Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on WHAM 1180 AM, said this in response to Obama's "income inequality speech":
Two Americas. The Democrats are right, there are two Americas. The America that works, and the America that doesn’t. The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t. It’s not the haves and the have nots, it’s the do's 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’sabout 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 are a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibility 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 shortsighted 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.
Posted : May 27, 2014 12:11 am
Dude, step away from the Interweb,, even Canton, Ohio is nice this time of year.
Posted : May 27, 2014 11:39 am
Topic starter
Dude, step away from the Interweb,, even Canton, Ohio is nice this time of year.
Perhaps more enlightenment,,"Under a Coconut tree"?? ...Seeked "answer",, no Avail???
This from someone who couldn't figure out where "Under a Coconut Tree" was in an earlier post. Maybe Canton, Ohio is the perfect place for you!
Posted : May 28, 2014 7:55 pm
petey, just wondering what was wrong with what was posted. what is wrong with good hard work?
even my son has learned that with hard work and NOT laziness you actually get somewhere in life. took him a while but he finally learned.
Posted : May 30, 2014 12:17 pm
Spot on Rotor!!!
Posted : May 31, 2014 1:18 am
I have a graduate degree and make a fine living. There is no question that those who have more usually made better choices. But I am glad that Obama is talking about raising wages and not raising entitlements. Obama didn't invent the concept of the minimum wage, he is simply talking about adjusting upwards for inflation. When a billion dollar company like Walmart or McDonalds pays people $7.50 per hour, it is we the tax payer that gets stuck with their emergency room costs, their Medicaid, their tax refunds, housing subsidies. You can't just pay people for what they know, you have to pay them for what they do. A bachelors degree teacher in the VI with 2 kids who is divorced made $29,000 per year last year and therefore was eligible for foodstamps. And earned income credit. Are you okay with this? The moguls on Wall street who brought our economy to the edge of a depression got entitlements and no jail time. Are you okay with that? More than half of all food stamp recipients work full time? Are you okay with that? More that 2/3 of all food stamp recipients live in red states and vote Republican? Fact. Our country became great because companies like Ford standardized the work week and paid a living wage. The minimum wage is responsible for the creation of middle class. If people get paid a living wage, we decrease their entitlement eligibility and increase their tax burden. I come inequality feeds continued dependency and keeps people less likely to maintain marital relationships. I am all for cutting off people who are lazy and do not work by choice. But for god sakes, if someone is willing to do an honest day's work, they should get an honest day's pay. And that has nothing to do with race.
You make me love Obama a little bit more because he is championing work. I notice you dig at him more than. Exes wary instead of arguing the concept. If Mitt Romney had won, we would be like Kentucky/ Arkansas/ Mississippi/ Louisiana/ Alabama. Deeply red states with the highest rates of welfare and doles. 60% of all entitlements go to white people. So why are you mentioning race? Are you criticizing our half white president for promoting entitlements that by far and by large go to white people?
The face of the Democratic Party is doing just fine. I give him an A- . Points off for responding to corruption in the territory.
Posted : June 1, 2014 8:08 am
miss justice-what do you consider entitlement? not trying to start an argument but a real question.
and lets take mcdonalds who is pretty similar in what others pay starting out. what is wrong with working hard and working your way up. trying to better yourself. seriously, if you have not made a raise or promotion and you are still working there after 3 years, it is your own fault and not that of others.
Posted : June 2, 2014 12:45 pm
Topic starter
Is there anyone here who thinks trading one deserter for five top Taliban leaders was a good deal?
Way to go Barry!
Posted : June 2, 2014 8:54 pm
Is there anyone here who thinks trading one deserter for five top Taliban leaders was a good deal?
Way to go Barry!
Posted : June 3, 2014 8:32 am
miss justice-what do you consider entitlement? not trying to start an argument but a real question.
and lets take mcdonalds who is pretty similar in what others pay starting out. what is wrong with working hard and working your way up. trying to better yourself. seriously, if you have not made a raise or promotion and you are still working there after 3 years, it is your own fault and not that of others.
These are what I consider entitlements:
1. Oil subsidies
2. Wall Street bail outs
3. Inheritances tax breaks
4. Farm subsidies
5. Pork barrel projects
6. Welfare (AFDC)
7. Medicaid
8. Food stamps
9. Housing subsidies
10. Earned income credit
These are what I can sided entitlements in order of size and reverse order of merit and common sense.
Posted : June 3, 2014 11:22 am
Is there anyone here who thinks trading one deserter for five top Taliban leaders was a good deal?
Way to go Barry!
