|
gowb posted:There are funny conservatives. Drew Carey, for one. Dennis Miller. Rush Limbaugh was pretty funny back in the day, when he was less bitter and angry. There's not nearly as many funny conservatives, for sure, but they are there. I do agree that most blatantly political conservative humor tends to fall flat, but the same thing applies to blatantly liberal humor as well. It's hard to be funny with an agenda. I'm  to find out that Drew Carey is conservative. Dennis Miller pretty much hasn't been funny since he became overtly conservative. Rush Limbaugh....OK if you say so.
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2011 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:00 |
|
|
gowb posted:There are funny conservatives. Drew Carey, for one. Dennis Miller. Rush Limbaugh was pretty funny back in the day, when he was less bitter and angry. There's not nearly as many funny conservatives, for sure, but they are there. I do agree that most blatantly political conservative humor tends to fall flat, but the same thing applies to blatantly liberal humor as well. It's hard to be funny with an agenda. True, but how much of their (good) comedic bits have anything to do with politics? I'm not familiar with anything Drew Carey has done outside of "Whose Line" and his old self-named show. Limbaugh's Half-Hour News Hour was awful and picked targets like sexual harassment victims. There was also the awful American Carol. It had the problem that ducttape described, as it was based on the premise that Michael Moore vocally supports terrorism. They have him actually make a move called "Die, American Pigs."
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2011 22:23
|
|
|
Dr Christmas posted:There was also the awful American Carol. It had the problem that ducttape described, as it was based on the premise that Michael Moore vocally supports terrorism. They have him actually make a move called "Die, American Pigs." Didn't Team America:World Police paint him as something incredibly similar?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2011 22:29
|
|
|
Ninja_Orca posted:Didn't Team America:World Police paint him as something incredibly similar? True, but that was supposed to be crazy and demented. It didn't have a completely serious scene where the ghost of George Washington chews not-Michael-Moore out in the ruins of the Twin Towers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2011 22:39
|
|
|
Just leaving this here... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehMl-CztpnA
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 07:33
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Just leaving this here... hey that linked to something mentioned earlier in this thread http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v_mQPvKXw3U&feature=relmfu
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 07:44
|
|
|
I've never heard of this Right Network before. Not a single person there thought better of using a red flag as part of their branding?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 08:29
|
|
|
TerminalSaint posted:I've never heard of this Right Network before. I think it's intentional. There're plenty of other similar co-options of political enemies' symbols etc by the right, like Glenn Beck's "taxpayer march on DC" thing using the clenched fist, the tune of The Red Flag used as a Christmas carol (although that might have been the other way around), May Day becoming Law Day, that "For The Record" crap using a punk theme in support of free market capitalism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 08:47
|
|
|
Habibi posted:I'm Drew Carey's one of the good ones. If he can be accused of anything it would be naive libertarianism. He's conservative in a similar, but slightly more sane, way to how Penn Jilette is conservative. By that I mean, truly conservative, and not just socially conservative. If I recall correctly I believe he's in favor of crazy things like the government stepping out of all marriages both gay and straight, but I could be wrong. He's not super annoying about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drew_Carey#Political_views ErIog fucked around with this message at 14:08 on Apr 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 14:05
|
|
|
Libertarianism is pretty much a viewpoint only the privileged can afford. Things work out well for them in capitalism by default, so governments are just seen as meddling with that. And if things work out well for them with as little government as possible (or so they think) then clearly the same would be true of everyone else, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 14:17
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:Libertarianism is pretty much a viewpoint only the privileged can afford. Things work out well for them in capitalism by default, so governments are just seen as meddling with that. And if things work out well for them with as little government as possible (or so they think) then clearly the same would be true of everyone else, right? There's problems with that point of view for certain, but I think one must at least respect the fact that he's ideologically consistent in his views. That's the thing that annoys me most about any group having anything to do with politics is rampant inconsistency that exists only because of bigotry and prejudice. When unions protest in Wisconsin it's a violent uncontrolled outburst of agression according to Fox News, but when the tea party people protest in Washington it is controlled, peaceful, and fair-minded despite the rampant evidence of bigotry and racism within the tea party.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 14:30
|
|
|
