jump to last post 1-18 of 18 discussions (66 posts)

Republicans Do Not Care About the Poor

  1. profile image0
    Sooner28posted 5 years ago

    Republicans in the Senate, along with four Democrats, voted against ending a filibuster on a bill that would end oil subsidies.  The Republican party votes for tax breaks for the rich, denies people the RIGHT to health care, and fights to reduce environmental protections.  These are all against the interests of the common person.  Tax cuts for big oil, but we have to cut Pell Grants for college education!

    Due to their tax cuts for the rich and thirst for war and oil overseas, they then claim we have to cut programs like Social Security and Medicare.  Forget the poor, feed the fat cats.  The Republicans just fail to mention it was their policies of reckless spending that put us in this massive hole in the first place.  If only George Orwell were alive today...

    1. Perspycacious profile image82
      Perspycaciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Demonstrate and malign all you want but categorizing one whole group with a broad brush is like saying that every Chinese restaurant serves only fatty foods.  Christians of either party care about the poor, and Mitt Romney does, too, though some would take a partial sound bite and paint him with a broad brush, too.  Say what you like about your guy or gal, without maligning any other patriotic Americans.  With freedom of speech also comes responsiblity.

      1. profile image0
        Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Cutting Medicare and Medicaid, privatizing education, privatizing Social Security, cutting Pell Grants, reducing environmental protections...what policies does the GOP support that help the poor?

        1. Perspycacious profile image82
          Perspycaciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          See what not responsibly paying down the National Debt (now approaching $15.6 trillion) will do to what we are accustomed to think is normal.  Times have come to the "settle up" time, and it may be some time before "Happy Days are here again." It too is called "responsibility" and the old carefree days of buying votes with "gimmes" had to start slowing down sometime.  President O's budget takes advantage of his request for a debt ceiling of $21 trillion, and if some say $15.6 trillion is hard to swallow, we will choke to death on $21 trillion...all of us.

          1. profile image0
            Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

            You didn't answer the question, but it was the recession, Bush tax cuts, and the wars that created the hole in the first place.

            1. Perspycacious profile image82
              Perspycaciousposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Look some facts in the face.  The President O. Budget is not the answer:
              http://www.usdebtclock.org/

              1. profile image0
                Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

                I completely agree that Obama's budget is not the answer.  Taxes are not significantly raised on the rich, and the military budget is still bloated.

                I think we can all agree that we want an efficient, fair government that provides the highest level of service possible.  Right now, we are not getting that.

      2. lifelovemystery profile image93
        lifelovemysteryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        It was Republicans that voted for Civil Rights, not the Democrats, but you won't hear any of that in this thread.
        The Democrats claim to want to tax the rich, but all Democrats in Congress are rich, so you won't see any movement on that. Cheers.

        1. lovemychris profile image55
          lovemychrisposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Errrr, they have proposed it. GOP won't have it. In fact, Ryan said NO revenue increases, only tax cuts. And RMoney will go along with him, or else.

          Obama wants to end the Bush cuts. Dems want to end the Bush tax cuts. Ryan and RMoney want to make them permanent.--and cut them MORE for the top %'ers.

          Pretty clear, isn't it?

          1. JSChams profile image60
            JSChamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            I'm just curious Chris how much actual effect you believe repealing those tax rates, they aren't cuts and Obama extended them you know, would have?

            There was a study done whereby all the wealth was actually removed from the top billionaires in this country and applied to the deficit. It still came up 300 billion short.

            All that about the "tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans" is another of the long list of talking points on the social justice wish list of the 20% who want to rule.

        2. profile image0
          Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Historical comparisons don't help the situation.  Abraham Lincoln was a Republican and freed the slaves, but many of the Republican party now entertains birtherism. 

          As to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it didn't break down along party lines.  It broke down based on regional lines, with the vast  majority of the North (Democrat or Republican) supporting it, and the bigoted South (again regardless of party) opposing it.  This is when the realignment of the South  occurred, and the Dixiecrats  became Republicans.  Not a good example for your side at all.

