Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
happyhippy
Feb 21, 2005

Playing games, watching movies, owning goons. 'sup
Pillbug

moths posted:

Weren't there a half dozen Benghazis under Bush?

But he didn't have her dick sucked in the oval office.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Sir Tonk
Apr 18, 2006
Young Orc

Radish posted:

There was another big attack that happened under Bush on September 11, but for some reason the Democrats make as big a deal about it. I guess it just wasn't as important as BENGHAZI.

Dr. Faustus
Feb 18, 2001

Grimey Drawer
What difference, at this point, does it make?

Did I get this here, or off Twitter? I'm not sure how accurate it is; but I'm hanging onto it anyway:

FlamingLiberal
Jan 18, 2009

Would you like to play a game?



The Ape of Naples posted:

No one seems to bring up the 1983 Beruit bombing under Reagan either. Yes, it was 30 years ago but that was much worse by contrast.
I certainly like to. Almost 250 soldiers died and St. Reagan did nothing (except 'cut and run', as Republicans like to say).

Darkman Fanpage
Jul 4, 2012

Dr. Faustus posted:

What difference, at this point, does it make?

Did I get this here, or off Twitter? I'm not sure how accurate it is; but I'm hanging onto it anyway:



LMAO at the Rumsfeld quote. Yeah, couldn't be that somebody is pissed off enough to lash out violently at the most convenient of targets. No, it's because they think we're weak and it's Obama's fault.

FMguru
Sep 10, 2003

peed on;
sexually

FlamingLiberal posted:

I certainly like to. Almost 250 soldiers died and St. Reagan did nothing (except 'cut and run', as Republicans like to say).
By total coincidence, he launched a quickly-planned and nearly-bothced invasion of the tiny island of Grenada just three days after the Beiruit Marine Barracks bombing.

Intel&Sebastian
Oct 20, 2002

colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!
"weak" would also strike me as a very interesting view of a foe who is currently lobbing missle strikes from untouchable roboplanes driven by people halfway across the world at either you or your neighbors.

Raskolnikov38
Mar 3, 2007

We were somewhere around Manila when the drugs began to take hold

Darkman Fanpage posted:

LMAO at the Rumsfeld quote. Yeah, couldn't be that somebody is pissed off enough to lash out violently at the most convenient of targets. No, it's because they think we're weak and it's Obama's fault.

That's all Rumsfeld's been saying since Obama got elected and he won't stop until he's strung up for his war crimes.

menino
Jul 27, 2006

Pon De Floor

Dr. Faustus posted:

What difference, at this point, does it make?

Did I get this here, or off Twitter? I'm not sure how accurate it is; but I'm hanging onto it anyway:



I'm always skeptical of these kinds of 'infographics' (if that's what you call this) but :drat: this is effective.

WoodrowSkillson
Feb 24, 2005

*Gestures at 60 years of Lions history*

menino posted:

I'm always skeptical of these kinds of 'infographics' (if that's what you call this) but :drat: this is effective.

Im fairly certain its accurate as i remember having an argument with my fathers and personally looking up all the other embassy attacks.

Eggplant Squire
Aug 14, 2003


WoodrowSkillson posted:

Im fairly certain its accurate as i remember having an argument with my fathers and personally looking up all the other embassy attacks.

Yeah me too after I got in a big argument with my parents and they claimed that there weren't any consulate/embassy attacks under Bush.

Intel&Sebastian
Oct 20, 2002

colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!

WoodrowSkillson posted:

Im fairly certain its accurate as i remember having an argument with my fathers and personally looking up all the other embassy attacks.

Gay dads for W? We truly live in a melting pot.

Eggplant Squire
Aug 14, 2003


Intel&Sebastian posted:

Gay dads for W? We truly live in a melting pot.

Don't be homonormative, maybe they live in a polyandrous relationship with mom.

quiggy
Aug 7, 2010

[in Russian] Oof.


