Right-wing commentator: Poor people voting is ‘un-American’

Originally posted by beezzer
The welfare state has been around for HOW many generations? Yeah, it's done alot of good.

Yeah a lot of good it's done right, we still have famine in the United States up to biblical proportions.
Do you seriously believe everything you write Beezzer?

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Janky Red

 

I might have missed what you were referring to, but what did you mean by it's not the real truth?

edit on 5-9-2011 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)

the truth is conservatives are not retarded as they act, when it come to understanding or
recognizing the realities of poverty. They act that way because their anti human side
will have to shine explaining why hunger and suffering is the way of the freedom they
promote. Exactly why they dodge certain posts...

Originally posted by cetaphobic
reply to post by The Old American

 

Actually
The poor being who they are (poor) generally means they are in need of the collective American people's money more than you are in need of the few dollars of your taxes that will go to them.

Actually
I don't really care what they think they need of mine. You are conversing with a person that would destroy entire nations of people if it meant that my wife and son would have a better life. And my income level is such that I need every penny for myself, my wife, and my son. If there is anything left over, and there is nothing I absolutely have to do with it...then it goes into savings for my son. He is more important to me than a million poor people.

/TOA

Are there poor people who would vote for benefits for themselves? Absolutely, but take a look at the rich and how they vote. They vote to take money away from the middle class and poor so they can become richer. Look at all these politicians voting for pay raises. There are corrupt people in every socioeconomic group.

There are a lot of intelligent poor out there who won't vote for those things in a time like this, when they know the country is broke. There are a lot of poor people who do not take hand outs. There are a lot of poor people who are on welfare only because its there and they need it, but would rather vote on something that would bring back jobs than increase welfare, because they would rather work.

Lets just stereotype all the poor people why don't we.

reply to post by Procession101


You assume there is an informed intelligence where none exists. Just another puppet belching out the propaganda fed to it like a good sheeple... Just another unwitting soldier for the well disguised fascist state...

"I pledge allegience to the flag of the Corporate States of America, and to the Fascist State for which it stands..."

Originally posted by The Old American



Actually
I don't really care what they think they need of mine. You are conversing with a person that would destroy entire nations of people if it meant that my wife and son would have a better life. And my income level is such that I need every penny for myself, my wife, and my son. If there is anything left over, and there is nothing I absolutely have to do with it...then it goes into savings for my son. He is more important to me than a million poor people.

/TOA

And I hope you or your family never have to experience poverty; but if you do, there are progressives like myself that are willing to help, your boy, your wife and you. No questions asked.....no provisions....no restrictions....

I still take the religion of my childhood to heart.

When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God." Leviticus 23:22

Deuteronomy 15:7, 11
If there is a poor man among your brothers in any of the towns of the land that the LORD your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward your poor brother. There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land.

reply to post by The Old American


And that makes you self centered, and a bad person. But it's okay. I'll gladly pay my taxes in case your family should ever become poor.

Kinda have to agree here. If they dont have a job and are not contributing to society in any way (im not talking about elders on social security or those that are genuinely disabled I mean those who work so hard trying to find a way out of work) then they should have no right to say what gos on with this country. The reason we have the president that we have now is because so many ignorant uneducated people looking for a handout came out and voted for him based on his race. Sad but true. so yea we can blame those who cast uneducated votes for the mess we are in today. you should at least have to prove that you know a thing or two about what you are voting for before you vote.

reply to post by Elsek


Seeing as the majority of the poor in this country are black- that is exactly what the result would be. White racists have never wanted the blacks to vote.
And once they are able to limit it to 'rich people'.. they will start limiting that down even farther by race and sex.

The Loons are running the Asylum.

reply to post by JROCK2527


For someone who is 'denying ignorance' you sure are in denial.

The wealthy want to own the political apparatus of the Country. And you would hand it to them? You like the idea of a bit of good old fashioned Feudalism? Feudalism made our forefathers LEAVE the old world for the new. Are you aware of that?

What you are proposing is what leads to countries having:

a. a King
b. a Dictator (same thing)

So anyone who agrees with this nonsense needs to move to a country ruled by either. You would be happy there.

A former GOP Operative (Mike Lofgren) who 'left the cult' wrote a great article about the GOP.

I saw this post the same day I read the article and Matthew Vadum of the Capital Research Center absolutely proves beyond a shadow of a doubt every single thing that Mike Lofgren wrote about the GOP- snippets of which are below:

1. The GOP cares solely and exclusively about its rich contributors. The party has built a whole catechism on the protection and further enrichment of America's plutocracy. Their caterwauling about deficit and debt is so much eyewash to con the public.

And what are the Rich most interested in? Keeping it 'in the family'. That 'outsiders' should enter the hallowed realms of wealth, either by building business, gaining education, developing technology is, to the wealthy, the greatest sin.

Wealthy people don't want anyone from the 'outside' rising to their level. They don't want competition to their businesses or their heirs. They don't want real competition for the worlds money and power. So to keep people poor, uneducated and powerless is the goal. And Voting is Power.

And Lofgren says:

Ever since Republicans captured the majority in a number of state legislatures last November, they have systematically attempted to make it more difficult to vote: by onerous voter ID requirements (in Wisconsin, Republicans have legislated photo IDs while simultaneously shutting Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) offices in Democratic constituencies while at the same time lengthening the hours of operation of DMV offices in GOP constituencies); by narrowing registration periods; and by residency requirements that may disenfranchise university students.

