continue the class warfare, and use them to further the conservative right wing ideology of scapegoating the poor to further hatred and divisiveness in America. It's just more elitist BS.

Please, this time don't let your ideology get in the way of your common sense!

Originally posted by beezzer
What did he say that wasn't true?

What did he say that is true?
Seriously. Lay it all our for me wit supporting facts or admit you are just happy to perpetuate a false stereotype because it makes you feel better about what you are trying to pull.

The poor will vote for more entitlements, it's in their own best interests.

You know all the poor and none of them want better jobs? You are going to have to prove you have any reason to believe that.

What needs to be done is to get them NOT to be poor anymore.

You claiming they want to stay poor is not a good place to start, is it?

But what progressive would want to lose their base?

Name calling right off the bat then?

Originally posted by whaaa

Originally posted by beezzer


Now you have folks like me. Tea Party, conservatives who want better for this "class". To get these folks off the dependence of government. To provide the oppourtunity for them to be free of governmnt dole.

So how exactly does keeping the poor from voting like the conservative Mr Vadum recommends; provide opportunity for the poor to go back to work, get an education and become productive members of society.

But let's continue the class warfare, and use them to further the conservative right wing ideology of scapegoating the poor to further hatred and divisiveness in America. It's just more elitist BS.

Eliminating class distinction, class warefare is elitist?

Keep your segregation then!

I can't wait to see what "drinking fountain" the progs make me drink from

ENOUGH! The personal attacks will stop NOW. Either voluntarily or by staff action. No further verbal warnings will be given.