Radish posted:

Don't be homonormative, maybe they live in a polyandrous relationship with mom.

Perhaps they were at the time a heterosexual mother and father but then the mother transitioned to male and WoodrowSkillson is being supportive of that fact. Don't be so cisnormative.

Eggplant Squire
Aug 14, 2003


Notorious QIG posted:

Perhaps they were at the time a heterosexual mother and father but then the mother transitioned to male and WoodrowSkillson is being supportive of that fact. Don't be so cisnormative.

drat I have a long way to go :eng99:

WoodrowSkillson
Feb 24, 2005

*Gestures at 60 years of Lions history*

I typoed that and sadly my mother and father are not breaking any new ground in marriages except staying together for 33 years so far.

WoodrowSkillson fucked around with this message at 19:47 on Apr 24, 2014

woke wedding drone
Jun 1, 2003

by exmarx
Fun Shoe

WoodrowSkillson posted:

I typoed that and sadly my mother and father are not breaking any new ground in marriages expect staying together for 33 years so far.

Quit forcing your lifestyle down my throat!

Good Citizen
Aug 12, 2008

trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump
Even Hannity is abandoning Bundy (while making sure to mention a double-standard regarding racism and that Democrats are actually even more racist).

It's going to be funny watching them try to shut him up now that he's saying things that make them look stupid. They wanted people to pay attention and now we are!

Spacedad
Sep 11, 2001

We go play orbital catch around the curvature of the earth, son.
A cattle rancher lying about property rights? Next you'll tell me dogs bark. :allears:


I am loving the Cliven Bundy fallout. LOVING IT.

Good Citizen
Aug 12, 2008

trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump trump

Spacedad posted:

A cattle rancher lying about property rights?

Oh, that's not why. This is why

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbnRnhrNFEY

beatlegs
Mar 11, 2001

dbzfandiego posted:

What the gently caress is wrong with this country?

For some reason racist assholes have suddenly felt emboldened to come out and make racist statements publicly without an ounce of shame. For the life of me, I can't think of a reason they would feel so comfortable doing so!

Intel&Sebastian
Oct 20, 2002

colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!
Maybe he's onto something. If slavery was still legal upstanding white men like Cliven Bundy would cut out the middleman, call up armed militias to protect his negroes, and let them continue eating the grass on federal land for free, rather than this roundabout bureaucratic mess of red-tape where they're burdened with free will and citizenship and electronic beep boop cards that let them into the same supermarkets as white folk.

Spacedad
Sep 11, 2001

We go play orbital catch around the curvature of the earth, son.

Oh, but black people are crooks who contribute nothing to society! Said the liar who is stealing over a million dollars in tax revenue from the government at gunpoint.


The legacy of racism in America is a legacy of white robbers, liars, cheats, murderers and frauds distracting people from their crimes using ethnic minority scapegoats.

This forked-tongued liar would just love to be on a porch in a rocking chair all day while bitching about how lazy his slaves are.

Spacedad fucked around with this message at 22:14 on Apr 24, 2014

ATP_Power
Jun 12, 2010

This is what fascinates me most in existence: the peculiar necessity of imagining what is, in fact, real.


beatlegs posted:

For some reason racist assholes have suddenly felt emboldened to come out and make racist statements publicly without an ounce of shame. For the life of me, I can't think of a reason they would feel so comfortable doing so!

Elections have consequences.

FuzzySkinner
May 23, 2012

beatlegs posted:

For some reason racist assholes have suddenly felt emboldened to come out and make racist statements publicly without an ounce of shame. For the life of me, I can't think of a reason they would feel so comfortable doing so!

I realize that this board has brought up "Southern Strategy" quite a bit, but whenever I seem to look at the modern "Conservative" as it stands right now, it purely seems to be the descendants of the confederacy.

Not even purely from a "They're racist, and support policies to hurt minorities" type of thing (Which is true), but from the perspective of them just seemingly right in line with everything the anti-federalists/confederacy seemed to champion.