    2. Onusonus profile image80
      Onusonusposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Yes it's all about how much we hate the poor and has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the government is spending money that they don't have in record breaking numbers.

      http://www.americanclarion.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Federal_Spending_Pie-300x196.jpg
      See the big black hole? That's unconstitutional entitlement spending, and it is the reason that for every fifty two cents they tax, they borrow forty seven cents from other countries, and rob our children, our grandchildren, and our great grandchildren of their future.

      http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/524515_337623999629298_114364638621903_885672_1527685_n.jpg

  2. lovemychris profile image55
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    "It is Murdoch’s job to deliver a war on Iran, deliver 100,000 American dead, to make sure congress is blackmailed, stays in line, to keep the American people divided, poor as possible, uninsured and lied to.

    His tools?

    He is partnered with a foreign intelligence agency and the Republican Party, also partnered with a foreign intelligence agency.

    Remember Newt Gingrich, the candidate nobody wanted.  He got $75 million dollars from a Vegas casino boss, we are being kind in our reference here, as his primary campaign funding."  --Duff


    Newt also met with Mittens on saturday..who knows what they are cooking up. According to a new book, Ryan laid down the law to Bohener on the debt ceiling...NO revenue increases...ONLY cuts.

    Truly truly the enemy of the United States of America. Working with foreign interests not our own. IMO IMO

  3. lovemychris profile image55
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    "110 deaths is not alarming to me"--Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) re immigration detainees who have died while awaiting deportation.

    1. profile image0
      Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      They have no problem taking the lives of innocent civilians overseas, or treating illegal immigrants harshly.  Yet, the Republican party believes it is wrong to destroy a fertilized egg.  The age of stupidity is upon us.

      1. JSChams profile image60
        JSChamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        So then.....why do you want to destroy a fertilized egg?

        1. profile image0
          Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          If a couple doesn't want to have a child, there should be no law against it.

          1. JSChams profile image60
            JSChamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            There are other ways of insuring you don't have to make that kind of decision.
            Infanticide as birth control is still murder.

            1. profile image0
              Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

              So a fertilized egg is a human being?

  4. Paul Wingert profile image78
    Paul Wingertposted 5 years ago

    Not only do Republicans don't care about anything but themselves, it's obvious they don't care about their image or self esteem. Look who they have as nominations! Don’t forget Palin and other idiots that spread their anti- women, immigration, healthcare, environmental, and just plain BS agenda.

  5. profile image0
    Sooner28posted 5 years ago

    I don't understand how lower-income Republicans still vote for the party.  It's really strange.  The Democrats aren't even that liberal.  Environmental regulations so we have clean air and water, some sort of universal health care plan (Nixon wanted an employer mandate, and the 90's Republicans wanted an individual mandate), and strong infrastructure.  Even Eisenhower warned of the military-industrial complex.  I could not imagine ANY presidential candidate, Republican or Democrat, saying such a thing now.

  6. lovemychris profile image55
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Well, I know this is beating a dead horse, but it's very cult-like behavior. To answer something you don't believe in with claims of "Not born here", "Socializing America", "he's Muslim, even though he says he Christian"...

    It's deranged thinking IMO. It comes from a place of anger, not rationality. And fear, I think.

    Now, the RW politicians?? They know EXACTLY what they are doing. Starving the beast.

    They want corporate control. And I mean control. Of Everything.

    "Money money money money....MONEY!"

    Ryan's budget passed. Check it out! What's it about???

  7. lovemychris profile image55
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    Listening to talk radio....reminding me about RMoney when he was gvr.

    His way of raising money? User fees! So--like taking the subway, buying a license, paying a fine, insepcting your car, etc etc.
    No taxes, but FEES.

    Who does it hut? Poor people. Running gvt on the backs of the poor. ALL the bennies rise to the top.

    Just like the banks. User fees pay the bills.

    oh, what?

    Failed to pass transportation bill?? Failed to pass an end to oil subsidies?? But passed Ryan's budget.

    There you have it. This is the gvt they wanted. Not me.

