Identifying evil people

reply to post by Valhall


I now have a clear view of what your stating in the original OP, it just took several posts for clarification. That is all i wanted to accomplish.

Its not to much to ask for supporting evidence for your argument is it?

Now i can see that you are offering your opinion on this supposed definition of "evil person(s)" according to the democrats and not a personal belief of yours.

It seems apparent that the democrats will always appear to be anti-wealth compared to the Republicans, though to the "evil" extent you have illustrated would be a far reaching conclusion.

reply to post by MDDoxs


Thank you for sticking with it. Being successful and being prosperous in America is not an evil thing. In fact, the American dream used to be that you had an idea and you took a risk on that idea and you worked hard and maybe, just maybe, you became financially comfortable...to where you didn't have to worry about your childrens' future and you could do good deeds and not worry about the "joys of a welfare Christmas".

Now...if you do that, you're a bad person who has more than other people. You're talked about as if you should have a scarlet A around your neck. You're castigated...villified.

That's the socialist mindset that has taken over in this country.

reply to post by Valhall


According to your "logic", then, the right and Republicans consider to be "evil" the following:

Gay people
Anyone on welfare
Anyone collecting Social Security
Most active military members
All veterans
The poor
Anyone collecting disability
Most students (who don't get loans from their parents)
The very wealthy, who don't pay income tax
Many in the southern "red states" (for being poor)

Silly thread.

reply to post by Valhall


Well let this be that starting mark in this thread were i will agree with you

The democrats do seem to lump everyone of wealth together, regardless of the means to attain said wealth and with disregard to humanitarian activities.

In my opinion, the topic has been polarized as a result of the significant differences between the parties. I think the republicans are so pro business, any other political viewpoint seems completely opposite.

My argument is that the democrats only appear as defining the wealthy as "evil" when compared to the republicans, but taken out of the political context, they dont appear as anti-wealth.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Silly post.

I don't agree with ANY social issue being at the national level, so I reject both party's planks on the gay/lesbian issue and on abortion. It shouldn't be discussed. Those are state level issues. So while I agree that the Republican party's platform indicates just what you said about the homosexual community, I don't personally agree with it.

As to the other horsecrap...that's what it is. Romney did not speak of anyone as evil. He did not speak of them as being worthless. He spoke of them as being untouchable and he's right. He's admitted from the start he was wrong in how he stated what he was trying to get across. There is a good chunk of that 47% who believe that a "welfare life" is a "way of life". That's the part he was talking about. They are untouchable by anyone who wants to reform this country economically. They want a sugar daddy and they will vote to keep one. It's probably the only real work they do every 4 years is wag their butt down to the polling place.

reply to post by Valhall


If the left believed that wealthy, successful people were "evil" how do you explain left wing presidents?

By definition they are succesful. Did the right vote them in?

Thank you for giving me a good laugh this morning.

reply to post by BritofTexas



I can give you a firsthand account that the right did help vote Obama in. I voted for him.

reply to post by MDDoxs


They don't appear as anti "their" wealth. They do appear as anti-wealth and they definitely appear as pro-redistribution

Originally posted by Valhall
reply to post by BritofTexas

 

I can give you a firsthand account that the right did help vote Obama in. I voted for him.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that only the right wing voted for Obama?

Originally posted by Valhall
reply to post by MDDoxs

 

They don't appear as anti "their" wealth. They do appear as anti-wealth and they definitely appear as pro-redistribution

Originally posted by MDDoxs
I did read your post, either you did not effectively make the point you intended,

Naaaaaaaaaaah .... Valhall got her point across very well. I totally get it.
Excellent post. It reminds me of how Southpark gets things across to people. LUV IT!

reply to post by BritofTexas


Are you seriously trying to imply that's what I said? You asked a question about how Democrats get into office and if that means the right votes for them...I answered you. Yes, there are those of us out here who do not vote straight party. In fact, as being a registered Republican for 30 years, this is the first year that the differences in the party platforms are so stark (with the Democrats' being totally unacceptable) that I will, in fact, vote pure party politics....Republican.

I have voted for three democratic candidates (presidential level - more than that at the other levels) over the course of my voting years. My answer was - YES, the right helps vote in who is elected. Can you not accept that without twisting it?

reply to post by FlyersFan


It took a little discussion to formalize the points of the argument here, but we have an understanding now as above.

Sometimes cues or under lying points can be missed in a purely text based medium.

South park is a great example of demonstrating an under lying statement/opinion.

The beauty of a forum thread is we can debate the issue to clarify and defend our positions and that was done

reply to [url= by Bodhi911[/url]


"obviously"? Hmmmm.... It is the LOVE of money which is evil. You do not have over quarter of a million dollars and not LOVE money. Then again, there are plenty of poor people who are also in LOVE with money so I'd say EVERYONE is evil and money is just a symptom of that.
redistribution of money is a great temporary salve to society, but it's really these powerful peoples' misdirection of LOVE that is the problem. What if materialism, DNA, and sensuality WEREN'T so lovable after all?

reply to post by Valhall


Who is twisting?

You claim that the left believe success/wealth to be "evil".

Surely that would mean the left would not vote for a sucessful politician.

reply to post by Valhall


One day, I will be evil.

As god is my witness, one day, I will become evil

(cue dramatic music)

Nice thread.

S&F

Originally posted by BritofTexas
You claim that the left believe success/wealth to be "evil".
Surely that would mean the left would not vote for a sucessful politician.

The far left sticks it's collective heads in the sand when convenient.
Ignoring the 'evil' (and mistakes) if it has a (D) after their name.
(the far right does the same thing .. but we are talking about the left so ... )

reply to post by BritofTexas



Apparently they will vote for their own, now won't they? As long as THAT wealthy politician promises to make sure all the OTHER wealthy individuals give away their wealth so we're all a little closer to having the same thing. My God, if you are seriously trying to ignore almost EVERY effing speech Biden has given since the 2008 election campaign, and Obama's speeches prior to the 2008 election, and say they DON'T talk about the wealthy as if they should be villified (well, wait THEY villify them), you're going to look REALLY silly.

reply to post by Valhall


Stop playing his game. Obviously he's messing with you. Nobody can seriously be that bad at reading comprehension. Sometimes people find someone to mess with and just latch on. Weird.

I've never heard anyone on the "left" say having money makes you evil. I've heard my grandpa say it, but ironically he's conservative.

Troll much?