It just seems like they're just being pushed more and more in that direction. It's not like that they didn't hold those types of beliefs before, but it is literally like someone flipped a switch in their brains as soon as Obama was elected to just flip the gently caress out over everything.

Pirate Radar
Apr 18, 2008

You're not my Ruthie!
You're not my Debbie!
You're not my Sherry!
Terrorist attacks happen in Republican administrations because the terrorists hate our freedoms and see how much of a threat America is to them. Terrorist attacks happen in Democratic administrations because the terrorists see how weak America is.

Pirate Radar fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Apr 24, 2014

Darkman Fanpage
Jul 4, 2012

Chantilly Say posted:

Terrorist attacks happen in Republican administrations because the terrorists hate our freedoms and see how much of a threat America is to them. Terrorist attacks happen in Democratic administrations because the terrorists see how weak America is. Now go vote Republican like good citizens.

I'd completely forgotten about this idiotic talking point. :psyduck:

Spacedad
Sep 11, 2001

We go play orbital catch around the curvature of the earth, son.

Chantilly Say posted:

Terrorist attacks happen in Republican administrations because the terrorists hate our freedoms and see how much of a threat America is to them. Terrorist attacks happen in Democratic administrations because the terrorists see how weak America is.

Yes but middle america, how does one tell the difference between evil terrorist and patriotic meth lab explosion.

Axetrain
Sep 14, 2007

Axetrain posted:

Is there any chance Bundy will face any actual legal consequences for pulling this poo poo? The guy is in open defiance of a court order and pretty much an insurrectionist. I know the Feds wanted to avoid any bloodshed but letting right-wing militias essentially seize government land with no repercussions seems like its setting a really bad precedent and inviting a lot more of this behavior.

I asked this in the political cartoons thread but meant to post it here.

TheDeadlyShoe
Feb 14, 2014

They'll probably just slap a lien on his house for unpaid debts. If I had to guess they're waiting for the furor to die down.

Ramadu
Aug 25, 2004

2015 NFL MVP


mr. mephistopheles posted:

Anyone ever listen to Andy Dean? His show popped up on one of my conservative AM stations this year. If you want idea of the future of conservatism, here it is.

He's a little more pop culture focused than the others and doesn't mention social issues as often. Hardcore FYGM though.

Also he looks exactly how you would imagine a conservative pundit in his 30s would look.



I hate Andy Dean more than anyone else on the radio. More than Hannity, more than Limbaugh, more than Ingraham. He is so god damned smug about everything. I just want to stuff him in a locker or give him a swirly.

One thing I do notice through listening to this poison, every host calls their other hosts or guests "my friend" or some other thing like that all the time. It's really weird.

Beowulfs_Ghost
Nov 6, 2009

TheDeadlyShoe posted:

They'll probably just slap a lien on his house for unpaid debts. If I had to guess they're waiting for the furor to die down.

"Obama shoots patriotic cowboys" was going to be bad going into the mid terms.

I have no doubt that federal authorities are quietly building a case against Bundy so they can come down on him like a ton of bricks in 6 months. I wouldn't be surprised if they are also writing down license plates and gathering photos to build cases against the more belligerent supporters, and they'll also be getting visits about 'interfering with federal agents'.


Considering the lengths federal agencies have gone through in the past to eventually nail their targets with something, it is incredibly naive of the Bundy supporters to think they have won, and that the feds are just going to drop the whole thing.

Slo-Tek
Jun 8, 2001

WINDOWS 98 BEAT HIS FRIEND WITH A SHOVEL

Ramadu posted:

I hate Andy Dean more than anyone else on the radio. More than Hannity, more than Limbaugh, more than Ingraham. He is so god damned smug about everything. I just want to stuff him in a locker or give him a swirly.

One thing I do notice through listening to this poison, every host calls their other hosts or guests "my friend" or some other thing like that all the time. It's really weird.