Hell yes!! Bring that sucker back, shave his beard and try him for TREASON!!!! Shoot the bastard on the capital steps with Barry watching!
Posted : June 3, 2014 11:24 am
Is there anyone here who thinks trading one deserter for five top Taliban leaders was a good deal?
Way to go Barry!
Yes, the Ronald Reagan fans who watched him Ronald Reagan trade dangerous arms for hostages. Ii am sure they agree with this trade on the principle of consistency, right?
The kid may have walked away unarmed into a Taliban lair because of mental illness. Wouldn't you like to see the results of his evaluation before you get sarcastic? Is America the kind of nation that abandons a potentially sick soldier on the battlefield or if he is captive? We are bigger than this.
With his deteriorating health, Obama had to act quickly. Are you really against the trade or is this another veiled dig? If he had let the boy die, I suspect you would be here criticizing his failure to act to save a white Christian hero albeit psychologically injured, instead of swapping five worthless jihadists. Am I wrong? Or do you condemn both Reagan and Obama for negotiating with terrorists?
Posted : June 3, 2014 11:32 am
Missjustice, why do you defend a political party? are you so politically aligned with the D's that you feel personally insulted and that you have to respond to items like this?
both parties have consistently screwed over the country, neither have done anything positive when the actual outcome is examined.
Posted : June 3, 2014 1:36 pm
I could not have said it better Roto. But the sad thing is, this is the route Americans want to go and this is why the democratic party is winning. America has been so brain washed by their college professors, which are mostly left wing nuts and who worships the European philisophy that "everyone should get a trophy" that they just can't see what is in front of them because they have been so blinded they couldn't see what was behind them. What is that old saying, those who ignore the past tend to repeat it. Take a look at the European model and see how that is working for them.
Posted : June 3, 2014 6:30 pm
I have a graduate degree and make a fine living. There is no question that those who have more usually made better choices. But I am glad that Obama is talking about raising wages and not raising entitlements. Obama didn't invent the concept of the minimum wage, he is simply talking about adjusting upwards for inflation. When a billion dollar company like Walmart or McDonalds pays people $7.50 per hour, it is we the tax payer that gets stuck with their emergency room costs, their Medicaid, their tax refunds, housing subsidies. You can't just pay people for what they know, you have to pay them for what they do. A bachelors degree teacher in the VI with 2 kids who is divorced made $29,000 per year last year and therefore was eligible for foodstamps. And earned income credit. Are you okay with this? The moguls on Wall street who brought our economy to the edge of a depression got entitlements and no jail time. Are you okay with that? More than half of all food stamp recipients work full time? Are you okay with that? More that 2/3 of all food stamp recipients live in red states and vote Republican? Fact. Our country became great because companies like Ford standardized the work week and paid a living wage. The minimum wage is responsible for the creation of middle class. If people get paid a living wage, we decrease their entitlement eligibility and increase their tax burden. I come inequality feeds continued dependency and keeps people less likely to maintain marital relationships. I am all for cutting off people who are lazy and do not work by choice. But for god sakes, if someone is willing to do an honest day's work, they should get an honest day's pay. And that has nothing to do with race.
You make me love Obama a little bit more because he is championing work. I notice you dig at him more than. Exes wary instead of arguing the concept. If Mitt Romney had won, we would be like Kentucky/ Arkansas/ Mississippi/ Louisiana/ Alabama. Deeply red states with the highest rates of welfare and doles. 60% of all entitlements go to white people. So why are you mentioning race? Are you criticizing our half white president for promoting entitlements that by far and by large go to white people?The face of the Democratic Party is doing just fine. I give him an A- . Points off for responding to corruption in the territory.
Like I said, BLIND BLIND BLIND, and it looks like the brain washing was in full speed.
I'm all for raising the minimum wage to a reasonable level that is sustainable, but when you trout out Ford, that makes me recall Detroit and the auto industry and UNIONS. Unions= communism at it's finest, I have worked at a few unionized places and hated it. No, the reaon you didn't vote for Romney, is because you were afraid he would cut the dole users, reform entitlements, and take the platform away from the democrats.
Posted : June 3, 2014 6:38 pm
Is there anyone here who thinks trading one deserter for five top Taliban leaders was a good deal?
Way to go Barry!
Yes, the Ronald Reagan fans who watched him Ronald Reagan trade dangerous arms for hostages. Ii am sure they agree with this trade on the principle of consistency, right?
The kid may have walked away unarmed into a Taliban lair because of mental illness. Wouldn't you like to see the results of his evaluation before you get sarcastic? Is America the kind of nation that abandons a potentially sick soldier on the battlefield or if he is captive? We are bigger than this.