  8. adjkp25 profile image92
    adjkp25posted 5 years ago

    When I saw that the House voted in favor of Rand Paul’s spending bill (I like to think of it as a reverse Robin Hood bill) I was floored.  If you make less than 200k a year and are planning on voting Republican make sure you really understand what views you are electing to support.

    1. rebekahELLE profile image89
      rebekahELLEposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I have quit trying to figure out any logic behind the GOP's platform. It has radically changed from what it once was.

    2. profile image0
      Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Chris Wallace actually nailed Paul Ryan because he wouldn't provide specific deductions to eliminate.    It was amazing to see Fox News temporarily acting like a real news organization.

      1. Paul Wingert profile image78
        Paul Wingertposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Fox News - aka The Republican Fundraising Network.

  9. Rambler1 profile image59
    Rambler1posted 5 years ago

    Well had they got rid of the tax breaks for the oil companies then the price of gas would be 8 dollars. Also, the DEMOCRATS have a majority in the SENATE and they voted it down. Had nothing to do with the republicans....If people want healthcare then they need to go get a skill, then work, and buy insurance. A person doesn't have to have insurance. Most rich people don't carry insurance, because for the most part it is a waste of money.

    1. profile image0
      Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      They couldn't break the filibuster.  They don't have 60 votes anymore.  You could point out that the Democrats didn't end the subsidies when they did have the filibuster proof majority, and you would have more of a case.  I would agree that they should have done it when they had the chance.

  10. JSChams profile image60
    JSChamsposted 5 years ago

    If you are ever wondering what the Democrat talking points of the day are, just tune ointo one of these hubs or forums.
    Yes, lower income Republicans do vote for Conservatism. You know why? Because it's right and they are right.
    You rag on the Republicans but that measure would not have failed if not for Democrats joinging in. i think a few might be starting to wake up.

    1. profile image0
      Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Why are they right?

      1. JSChams profile image60
        JSChamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        Because they know the difference between living in the freedom of United states under the Constitution versus Marxist tyranny. Especially those a little older like me who have seen it in action.

        1. lifelovemystery profile image93
          lifelovemysteryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          You cannot argue with people that only download the daily talking points from the White House. These are the same people that call GWB a war criminal for GITMO. They refuse to acknowledge that Obama has extended GITMO and will not shut it down. They probably don't know about this little clip where Obama is pushing for 'Prolonged Detention' of people that MIGHT commit a crime.

          Instead of detaining them, he uses drones to kill them. Because they MIGHT BE DANGEROUS.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9Z2ac34RDI

          1. profile image0
            Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Obama is a war criminal if he has allowed torture to continue.

        2. profile image0
          Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Give me some examples of Marxist tyranny.

  11. Eric Newland profile image60
    Eric Newlandposted 5 years ago

    I'm ticked off that the RSC budget goes out of its way to make sure defense is immune to ANY cuts of ANY kind.

    Other than that, though, a balanced budget can only help everyone in the long run. I'm sick of us borrowing from our children to pay ourselves. Speaking of greed.

    1. profile image0
      Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

      I completely agree that the massive borrowing needs to stop.  Imperial wars for oil, giant tax cuts for Bill Gates and Warren Buffet, and corporate subsidies for oil and gas all need to be eliminated.

  12. JSChams profile image60
    JSChamsposted 5 years ago

    Oh no ! Can't be!!!!!  Don't you know George Bush us doing all this? Right now? For some insane reason those evil Conservatives think we should have a budget and it should be balanced!!!!!  Is that not insane and evil and above all racist???

    1. Eric Newland profile image60
      Eric Newlandposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      It's not like people spending money they don't have has ever hurt anyone! Like, say, causing the second largest economic downturn in American history! If it worked for homebuyers why wouldn't it work for the government?

  13. lovemychris profile image55
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    They don't want a balanced budget, they want to kill gvt.

    They don't CARE about balancing!! Otherwise, they would make it balanced, DUH.

    Their policies favor the very rich. AND they take from everyone else to do so. That is hardly balanced, it is skewered to the rich.