Pretty straightforward ingroup/outgroup stuff. It helps make everybody feel better about calling in after an hour about entitlements and lazy frauding ni....urbans. Anyway, doesn't apply to you, Friend, or any of the Folks Out There, you earned your disability/social security, it's just these _types_ I'm talking about, not you.

Wolfsheim
Dec 23, 2003

"Ah," Ratz had said, at last, "the artiste."

Beowulfs_Ghost posted:

"Obama shoots patriotic cowboys" was going to be bad going into the mid terms.

I have no doubt that federal authorities are quietly building a case against Bundy so they can come down on him like a ton of bricks in 6 months. I wouldn't be surprised if they are also writing down license plates and gathering photos to build cases against the more belligerent supporters, and they'll also be getting visits about 'interfering with federal agents'.


Considering the lengths federal agencies have gone through in the past to eventually nail their targets with something, it is incredibly naive of the Bundy supporters to think they have won, and that the feds are just going to drop the whole thing.

To be fair, this isn't exactly a group known for it's long-term thinking, and a lot of them probably saw this as their best shot to kick off the long-awaited CWII. Remember; they still consider themselves part of a silent, white majority who is almost as fed up with Obama's America as they are, and all media they consume reinforces this.

Zuhzuhzombie!!
Apr 17, 2008
FACTS ARE A CONSPIRACY BY THE CAPITALIST OPRESSOR

Axetrain posted:

I asked this in the political cartoons thread but meant to post it here.

Well threatening Federal Agents would usually land your rear end in jail too. I suspect they'll wait for Hannity to pack up the camcorders and then kick his door in at 4am on a Tuesday morning.

kik2dagroin
Mar 23, 2007

Use the anger. Use it.
Limbaugh came back from hiatus today :toot:

quote:

RUSH: Professor Mark Rank, Washington University, coauthor of Chasing the American Dream: Understanding What Shapes Our Fortunes, tells a story of his own and others' research, last Sunday's New York Times.

"Far from having the twenty-first century equivalent of an Edwardian class system, the United States is characterized by a great deal of variation in income. More than half of all adult Americans will be at or near the poverty line at some point over the course of their lives." More than half. "Seventy-three percent will also find themselves in the top 20% over the course of their life. Thirty-nine percent will make it into the top 5% for at least a year. And perhaps most remarkable, 12% of Americans will be in the top 1% for at least one year of their working lives.

"The top 1% is such an unstable group, it makes no sense to write, as many progressives do, about what has happened to its income over the past 10 or 20 years because it doesn't contain same group of people from year to year." The United States is still and indeed the land of opportunity. The American dream is still possible, and it's still happening. People from all walks of life in and out of various income levels, we are not static, and we are not destined to be in one income level for all of our lives, until people like Obama gain full control, then we all.
Whoops that wasn't it, no no no. He discovered that Piketty's book Capital in the 21st Century was out and how furiously I masturbate all over the cover every second of the day.

quote:

RUSH: There's something that I want to spend some time on -- if it takes the next two days discussing with you, and it may. There's a new book out. I became aware of this while I was out, post-op. Some French socialist, Marxist, communist economist has published a book, and the left in this country is having orgasms over it. It's the number one book on Amazon. The guy's name is Thomas Piketty. It is timed coincidentally -- maybe not coincidentally -- you know, the Obama Regime and the Democrats are all on this big kick of income inequality and what to do about it. And this guy's book gives them ammo.

It's the most outrageous set of assumptions that I have ever read. In fact, it's nothing new. It's just repackaged, but I'm telling you the people on the left can barely contain themselves with their giddiness over this, and it portends grave danger for this country if any of this guy's suggestions were to ever become adopted. And Obama is on his way to trying to adopt some of them, all on the basis of getting rid of income inequality. Can somebody tell me, when has there ever been income equality, and if you can tell me when there has been income equality, can you tell me what kind of lives those people had, and what kind of country they lived in, and what kind of liberty and freedom they had.