With his deteriorating health, Obama had to act quickly. Are you really against the trade or is this another veiled dig? If he had let the boy die, I suspect you would be here criticizing his failure to act to save a white Christian hero albeit psychologically injured, instead of swapping five worthless jihadists. Am I wrong? Or do you condemn both Reagan and Obama for negotiating with terrorists?
MENTAL ILLNESS, where did that come from?? I guess when they get through checking him out, they'll find he's suffering from Lupus or Fibromylupie YES, I condemn anyone who negotiates with Terrorist.
Posted : June 3, 2014 6:43 pm
I have a graduate degree and make a fine living. There is no question that those who have more usually made better choices. But I am glad that Obama is talking about raising wages and not raising entitlements. Obama didn't invent the concept of the minimum wage, he is simply talking about adjusting upwards for inflation. When a billion dollar company like Walmart or McDonalds pays people $7.50 per hour, it is we the tax payer that gets stuck with their emergency room costs, their Medicaid, their tax refunds, housing subsidies. You More that 2/3 of all food stamp recipients live in red states and vote Republican? Fact. Our country became great because companies like Ford standardized the work week and paid a living wage. The minimum wage is responsible for the creation of middle class. If people get paid a living wage, we decrease their entitlement eligibility and increase their tax burden. Income inequality feeds continued dependency and keeps people less likely to maintain marital relationships. I am all for cutting off people who are lazy and do not work by choice. But for god sakes, if someone is willing to do an honest day's work, they should get an honest day's pay. And that has nothing to do with race.
You make me love Obama a little bit more because he is championing work. I notice you dig at him more than. Exes wary instead of arguing the concept. If Mitt Romney had won, we would be like Kentucky/ Arkansas/ Mississippi/ Louisiana/ Alabama. Deeply red states with the highest rates of welfare and doles. 60% of all entitlements go to white people. So why are you mentioning race? Are you criticizing our half white president for promoting entitlements that by far and by large go to white people?The face of the Democratic Party is doing just fine. I give him an A- . Points off for responding to corruption in the territory.
Like I said, BLIND BLIND BLIND, and it looks like the brain washing was in full speed.
I'm all for raising the minimum wage to a reasonable level that is sustainable, but when you trout out Ford, that makes me recall Detroit and the auto industry and UNIONS. Unions= communism at it's finest, I have worked at a few unionized places and hated it. No, the reaon you didn't vote for Romney, is because you were afraid he would cut the dole users, reform entitlements, and take the platform away from the democrats.
On the contrary! I want him to cut the dole. Cut the dole on GE, the oil companies, the congressman with farm subsidies, the rich who inherit without paying taxes first.
But answer this... Are you ready to cut all personal, mortgage interest, and business deductions?
Posted : June 4, 2014 11:30 am
Topic starter
When is a lie not a lie? When it is said by a liberal. Check out how the liberal media tries to avoid calling Obama a liar.
Rob Ford didn’t misspeak when he claimed not to be on crack, despite being on crack. Barack Obama didn’t misspeak when he promised to let you keep your health plan, when he had no intention of letting you do any such thing. And the New York Times didn’t misspeak when it tried to pass that lie off as a mere slip of the tongue.
The New York Times, which never hesitated to call George W. Bush a liar, switched up its euphemisms and began calling Obama’s lie an “incorrect promise”. NBC News called it a “promise they couldn’t keep.” The Associated Press called it an “inflated promise.”
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/lying-liberal-liars/
Why do liberals get so upset with Fox News because of their right biased opinion shows but fail to show any indignation at the left biased opinion shows on MSNBC. MSNBC has a higher ratio of garbage to news than Fox. Is it possible that bias is only objectionable when it doesn't match your own bias?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/03/18/pew-study-finds-msnbc-the-most-opinionated-cable-news-channel-by-far/
I think they get upset with Fox because it is the only dissenting voice among the networks. It presents a view that is not leftist and must be crushed. I for one think that it is necessary to have two sides to a debate and since Fox News is the most popular news network in the country others must agree.
Posted : June 11, 2014 6:35 pm
Topic starter
Can Hillary Clinton be trusted to tell the truth about Benghazi? I think not.
Back in 2008 when Obama and Clinton were locked in a fight for the Democratic nomination for president they were fighting over who had the most foreign policy experience. Neither had any experience but that didn't stop them.
Clinton claimed that she got her foreign policy experience from her days as first lady. Do you recall her story of coming under fire in Bosnia?
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html
The comedian Sinbad remembers it differently, but of course he was an Obama supporter.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2008/03/sinbad_unloads_on_hillary_clin.html
Then all of a sudden Obama wins the nomination and WHAT? He appoints Clinton, who had zero foreign policy experience to the post of Secretary of State. Is this a joke?