ErIog posted:There's problems with that point of view for certain, but I think one must at least respect the fact that he's ideologically consistent in his views. That's the thing that annoys me most about any group having anything to do with politics is rampant inconsistency that exists only because of bigotry and prejudice. Well, there's a bunch of different flavours of libertarianism but I wouldn't call it ideologically consistent. For an ideology that purports to be all about individual and personal freedom it is odd that the Mises institute for example would be fine with a thriving market in children. I suppose indentured servitude would be ok too, and wage slavery is pretty much the cornerstone of the 'free' market capitalism they love so much. That same 'free' market that would, without government intervention, form monopolies and other competition disturbing effects.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 16:23
|
|
|
I guess tax season is stupid text season too.quote:I worked on average 75 hours a week in 2010. Each of my four employers withheld taxes. Now the IRS tells me a owe 4 percent more of my gross to the gov't or I go to jail. I'd stay on unemployment if I were on it. Wouldn't have to work and I'd make two-thirds of what I make now. Think of all the man hours the government would save on loving the little guy if we had a flat tax! I don't know what he grosses or where he got the 66% number but if I had to guess I'd say from his rear end.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 19:50
|
|
|
ought ten posted:I guess tax season is stupid text season too. Is this a Facebook post? Double dog dare them to go on unemployment, and see how they back out of that statement.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 20:35
|
|
|
ought ten posted:I guess tax season is stupid text season too. Pulling some numbers out of my rear end: Each of those four employers took out taxes as if he was making $10,000 a year - that is, not much. As someone who made $40,000 he owes more FIT than four people making $10k. He probably should have asked his employers to make additional withholdings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 21:03
|
|
|
ought ten posted:I guess tax season is stupid text season too. Am I reading this wrong or is he working 75 hours per week to make ~$30k? Unemployment maxes out at about $400 per week, which is about $20k per year. Of course, if he's making that little, he'd qualify for less than $400 per week. He's working four lovely minimum wage jobs? The exact numbers vary by state, of course.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 21:06
|
|
|
He works four lovely minimum wage jobs for 75 hours a week, and he's pissed off at the government? I'd be pissed off at all four employers for not giving me more than 20 hours and for not paying me enough to even live on. Not that $30,000 isn't living assuming he doesn't have kids.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 21:13
|
|
|
You also pay taxes on unemployment too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
If the government didn't tax his employers so much they could afford to let some of that the money they'd be making trickle down to him.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 21:49
|
|
|
At $7.25 x 75 x 52 he'd make $28,275 making his total federal tax burden just under $2,400 according to the calculator I've pulled up. So, he's being taxed at roughly 8%... does he not realize that every single flat tax rate estimated would be higher than his current tax rate? The lowest I've seen proposed is 11.8% and the highest is 17%. So, he'd have made between $1075-$2545 less if we had a flat tax system. loving idiot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 21:52
|
|
|
In response to all of the excellent points made I'll just say no, he didn't think of that. He realized he was going to have to write a check to the government, got all huffy and yelled "FLAT TAX!" I told him he can leave if he doesn't like it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2011 21:56
|
|
|
Anubis posted:At $7.25 x 75 x 52 he'd make $28,275 making his total federal tax burden just under $2,400 according to the calculator I've pulled up. My understanding was that most flat tax plans would still exempt the first $X in income (probably up to the poverty line). So in that case he would probably end up paying less in taxes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2011 03:17
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qx0p8ONUXI This video is making the conservative email and blog rounds. It's not just a stupid soundbite. It's a stupid soundbite taken out of context and falsely reported where the speaker isn't even allowed to finish his sentence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2011 03:33
|
|
|
Florida Betty posted:My understanding was that most flat tax plans would still exempt the first $X in income (probably up to the poverty line). So in that case he would probably end up paying less in taxes. Certainly depends on the plan but the poverty line is at $10,890 for a single household right now. So even removing that from his taxable income would mean he'd pay between $2,051-2,995 and you'd have to imagine the lower rate one would be one of those without the exemption if they were trying to match either current income or current spending. But if that exemption existed who's to say the companies he works for wouldn't assume (since he obviously isn't planning ahead and adjusting withholding now) that he's fully exempt leaving him with the whole thing on his plate come April? I'm sure that would lead to a lovely rant.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 10:54
|
|
|
I thought that the most common flat tax proposals included a monthly 'prebate,' a payment to cancel out all of their taxes for the first ten thousand dollars or so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 15:49
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I thought that the most common flat tax proposals included a monthly 'prebate,' a payment to cancel out all of their taxes for the first ten thousand dollars or so. Ahh yes, mailing out a check every month to every single household filing taxes. So simple, the flat tax...