This guy is suggesting an 80% tax rate on incomes over $500,000 a year. Not to raise revenue for the government, but to eliminate those incomes. This guy's objective is to simply wipe out the wealthy. And supposedly everybody is gonna be deliriously happy after this. It is absurd. It's stupid. It's dumb. It's ignorant. It's been tried, and it is being tried in every place in the world you wouldn't want to live. And yet the left in this country and the Democrat Party and the media, they're just chomping at the bit, excited as they can be. And I want to go through some actual factual analysis of incomes in this country and wealth and census data evidence that proves that this is the land of opportunity.

The top 1%'s not a static group. The top 10%'s not a static group. People move in and out of income groups all the time in this country. People make and lose fortunes all the time. They make a lot of money, they lose it. It's not the same 1% for 50 years. It's not the same 1% for four years. People move in and out all the time.
It really is problematic what this guy is suggesting and the way it's being embraced in this country by the movers and shakers of the left is what harbingers ill will. I just want to inform you of it so that you're up to speed on it.
Huh, sounds like the exact same thesis as that article he quoted

quote:

RUSH: There's a new book that the left has embraced. It's by a French Marxist economist named Thomas Piketty. Now, you may have heard this discussed. I first heard of this a few days ago. It's one of the reasons I've been chomping at the bit to get back here and discuss this. The reason it's being embraced is not just that it's Marxism and socialism and communism. It's embraced because it happens to coincide with Obama's big push here on income inequality. I'm told he pronounces the name Piketty. Piketty, Piketty, I couldn't care less. He's a wuss. Okay, Thomas Piketty. Fine, okay, that's how he pronounces his name. We'll give him that.

Obama is embracing this, and the left is embracing it because of Obama's push on income inequality, as though there's some moral sin in income inequality. There's some moral sin in capitalism, and therefore there is a moral sin in the United States of America. The United States of America is a moral sin. It's flawed deeply and morally because of the concentration of wealth in the top 1%. They are hoarding it. They are taking it from everybody. They are stealing it. They're not sharing it, not redistributing it, giving it away. They're not paying people enough and so forth.

To the extent that there is any concentration of wealth taking place in this country, let me tell you where it's happening. Government. The richest counties in this country used to be in Florida, in California. They are now the suburbs of Washington, DC. Wealth is being concentrated in the hands of people who are in or associated with government. They are the 1%. This is conveniently ignored by people who thrill with delight at Piketty's book.

I want to start with several analysis pieces here before I share with you my own thoughts. I want to start with a piece here by David Harsanyi, and my bad, I neglected when I printed this to make a note -- he's a scholar, a think tank contributor, blogger somewhere, and I just neglected to print, make a note of where. Here's how he begins his analysis.

"As I write this, Thomas Piketty’s book 'Capital in the Twenty-First Century' is #1 on Amazon. It’s been deemed an 'important book' by a bunch of smart people. Why not? It validates many of the preconceived notions progressives have about capitalism: Inequality is growing. Mobility is shrinking. Meritocracy is dead. We all live in a sprawling zero-sum fallacy. And so on.

"The book, as you probably know, has also sparked nonstop conversation in political and media circles. Though it’s best to let economists debunk Piketty’s methodology and data, it is worth pointing out that liberal pundits and writers have not only enthusiastically and unconditionally embraced a book on economics, or even a run-of-the-mill leftist polemic, but a hard-left manifesto."

Now, my point with starting with Mr. Harsanyi is that I think he is typical in that he is surprised at how far left the American media is today. He is surprised at how far left the Democrat Party is today. You and I are not. We know they are deeply committed Marxists. They are fascists. We see it. We're the victims of it. We're the ones they try to shut up. We're the ones who are not allowed to dissent. We are the ones, the Catherine Engelbrechts, you name it, the Tea Party, we are the ones that the powers that be on the left try to eliminate. Not converse with, not debate, none of that. We know it.