    Wasteful, and corrosive to a decent society.

    Look at em! Obama and the generals want to cut waste from defense, and they say no way.

    But they will cut from programs that help the poor and middle class with no problem.

    Bunch of wasteful, heartless clowns.

    1. Eric Newland profile image60
      Eric Newlandposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      The Republican Study Committee proposes to create a budget surplus within five years. I don't approve of every measure they're proposing to pull it off, but at least they're trying.

      Obama, meanwhile, is trying to raise the debt ceiling again. Because apparently China isn't getting rich enough off all the interest we're already paying them. If that isn't an overt way of saying balancing the budget is the last thing on his mind I don't know what is.

      And, mathematically, as has already been stated several times, even the rich aren't rich enough to close the deficit. Raise all the new taxes all you want; at this point I'm fed up, I won't stop you. But you'll only reduce the size of the cuts that need to be made by a few percent.

      1. lovemychris profile image55
        lovemychrisposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        They're trying to do what?

        If they stopped the idiotic give-aways to the Uber Rich, we'd have more money to work with for America!

        We are borrowing from China to give Adler more of tax cut.

        There is no shortage of anything.
        We just have to pry it from the hoarders, who apparently haven't made it out of CaveMan mentality!

        HowIseeit.

        1. Repairguy47 profile image59
          Repairguy47posted 5 years agoin reply to this

          You mean letting them keep what they earned? Thats not a give away.

          1. lovemychris profile image55
            lovemychrisposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            Yeah it is. They earned it here, in America. They owe HER!

            1. Repairguy47 profile image59
              Repairguy47posted 5 years agoin reply to this

              They owe her? Why do they owe her?

              1. lovemychris profile image55
                lovemychrisposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                They use her roads, live on her land, and make money off her citizens.

                Without America...where would they be?

                If they can't give back in proportion to what they take....what's that make them?

                Unfair, Unbalanced!

                1. Eric Newland profile image60
                  Eric Newlandposted 5 years agoin reply to this

                  They don't "take" anything. People voluntarily pay them and/or the companies they have a stake in for goods or services.

                  And they already give back WAY more in proportion to what they earn. The top 25% of earners make 40% of the money and pay 70% of the taxes. The evil evil top 1% earn 15% of the money and pay almost a third of the taxes all by themselves. I'd say they have their road use pretty much paid for by January 15th.

                  I think our goal should be to cut as much of our out-of-control spending as we can and then, after we get what's really killing America out of the way, we can talk about raising taxes to make up any difference that remains.

                  20 cents of every dollar is already national debt interest. Or, if you'd like to invert that, that means everything the government does with federal tax money costs 25% more than it should.

                  How much more will our children's taxes be devalued? 30 cents off every dollar? Fifty cents?

                  If we can keep from growing our debt, or even pay it down some, then the interest we pay on it will either shrink or become less significant due to inflation. Know what that means? More money for government services. And we'll be able to pay for them without hurting ourselves down the road.

                  Why would anyone not want that?

  14. lovemychris profile image55
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    "GOP wants u to have endless babies, with no jobs, no public assistance, no healthcare, no public school, no quality childcare. Yeah, ok."

    Just what do they want these babies for?

    1. lifelovemystery profile image93
      lifelovemysteryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Nothing in your comment makes sense and cannot be substantiated. I think you just like to see yourself in print.

      1. lovemychris profile image55
        lovemychrisposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        This was a comment from a fellow American. So, it's not myself.

        And I am asking a serious question.

        What do you plan on doing with all those unwanted babies?

        1. lifelovemystery profile image93
          lifelovemysteryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Isn't Obama doing enough to promote abortions?

          Your responses are so ridiculous that I typically laugh when I read them. I think you work for the White House. By the way, your guy is in big trouble right now.

          Perhaps you should focus your energies on his successes. My bad. He can only run on a record of failure. Cheers.