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 16:54
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:I thought that the most common flat tax proposals included a monthly 'prebate,' a payment to cancel out all of their taxes for the first ten thousand dollars or so. I know that's what the so-called FairTax would do; I'm not actually sure what flat tax plans want to do as far as any sort of exemption. I'd imagine at least some of them have a "no taxes on the first $x" provision, which would make the taxes "progressive" in the loosest of senses.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 22:24
|
|
|
Deuce posted:Ahh yes, mailing out a check every month to every single household filing taxes. So simple, the flat tax... Don't you see how that reduces the work our country needs to do? I'm sure that the fraud prevention step would be something as amazingly simple as "Only the person that this check is made out to can cash it!" being printed on it. See! Simple!
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2011 18:40
|
|
|
A close family friend commented on this link posted by the local Tea Party: http://constitutionclub.org/2011/04/03/you-just-gotta-love-the-donald/ YOU JUST GOTTA LOVE THE DONALD posted:WHETHER HE RUNS OR NOT, TRUMP WILL DEFINITELY SHAKE THINGS UP Bolded my favorite part. Do these people actually think just parroting talking points is a good thing? Here's the comment: quote:The White House, unfortunately, is a joke now anyway. He certainly couldn’t harm it in any way. Think Clintin started the nose dive. Being someone self-employed I appreciate someone who is not a lawyer or someone who has been handed their inheritance and therefore has no other ambition, but to run for an office. He understands how unfair the laws and taxes are for business owners. And he certainly understands how this health care will destroy free market. But, we all have reasons why we support one candidate over another. I simply wish he would just say what his relationship is with Jesus. Other than his failed marriages, he seems to have good morals and values. Think we’ve all had some, several! screw-ups…..? This person has written and published a novel...
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2011 22:24
|
|
|
YOU JUST GOTTA LOVE THE DONALD posted:Between the mealy-mouthed Obama and the Congressional double-speakers who continue to play politics as usual, Trump is a no-nonsense, straight-shooting, ballsy breath of fresh air. He speaks our language and he says the things out loud that we actually think about these clowns. What’s not to like about that? Not sure people are going to vote for a candidate with ballsy breath.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2011 22:46
|
|
|
El Boot posted:A close family friend commented on this link posted by the local Tea Party: El Boot posted:This person has written and published a novel... ...no, I always think that, but it never is, is it
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 01:26
|
|
|
Oh my god.quote:
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 02:03
|
|
|
Slave owners claimed to be providing for the well-being of their slaves by keeping them enslaved! That's why Jefferson was virtuous and doesn't count as a slave owner because he did the same thing 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 04:00
|
|
|
The English barons weren't stupid. Are we supposed to think they didn't NOTICE the Magna Carta, of which they wrote several drafts, logically condemned feudalism in principle? They knew what they were saying.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 05:53
|
|
|
Enjoy posted:The English barons weren't stupid. Are we supposed to think they didn't NOTICE the Magna Carta, of which they wrote several drafts, logically condemned feudalism in principle? They knew what they were saying. I think the idea is how people condemn history classes in the US (the west?) as being only about "Dead old white guys", like these people are suggesting ignoring western history entirely and arent instead suggesting to balance it out more.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 06:22
|
|
|
Since it's not often pointed out, I want to mention that John Locke's ideas about property rights helped settlers justify taking land from the Native Americans. According to Locke, people establish property rights on a piece of land by improving it (i.e., by farming or building on it). Now, lots of Europeans didn't think that Native Americans improved the land they lived on in this way (even though many of them totally did), so settlers felt perfectly justified in taking Native land. John Locke: enshrining the liberties of rich white guys. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 06:45
|
|
|
After I read my copy of the Magna Carta I'm going to go down to the ATM machine
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 06:54
|
|
|
RagnarokAngel posted:I think the idea is how people condemn history classes in the US (the west?) as being only about "Dead old white guys", like these people are suggesting ignoring western history entirely and arent instead suggesting to balance it out more. I was mostly picking at how the meaning of an historical document can often change over time as the words used in it alter, such as trial by peers for a "freeman" in the Magna Carta pretty obviously not referring to the unwashed masses, even though later interpretations point to that document as the "bedrock of British jurisprudence" or whatever. Similarly, the vastly encompassing terms in the phrase "all men created equal" are completely subjective and have been argued to mean different things by different people. Yeah, the ethnocetricism is bad but attacking premises isn't effective when the premise is derived subjectively.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 07:05
|
|
|
THE DONALD posted:Whether he’s blasting China for “screwing us,” Let's play a game! One of these things is a valid opinion, while two others are examples of batshit lunacy. See if you can discern which ones are which!
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:00 |
|
|
UltraPenguinX posted:Let's play a game! One of these things is a valid opinion, while two others are examples of batshit lunacy. See if you can discern which ones are which! I'm gonna guess... Ron Paul?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2011 17:35
|
|