The only thing that's new about the left is in the last 20 years the media has thrown off their cloak of camouflage and they are now openly acknowledging who and what they are. Oh, yeah, Harsanyi is from the Federalist.com. He says, "Now, I realize we're all supposed to accept the fact that conservatives are alone in embracing fringe --" He's being sarcastic here -- "Now, I realize we’re all supposed to accept the fact that conservatives are alone in embracing fringe economic ideas. But how does a book that evokes Marx and talks about tweaking the Soviet experiment find so much love from people who consider themselves rational, evidence-driven moderates?"

They're not rational evidence driven moderates, Mr. Harsanyi. They are hard-left, committed socialists.
...
There are reasons for why the mask of camouflage has been dropped, and I really do believe it's because of the loss of their media monopoly, which has forced them into sort of a competitive mode. They're now having to compete and they no longer get away with this phony objectivity that they always were granted. They always benefited from the assumption that they were objective. Yeah, they might have been liberal, but they were fair. They never were. They were always hard leftists. They always have been hard leftists, and now all they've done is come forth and admit it.

"How does a book that evokes Marx and talks about tweaking the Soviet experiment find so much love from people who consider themselves rational, evidence-driven moderates?" Have people not been paying attention the last seven years, or six, whatever the hell it is this guy's been in office? Have people not been paying attention to what's happening, or is it they choose not to notice it? And I'm not harping on Harsanyi. Please do not anybody send him a note that I'm ripping him to shreds. This is serving here as an object lesson.

He goes on to say: "Piketty, a professor at the Paris School of Economics, argues that capitalism allocates resources efficiently but unfairly apportions income. And the excessive accumulation of wealth by the one percent ... is not only corrupt, but an inequality that makes democracy unsustainable. And it’s going to get worse. So only a massive transfer of wealth could make our nation whole again."

Well, hello, this is Barack Obama. This is Saul Alinsky. This isn't anything new. I guess it is new to some people to see every day on cable news your average, ordinary guest agree with this stuff, but that's what's new. It's just new that they're admitting it. They didn't in the last 20 years go from moderate to fascist. They've always been liberal fascists. It's why I keep harping on the importance for people learning and understanding ideology and how to associate it with people so you know what's coming. Note it Mr. Piketty is not giving his book away. He's charging $39.95 for his book. Why? Why does he need the money? Just a little side question.
...
When has income ever been equal? If you don't believe in free will and independence and liberty in a general sense, if you don't believe in those things then you will find arguments about beneficent and wise, Big Government alluring. If you're a coward; if you're afraid to strike out on your own; if you're afraid to take a risk; if you're afraid to go for it; if you'd rather have the security of knowing you're gonna be taken care of and at the same time somebody who did take a risk and it pays off and they become wealthy, they're gonna be gotten even with, then Big Government's for you.

But if you believe in free will -- we've got 200, 300 million people in this country and every one of us is different. There is nothing about any of us that is equal. That is what the law is to do. But there is no guarantee, there can't be a guarantee, there never was a guarantee, it's not godly or humanly possible for there to be equality of outcome.

...
Here's the question, folks. How many more people must suffer under these Marxist, socialist, liberal theories before a free people like those of us in this country aggressively and permanently reject this nonsense? I don't know. I'm really bothered, look, I'm conflicted. I'm glad people's eyes are being opened, and if this book is opening people's eyes as to just what the current left is, fine. But I'm a little sad that it's taken six years. 'Cause look what's happened in these six years. Real deep damage has been done to the underlying foundation, and I mean foundation, founding of this country.

I'm gonna get you the numbers here before this program ends. You compare the suffering, the human suffering under communism, socialism, Marxism versus the human suffering under capitalism, there is no comparison whatsoever, none. The human suffering that occurs in communism and socialism knows no comparison. The suffering that occurs in capitalism can't even make a dent. Now, of course free markets create unequal results. Sorry, folks. That's what freedom does.
...
Now back to this lamebrain Piketty from France. I'm yukking it up with this guy. I'm telling you, this is serious stuff because many more people than apparently a lot of people realize are eating it up and want to implement it in this country. And, folks, the reason it scares me is the last six years were not necessary. This could have been avoided. Obama could have been defeated with just a little honesty about who he was because we are not the minority in this country.