This legislative assault is moving in a diametrically opposed direction to 200 years of American history, when the arrow of progress pointed toward more political participation by more citizens. Republicans are among the most shrill in self-righteously lecturing other countries about the wonders of democracy; exporting democracy (albeit at the barrel of a gun) to the Middle East was a signature policy of the Bush administration. But domestically, they don't want those people voting.

It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe. This trend has several implications, none of them pleasant.

Link to Lofgren article:
www.truth-out.org...

reply to post by Janky Red

Originally posted by beezzer
What did he say that wasn't true?
The poor will vote for more entitlements, it's in their own best interests. What needs to be done is to get them NOT to be poor anymore.

But what progressive would want to lose their base?

The poor vote against the people who give half a crap about them.

The GOP's answer to everything is

TAX cuts for the WEALTHY

The GOP wants tax cuts for everyone, not this class warfare crap that Obama pushes.

DEREGULATION, just enough so the mega business's can charge 56% when you miss a credit card payment

You mean that's what The Senator from MBNA (now your VP) brought to you, don't you?

TORT REFORM so corporations can break up class action by out financing and crushing
any individual legal challenges.

You're the type that awards $2 million to a jerk that spills coffee on her lap, aren't you?

The GOP wants to defund grants systems which help people get educated so they can hopefully leave
the trap of poverty.

Please give links to allegations.

The GOP wants to end unemployment benefits, which will further impoverish many more people, which
will further destroy the economy.

No they don't. They just realize we can't afford to carry you for 3 or more years when you get laid off. And they don't think that union members that go on strike should be entitled to unemployment checks.

The GOP wants to end Medicare because healthcare is akin to a car or watch, XRAYS are exotic,
who needs health anyways?

I think you're confusing them with Obama who says "Give grandma a pill" instead of proper treatment.

reply to post by whaaa

And I hope you or your family never have to experience poverty; but if you do, there are progressives like myself that are willing to help, your boy, your wife and you. No questions asked.....no provisions....no restrictions....

I still take the religion of my childhood to heart.

I don't remember taking a pledge to starve poor people when I decided I was a conservative. The difference is, I give because I choose to, and I do it without saying "Hey World, Look at Me!"

Progressives have no monopoly on generosity and charity.

The GOP wants tax cuts for everyone

I guess you missed the news last week- the Republicans are against more payroll tax cuts because it benefits working people more than the rich.

Oh, and wanting to end capital gains and inheritance taxes benefits the rich almost exclusively.

But nice try.

Originally posted by Justoneman
If you are deemed healthy, and a working age person who lives off of the Government dole without returning something to society in some form of a recognizable job or work, you should not vote. We realize that you would be insane to vote against the free money.

Since someone would be insane to vote against free money, are those who vote along with the tea party/right-wing types thus admitting to be insane? I mean, you all are voting against free money, right?

Since you are thus admitting to being insane, should you have the right to vote? Why should anyone who is insane be allowed to make decisions for the rest of us?

Allowing insane people to vote is un-American.

reply to post by CB328

The GOP wants tax cuts for everyone

I guess you missed the news last week- the Republicans are against more payroll tax cuts because it benefits working people more than the rich.

Links or it didn't happen.

Oh, and wanting to end capital gains and inheritance taxes benefits the rich almost exclusively.

But nice try.

I'd say the middle class benefits as much, even the poor in some cases. And I cannot believe anyone would be in favor of death taxes.

ETA: I don't expect an answer from you. Answers don't come from those who have been a member for less than 24 hours....hmmmm..

Originally posted by mishigas

Progressives have no monopoly on generosity and charity.

You can say that with some support:

Sixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives.

If many conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, Brooks, a registered independent, is, as a reviewer of his book said, a social scientist who has been mugged by data.

They include these findings: -- Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families, conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberal-headed household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227).

-- Conservatives also donate more time and give more blood.

-- Residents of the states that voted for John Kerry in 2004 gave smaller percentages of their incomes to charity than did residents of states that voted for George Bush.

-- Bush carried 24 of the 25 states where charitable giving was above average.

-- In the 10 reddest states, in which Bush got more than 60 percent majorities, the average percentage of personal income donated to charity was 3.5. Residents of the bluest states, which gave Bush less than 40 percent, donated just 1.9 percent.

-- People who reject the idea that "government has a responsibility to reduce income inequality" give an average of four times more than people who accept that proposition.

Link to Full article


I'm not preaching, just showing that Conservatives aren't the bastards that the Left almost ALWAYS portrays them as.
Conservatives like to give of their time and money, Progressives like to give of OTHER PEOPLE'S time and money.

reply to post by whaaa


I think there are 2 main points missed in your review of this article.
1. That the main idea of getting out and registering the poor, who as a large whole don't vote in the first place, is a way to keep the Democrats/Socialist in power, as they ride the bandwagon of "for the little guy".
2. When people find out that they can vote themselves money, we have a problem, thus point 1 is back at the forefront.

reply to post by macman

2. When people find out that they can vote themselves money, we have a problem, thus point 1 is back at the forefront.

I'm here to learn

so, when the poor (i.e., dumb) peoples accidentally figures out that they can votes themselves more money - they always will 'cause they are greedy and slow and they don't always know the bestest thing to do for everybody? Or else - when the communists tell them to they will - cause some people don't know any better than to do what bad people say?

but when the weller-to-do has a chance to votes themselves less taxes - that's not the same - that is betterer for the country only and we should all be proud of them?

'cause that's not like voting themselves more money - that money they don't pay automatically turns into more money for everyone?

I heared about that runny money idear before - it always works out real good for everyone - we should definitely do that one

Should ensure fair