      2. JSChams profile image60
        JSChamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        What's even more hilarious is that they who are complaining are the ones who don't want the babies.
        It's real simple Chris if you don't want one don't have one but don't kill it when it's conceived because then it's too late. you will be a murderer.
        Not sure if you are a parent but I hope the child/children finds a good source of wisdom cause you ain't it.

  15. lovemychris profile image55
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    "Paul Ryan voted for the Bush tax cuts, Iraq war, Medicare Part D & TARP but is a debt expert to Mitt Romney"

    hello?

  16. lovemychris profile image55
    lovemychrisposted 5 years ago

    "I think our goal should be to cut as much of our out-of-control spending as we can and then, after we get what's really killing America out of the way, we can talk about raising taxes to make up any difference that remains."

    Call your R people. They refuse to cut defense spending, and refuse to end the oil and gas subsidies. And continue to want more tax cuts for billionaires, which takes money out of America's pool. All to sit in Swiss banks avoiding US taxes.

    Rich people pay on average a 14% tax....and they have 99% of the wealth.

    America's founders were escaping Feudalism, not wanting to recreate it 1000 fold.

    myviewoftheworld

    1. Eric Newland profile image60
      Eric Newlandposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Here are some numbers that aren't made up.

      http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html#table1

      The 1% own 16% of the wealth, pay an average tax rate of 24%, and cover a full 1/3rd of all federal income taxes all by themselves.

      The top 25%, taken altogether, do pay 14% on average, and have 65% of the wealth. But if you have a problem with that you need to take it up with people who make $66,000 a year.

      1. lovemychris profile image55
        lovemychrisposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        $66,000 is considered top 25%??

        Then what the holy h is Adelson, who makes 21.5 billion?

        Amd Romney at 21 mil? (that we know of)

        And if this is such a nothing issue, explain the wealth gap being bigger than any time since the great depression.

        You don't think the R policies had anything to do with it?

        1. lifelovemystery profile image93
          lifelovemysteryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          Obama pulled in more than $6 million last year. Where does that put him, at the bottom of the rich pile?

          1. JSChams profile image60
            JSChamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

            No you miss the point. Democrats aren't ever rich or wealthy. They are just middle class. My own wife believed the Kennedys were just this little middle class family from Mass. I had to educate her on them.

            The top seven wealthiest in Congress are Democrats. It was eight before Teddy passed. But they aren't 1%!!!!! Oh no! Neither is Micheal Moore, Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann........this list is long but they are lying hypocrites.

            1. lifelovemystery profile image93
              lifelovemysteryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Yes. Lying hypocrites with a brain-washed and gullible constituency. They believe everything posted by MSM and are incapable of thinking for themselves. Sad.

            2. profile image0
              Sooner28posted 5 years agoin reply to this

              Michael Moore, Bill Maher, and Keith Olbermann all support politicians that will raise taxes on them.  Big difference compared to an oil company executive who votes conservative to line his pockets more.

  17. habee profile image96
    habeeposted 5 years ago

    If oil subsidies were removed, wouldn't the price of gas be even higher for consumers? Didn't Obama vote for oil subsidies in 2005, along with a tax increase they were allowed to spread out paying over 11 years?

    1. lovemychris profile image55
      lovemychrisposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Did he? I don't know. All I know is what he wants to do now.

      And who is stopping him.

    2. lifelovemystery profile image93
      lifelovemysteryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

      Obama has been 'clamoring' to end the oil subsidies since 2009. HOWEVER, these are his rich friends and he has NO INTENTION of punishing them for making money. He also has no intention of paying more taxes (per his claim to tax the rich even more) because he is one of them.

      lovemychris - you really have to step back and look at the big picture. It will surprise you.

      1. JSChams profile image60
        JSChamsposted 5 years agoin reply to this

        I just think Chris needs to clean out his bong. I don't think it's been rinsed since Nixon.

        1. lifelovemystery profile image93
          lifelovemysteryposted 5 years agoin reply to this

          I think Chris is a WH advisor masquerading as a victim.

  18. steveamy profile image60
    steveamyposted 5 years ago

    true ...and this is not a revelation

 
working