Do politicians lie? You betcha! Both left and right are out for power, not to serve the people. Time for a real change, not Obama's kind of change.
Posted : June 11, 2014 7:25 pm
All politicians lie. This guy actually testified with a strait face:
(Reuters) - Republican leaders in Florida's Legislature did not design their congressional redistricting plan to tilt the political playing field in their party's favor, a legislative aide testified on Wednesday at a trial that could force redrawing of the state's congressional boundaries.
Political redistricting trial in Florida awaits judge's ruling
...but fail to show any indignation at the left biased opinion shows on MSNBC.
I don't watch MSNBC or FOX both are just as bad. I get my news from Comedy Central and read online a lot.
Posted : June 11, 2014 10:06 pm
Topic starter
I don't watch MSNBC or FOX both are just as bad. I get my news from Comedy Central and read online a lot.
And yet you constantly degrade anyone who watches Fox and never mention MSNBC.
Is your bias showing?
BTW. I don't watch any news channels on TV except on very rare occasions. When I do watch Fox news, I never watch the opinion shows only the newsroom reporting. O'Reilly and Hannity are morons. I get my news from the Internet. foxnews.com, cnn.com, npr.org, news.bbc.co.uk, etc.
Posted : June 11, 2014 10:14 pm
And yet you constantly degrade anyone who watches Fox and never mention MSNBC.
Is your bias showing?
Yes I hope so, it is because of Fox backing the fairly nuts modern Republican party.
Posted : June 12, 2014 12:52 am
Topic starter
And yet you constantly degrade anyone who watches Fox and never mention MSNBC.
Is your bias showing?
Yes I hope so, it is because of Fox backing the fairly nuts modern Republican party.
As opposed to the fairly nuts modern Democratic party?
"We will have to pass the bill to find out what's in it?" Can't we find out before we pass it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hV-05TLiiLU
Posted : June 12, 2014 1:09 am
Topic starter
Our president continues to rant about more gun control while ignoring other more pressing causes of death.
Gun deaths account for just over 30,000 deaths a year. Tobacco accounts for 480,000 deaths a year. Yet our president (a smoker) never complains about tobacco deaths. More people die from swimming pool related deaths than die from gun related deaths. Are swimming pools really necessary?
Cigarette smoking causes about one of every five deaths in the United States each year.Cigarette smoking is estimated to cause the following:
•More than 480,000 deaths annually (including deaths from secondhand smoke)
•278,544 deaths annually among men (including deaths from secondhand smoke)
•201,773 deaths annually among women (including deaths from secondhand smoke)
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/
But before you say that smoking only hurts the smoker. The CDC estimates that 34,000 people annually die as a result of secondhand smoke. This exceeds the number of deaths due to firearms. Where is the liberal outrage?
http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/health_effects/
What’s more dangerous: a swimming pool or a gun? When it comes to children, there is no comparison: a swimming pool is 100 times more deadly.
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2001/07/27/levittpoolsvsguns/
Sounds hypocritical to me!
Posted : June 12, 2014 1:26 am
Topic starter
Illegal immigrants or undocumented immigrants? Aren't they the same thing? If someone sneaks across our borders without going through immigration and customs aren't they breaking our laws. Why do they deserve special treatment. Is it because they usually become good little democrats?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/01/30/170677880/in-immigration-debate-undocumented-vs-illegal-is-more-than-just-semantics
Why should immigrants be allowed to sneak across the border bypassing all of the background checks and queues? Why do they deserve amnesty? Isn't this sending a bad message?
"Calderon's government is filing a lawsuit against Arizona over their new immigration enforcement law. Calderon himself during a visit to Washington, DC scolded the state of Arizona and its citizens and received a standing ovation from Democrat members of Congress."
"However, Calderon and his government appear to be unwilling to acknowledge their own hypocrisy in dealing with illegal immigrants who enter Mexico from Central American countries. Considered felons by the Mexican government, these immigrants fear detention, rape and robbery. Police and soldiers hunt them down at railroads, bus stations and fleabag hotels. Sometimes they are deported; more often officers beat them and simply take their money and possessions."
"They allow Calderon and his flunkies to denigrate and scold Americans who call for tougher border security and a sane immigration policy while the blood of Central Americans who've entered or attempted to enter Mexico across its southern border stains their own hands," says former military intelligence officer, and NYPD detective, Sid Franes.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6770/pub_detail.asp
Posted : June 12, 2014 1:42 am
Page 1 / 5
Next