We are being governed and ruled by a really small minority of people. They happen to control the media which makes them look big. They are mean, they are vicious, and they do not tolerate any dissent whatsoever. They are the modern day Marxists, fascists. From this poor guy at Mozilla, to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, I mean the list is long of people who have been silenced, intimidated, threatened in the United States of America, by other so-called Americans. Obama didn't have to win in 2008, he didn't have to win in 2012, and Hillary doesn't have to win in 2016. She's one of them. She's no different than any of the others. They're all in on this stuff.

What does inequality of income mean? Has there ever been equality of income? The Pilgrims tried it. It's right there in Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims, my first ever children's book. Didn't work. True story.
...
Anybody that's not all-in with Eric Holder is an enemy of the state. Talk to Catherine Engelbrecht, talk to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, talk to Brendan Eich, Condoleezza Rice, Dropbox. They tried to get her forced out of Dropbox, named her to the board of directors. She's an enemy of the state in the United States of America.

And here comes this idiot Piketty with his book and these clowns are all addressing it, embracing it. Who's gonna make these determinations of who gets what? Who's gonna make these determinations of what we all need to be equal? The same people who brought us Obamacare? The same people who run the DMV? The same people running the climate change movement? Who are these people gonna be? The people that can routinely get a CEO fired for giving a thousand dollars to a proposition that says marriage is that between a man and a woman? Can you imagine believing that marriage is between a man and a woman is enough to get you exiled in the United States of America today?
But it is?

My point is, this is not new. The sentiment is not new. The desire is not new. The bravery is new because there's no opposition to it because everybody's scared to death to oppose it. There are graves, there are gulags, there are homeless shelters filled with human beings who have suffered under these experiments, socialism and communism. In North Korea, in China, in Cuba, it's all over the world. That's what is exceptional about the United States of America and that's what American exceptionalism is. We are the exception to living the way most people have since the beginning of time.

Liberty and freedom are taken for granted by people who are born to it, and, as such, they're the last to recognize it being encroached upon. But it is in the process of happening. Daily people are losing liberty. Daily people are losing freedom. Daily more and more people are afraid to tell you what they really think about something.
We are being ruled, we are being governed by a genuine minority. The latest polling data on the Keystone pipeline, 61, 62% want it. The left is not the majority in this country. But they've made themselves look like they are with the help of the media, who are perhaps the leaders by design in this thing.
...
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2014/04/24/the_left_is_giddy_over_new_marxist_book
Seems to me he's calling liberals fascists with greater frequency these days :jerkbag:

Intel&Sebastian
Oct 20, 2002

colonel...
i'm trying to sneak around
but i'm dummy thicc
and the clap of my ass cheeks
keeps alerting the guards!
39% making it into the top 5 (188k in a year) even for just one year of their lives sounds like a bunch of bullshit. How are they calculating that?

Phone
Jul 30, 2005

親子丼をほしい。

Intel&Sebastian posted:

39% making it into the top 5 (188k in a year) even for just one year of their lives sounds like a bunch of bullshit. How are they calculating that?

Paul Ryan's excel spreadsheet.

Beowulfs_Ghost
Nov 6, 2009
I wonder how many of those are a 1 time thing that net them over $100,000 for the year. Like selling the family home after the kids move out and you're about to retire, or getting an inheritance.

My wife and I made $150k one year, but that was because my father-in-law died and we sold the house he left to us.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Bunleigh
Jun 6, 2005

by exmarx
Looks like he's quoting this op-ed which it doesn't explain itself and doesn't sound even remotely plausible. Maybe it includes people who inherit a house when their parents die or something.

edit: ^ I swear I didn't read that before I posted the same idea, honest.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply