10 of the Dumbest Things Republican Voters Say

moransI was talking to my friend about politics (they don’t follow politics much) and we got on the topic of talking points.  Though they were raised in a Republican household, they really aren’t someone I would consider a Republican or a Democrat.  But during this discussion, as they presented some of the “arguments” their family members have presented to them, I couldn’t help but notice all they did was regurgitate one right-wing talking point after another.  Clearly they picked these lines up from their Republican family members.

That’s when it really hit me that being a Republican essentially means you have to learn a whole new kind of coded language in order to speak about specific topics.  Because that’s what these people do.  They concoct these talking points as a better means to manipulate people who don’t like to think for themselves into believing in things that don’t make any sense.

So I decided I would make a list of 10 of the dumbest things I often hear Republicans say.

In no particular order, here we go:

1) Tax cuts create jobs: No, they don’t – demand creates jobs.

2) Same-sex marriage ruins the sanctity of marriage: Actually, divorce did that long ago.

3) Homosexual parents will raise homosexuals children: Fun fact, most homosexuals were raised by heterosexuals.

4) The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun: Actually, the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to try to prevent the bad guy from ever gaining access to a gun – universal background checks would have helped out a lot with doing just that.

5) Referring to rich people as job creators: Just because someone has a lot money, doesn’t mean they create jobs.

6) Drill baby drill!: The phrase uttered by individuals who have no idea how the price of oil is determined or how it’s sold on the global market.

7) Climate change is a hoax: Something said by people who’ve either been brainwashed by “facts” that have been funded by the oil industry (the biggest benefactors behind the destruction of our planet) or religious fanatics that believe climate change is caused by God, not humans.

8) Democrats are the real racists: Can someone remind me which party has politicians who question the legality of the Civil Rights Act, voters who proudly fly the Confederate flag, candidates who practically get no voting support from minority groups and has the backing of many members of the KKK and neo-Nazi’s?

9) Socialized health care doesn’t work: Then can someone explain to me why Medicare is extremely popular with seniors and why every country that leads the world in average life expectancy and infant mortality rate has universal health care?

10) We support our troops: The last time I checked, the Republican party sent over 4,000 American troops to die in Iraq based on a lie and Republicans blocked a veterans bill in Congress.  Explain to me again how exactly that’s “supporting our troops”?

Oh man, I could keep going on and on. I might have to make a “Part 2” of this here in the near future.  As for now I hope you enjoyed it.  Feel free to hit me up on Twitter to share some of the dumbest things you hear Republicans say.


Allen Clifton

Allen Clifton is a native Texan who now lives in the Austin area. He has a degree in Political Science from Sam Houston State University. Allen is a co-founder of Forward Progressives and creator of the popular Right Off A Cliff column and Facebook page. Be sure to follow Allen on Twitter and Facebook, and subscribe to his channel on YouTube as well.

Comments

Facebook comments

  • Jerry Graybosch

    Re #9… and they spend less for healthcare than we do

    • Mr Creosote

      However that “fact” ignores that we are the least healthy in the ‘first world’.
      You don’t see many 400 pound 37 year olds riding a scooter around the Walmart store in Paris, France (yes there is one).
      The fact that it is very expensive to get the 400 pound heffer riding the rascal scooter to have the same median lifetime, as the Parisian woman weighing 105, and eating the Mediterranean diet, while true, says Bumpkus about cost or quality of HEALTHCARE.
      Getting the diabetic doubleamputee, to live a long life is going to cost more than keeping someone riding their bicycle well into their 70’s healthy.
      The whole – we spend more but have the same outcome (82 lifespan) ignores the obvious factors.

  • Stephen Barlow

    10 strikes, No balls. Great pitching. Not even risky because the The Party of NO, is the Party of LESS THAN NOTHING. They can’t BUY a hit.

    The Democrats need to change their 2014 message. They need to briefly mention the 8MILLION person PPACA megasuccess and then, SLAM HOME the points that:

    The Party of NO Shut down the government
    The Party of LESS THAN NOTHING has blocked:
    Veteran’s Healthcare
    Veteran’s Education
    Veteran’s Jobs

    They weakened our military into worthlessness for corporate greed.

    Medicare expansion for the neediest Americans
    Unemployment Extension for those whom the Republican Policy and Mismanagement UNEMPLOYED in the first place
    Mortgage relief for the 11 MILLION families made Homeless by Republican Deregulation of banking.
    Corruption and decay of education for America’s children.
    For profit Student loans for America’s adults.
    FORCED PREGNANCY and MANDATORY CHILDBIRTH for ALL RAPE VICTIMS!

    They need to avoid, “Vote for Bill X…” or “Bill x’s opponent Eff Ewe did…”

    100% PARTy message EVERYWHERE, ALL THE TIME.

    The REDS did this to you!!! Do you want them to keep denying you the Government your taxes paid for? They CLOSED the National MONUMENTS and then USED the Veteran’s like body armor to deflect responsibility for their ignorance. VOTE the Republicans OUT and let America have it’s Government back!!!”

    • Sandy Greer

      I’d add something, but…

      Brilliant! That’s what comes to mind.

      • Stephen Barlow

        Thank you, but what would you Add? I just gave an example of what I would write as ad copy. If ALl of Democratic thinking missed this point, surely I missed a detail or three.

      • The Power of Love

        I was under the impression that Sandy said you covered everything. Both of you rock!

    • Margaret Brooks

      You are right. Democrats need to start pointing these things out instead of being silent… it’s time to fight back!

  • Jim Wiggin

    “A rising tide lifts all boats.” If that is true, then why not pump the water in at the bottom instead of trickling it down from the top? In any event, it’s not true when most of the boats are rotten or full of holes.

    • Terri

      Oh there’s trickle-down all right. Not all voters have identified what exactly it is that’s trickling down. Pro tip: It isn’t money.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        It’s yellow and liquid…

    • 1EdMeadows83

      ” it’s not true when most of the boats are rotten or full of holes.” Or if the boat is tied to a tree.

  • Seth Williams

    The only one I don’t agree with is 4. I’m for background checks but it’s not going to stop people from acquiring guns off the black market or from someone else. You need to give people the power to fight back…not take it away.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      Please explain the rampant paranoia among you gun people. To hear you talk, there are bands of marauding (minority) bandits roving around every day trying to take your stuff and rape your women. Frankly, I’m more terrified of the “law abidin'” citizens who think guns are the answer to everything.

      • Seth Williams

        See this is where I don’t like being. labeled a liberal or a conservative. You just said “you gun people” implying that I’m just like the idiot conservatives. Here’s a novel idea, do you think people have different views? No I don’t think there are marauding bandits roving around the country everyday but there are thieves and idiots. Again, I’m FOR background checks and I’m even for a gun registry but I’m not for taking away people’s right to protection. I just have more common sense than to think a law restricting guns to people is going to stop criminals from acquiring a gun lol

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Here’s the problem. No one is for ” taking away people’s right to protection.” Where DO you get that idea???? Protection from what/who? That is why I say “you gun people” because you/they are convinced YOU/THEY NEED PROTECTION and government is going to take your/their guns.

        If you’re a nut job, you don’t need a gun. I see no problem with laws that say if you’re a nut job, you don’t need a gun. If you’re not a nut job, you have nothing to worry about.

      • Seth Williams

        I agree, if you have mental problems, you don’t need a gun. So I’m guessing all the murders that happen on a daily basis are fake? If I’m a law abiding citizen, who is not mentally unstable, why shouldn’t I be allowed to carry? What reasoning do you have against someone who passes an extensive background check, goes through a gun safety course, and is fully licensed to carry?

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Who said they are fake? And who has said YOU couldn’t have a gun? Who is out there trying to take away your gun?

      • Seth Williams

        Again, I’m with you as far as having background checks and a registry. Just the way that comment in this article sounds like they want no one to have guns. Which will never happen. Honestly, the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun IS to have someone else take them out. I’m in the military and I know for a fact that the best way to protect yourself is to make yourself a hard target. If you don’t, you are more likely to be attacked ( and no..not by marauding idiots…). Chances are if someone knows your packing, they arnt going to try to rob you. instead they’ll go after someone else, who isn’t going to put up a fight. Crime is out there whether you want to believe it or not.

      • Jillian Brown

        You seem very knowledgable about guns. However many gun owners don’t have anywhere near that level of knowledge. Every day little kids shoot each other with their parents’ guns. Every day some idiot shoots himself/herself in the foot or accidentally shoots his/her neighbor. And law enforcement recommends, time and time again, not to be a hero and confront a gun wielding criminal with a gun; sometimes cops can’t tell who’s the criminal when they arrive. Tackling a criminal is often just as effective, if not more so, than pointing a gun at him/her. And installing security systems in your home can deter criminals, or owning a large dog, without putting your family at risk for an accidental gun death.
        If you live out in the middle of nowhere, hunt, or have someone who is actively threatening/ stalking you, a gun can be a necessity. But so many Americans fetishize guns to a disturbing level (like Colbert with his gun Sweetness). It’s like idiots with pickup trucks they never use. I really wish people would be required to take and pass a gun safety test when they buy their first firearm.

      • Seth Williams

        Tackle a guy with a gun? Really? So if someone has a gun on you at say 10 feet, are you really going to try and run over and tackle him/her?

        By the time cops arrive, the situation would be over if someone had a gun to confront the other. Either you’d have a stand off because the perp won or it’d be over and the guy that took the perp out would be telling the cops that. Typically you are going to have witnesses that can collaberate the story.`

      • Sandy Greer

        Doesn’t happen very often, and I can’t find a link to prove it.

        But just last night I heard on the news an 84-year old man tackled an armed robber, who’d pulled a gun on his wife. Disarmed him, and held him for police.

        He was ex-military, and I guess the adrenaline got him going.

        Not something I would do, for sure.

      • mencik

        Or, they would both shoot and both would be dead. Or more good guys with guns would start shooting not knowing which of the two was the good guy and which was the bad guy. Then perhaps other good guys with guns would see this happening and it would escalate into a massacre.

        While I am not if favor of taking people’s guns away, I am also against stupid arguments like only more good guys with guns can stop bad guys with guns.

        I also think the argument that we need these massive weapons arsenals to combat a tyrannical government are a bunch of hooey. That battle was lost long ago. The Government has drones, armored vehicles, shoulder fired grenades and missiles, much more than your arsenal could possibly stop. All it means is you’ll go down shooting.

      • regressive white trash reli

        or……..by recognizing the pinpoint accuracy of our military: they will simply “go down shot”

      • Mach1man_69

        FYI….There are 4.5-4.7 million dog attacks per year and less than 800 “accidental” shootings. So how is having a large dog any safer for your family than owning a handgun?

      • Lucy Olivera

        And their are no regulations that keep guns out of dogs paws either. Damn dogs.

      • mencik

        No, there are about 4.5 million “dog bites” per year, not attacks. Many of these occur in the home of the owner and not of any consequence. An extremely low number of these are fatal compared to the accidental shootings.

      • Mach1man_69

        A dog bite is an attack. It is a dogs defense mechanism, thus attack. Either way I was just making a point that there are WAY more dog related attacks than gun related attacks. Obviously not all dog attacks are fatal but neither are all shootings.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Here is the quote verbatim. “4)The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun: Actually, the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to try to prevent the bad guy from ever gaining access to a gun – universal background checks would have helped out a lot with doing just that. ”

        I must have missed something. Where does it say “they want no one to have guns.”???

      • Seth Williams

        The problem though is the bad guy isn’t going to buy a gun through the proper means. He’s typically going to get it off the street.

      • John M

        Seth, you wasting your time. I feel the same way as you. I’m a liberal gun owner. Yes, background checks. But god forbid you question any aspect of gun control and you’re instantly marked a “gun nut”. Dealing with anti-gun people is like dealing with climate change deniers. All the facts in the world won’t convince them. They’ll point out that nobody needs an M16 and they should be banned. But they don’t seem to care that 90% of all gun crimes are committed with hand guns. And, out of the 10% that are committed with rifles, only 10% of those are committed with what is commonly referred to as an “assault rifle”. So banning or restricting a type of weapon like the M16 will have almost zero effect on gun violence. The same goes for the restrictions they put on the guns themselves. If they could explain how making a pistol grip or collapsable stock illegal will save lives, I’ve be all for it. But they can’t. All they can do is get mad and call us names. Watch, someone will respond to what I wrote by calling me names and getting very angry.

      • Mach1man_69

        I think people fail to realize though that we already have background checks, most gun control people seem to think that anybody can go into a gun store and buy one off the shelf. Now enforcing the laws we already have is one thing but creating brand news just hurts the law-abiding citizens.

      • terribletwos

        Funny that but not so funny. I knew of an ex-felon who did time in Huntsville, in fact he seemed to enjoy telling people this. He bought a hand gun at the very large flea market in Grapevine, Texas. No background check, went home with it right after he bought it.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        What “brand new law?”

      • Mach1man_69

        Any law that has been offered up since the Sandy Hook shooting have all been new laws. Politicians push for new gun laws and regulations every day. New York already has imposed new laws and regulations on it’s citizens in the past months and so has several other states.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        So what? What laws? How do they impact you?

      • John M

        Exactly. Though I would like to see them close the gun show loophole. And I wouldn’t be against background checks for private sales as long as it didn’t cost anything.

      • Mel

        A point that many people fail to recognize, is the death toll of suicide by gun is far higher than homicide by gun. Restriction of means is one of the best ways to prevent suicide as the actual act of suicide (even if it is previously thought about or planned) is often impulsive. Making someone wait in order to get a gun could save someone who is impulsively considering suicide.

      • Mach1man_69

        I would argue that suicidal people are very impulsive but also just choose the best available means. More gun control would only affect the suicidal individuals who felt like they HAD to use a gun. If we had no guns at all people would just use the best, fastest available means. I know that sounds very grim but I personally believe that to be true. I do understand your point though.

      • Mel

        What you say is definitely true, though it is also true that guns are one of the most lethal methods of suicide possible. If the person chooses another less lethal method, they have a chance to survive and receive treatment. Approximately 50% of people who are depressed (though depression is just one of the reasons that people choose to commit suicide and not all depressed people are suicidal) are treatable by medication of psychotherapy. I’m not trying to argue that this is a perfect solution, but that there are some possible benefits of this wait time.

      • Mach1man_69

        That’s true, I can’t really argue with that. It just sucks that everyone would be subject to a wait when only a relatively small number of people use guns negatively on a year to year basis. When you consider that in 2014 there were approximately 52,000 gun related incidents and of that only around 13,000 resulted in death, in a country with an estimated 90 million gun owners and 300 million guns, I would say that those odds are VERY good. At what point is it infringing on the rights of hundreds of millions to “hopefully” slow down what is probably inevitable anyway (suicide)? I really hate to even put it that way, especially when I know people that have committed suicide.

      • Mel

        I’m sorry you have had to experience something like that, I can’t imagine how difficult that must have been. I agree with you that the problem is relatively small scale compared to the amount of people who own guns. I am pro gun and own guns myself. Right now there is no exact measure of who will actually commit suicide and no way to fully prevent someone who want to do so. But we are learning more all of the time, and a new measure for suicidal thinking has just been developed that does not explicitly ask the person if they are thinking about suicide. I work in a research lab that studies these things, and I am very hopeful about the future of predicting/preventing suicide and do not see it as an inevitable event necessarily. Personally, looking at the sunk-cost situation for this, if a wait period saves 100 lives, I am for it because I believe human life is more important that possible inconvenience, though you have the total right to disagree.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Again, who is trying to take your guns? That seems to be Seth’s major fear.

      • John M

        People like Senator Feinstein. And the banning of parts of a gun that have no effect on it functionality. For instance, a pistol grip. Here in NY it is now illegal to buy a rifle with this type of grip. It makes no sense. It doesn’t effect how the gun works. It was just done to placate the anti-gun lobby.

      • Randall

        John M, handgun purchases by far outweigh military/assault rifle purchases by well over 10-1 margin so it’s very reasonable that 90% of all gun crimes are committed with handguns.

      • John M

        Actually, the percentage of gun crime committed with hand guns is even higher. It’s closer to 95%. Out of that 5% committed with rifles, less than 1% committed using “assault” type rifles. So all these laws against pistol grips and flash suppressors and foldable stocks have nearly zero effect on gun crime.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        So what is your point? We should have no laws?

      • Mach1man_69

        “Bad guys” rarely/never go the LEGAL route to acquire guns so how does creating more legislation do anything other than slow down a law-abiding citizen…because last time I check we are the only ones ABIDING BY THE LAW.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        What’s wrong with slowing down a law-abiding citizen? if s/he is law abiding, s/he shouldn’t mind having to go through a background check and registering said firearms. And how much does it slow you down? You expecting an apocalypse?

      • Mach1man_69

        Why do keep assuming that every gun owner is “expecting an apocalypse”. Are cops, securtity guards, etc… expecting an apocalypse? What makes you think that I can’t protect my family in my own house better than a cop that is 30 minutes away? The sad fact is that there are criminals out there that I am prepared to protect my family from….no apocalypse required.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Not every gun owner, just people like you.

      • Mach1man_69

        People like me? You have never met me……You are about the smartest person I have ever had a debate with.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        You go on about protecting yourself from murders, rapists, thieves and your avatar is a gun and lotsa bullets….pretty much pegged yourself. I don’t have to meet you.

      • Mach1man_69

        Then you go ahead getting raped and robbed and the whole time you are being victimized i want you to smile real big and be proud of youself in knowing that you did nothing to defend yourself. Big round of applause……

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        What makes you think statistically I’m likely to get raped or robbed? And why would I need a gun to defend myself? I think the best defense is a good, strong lock and not putting myself in stupid situations where I’m likely to get robbed.

        Seriously, do you really think if someone is robbing you at gunpoint you are going to be able to pull out your gun and shoot before being shot? You might want to talk to the cops about how well those shootouts work out.

      • Mach1man_69

        It doesn’t really matter statiscally because someone has to be that statistic, wouldn’t you rather it not be you? Also you never know when or where you could be raped or robbed but you can control your ability to protect yourself from it. It is your job to protect yourself because nobody else is going to.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Again, you really think you are going to win because you have a gun?

      • Mach1man_69

        It evens the playing field at least and gives you a chance. Other than that they will always have the upper hand, and i don’t like those odds.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        How many times have you been attacked/raped/robbed?
        How many people around you have been attacked/raped/robbed?
        Tell me how having a gun would help you with one pointed at your head?

      • frxhere

        All of these new gun laws won’t do anything to stop somebody who is determend to do what he wants to do! It’s like trying to stop drunk drivers by making it harder for sober drivers to get a car.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        See above. Felon didn’t go to a gun shop.

      • Taymie

        I just don’t want to be in the store when the bad guy with a gun decides to do bad guy things and the good guys with the guns decide to protect everyone else. And since there are so many of them out there these days several good guys with guns start taking out the bad guy with a gun.

        Only who knows who the original bad guy with a gun is? Because all most people know is there are people with guns and the original bad guy is indistinguishable from the rest.

        I’ve always disliked that argument.

      • DoctorButler

        It won’t prevent crime completely (obviously), but at the very least it will create more obstacles for them in their efforts to obtain a gun; it’s better than nothing.

      • terribletwos

        I remember all the panic over guns when Reagan passed gun legislation/registration. It was the same panic back then that it is now, same exact words…”they’re coming to take our guns”. Funny, there are tons more guns out there now per person than there were back then. No one took their guns, if anything people have more.

      • Lucy Olivera

        If you have mental problems, when you are released from the hospital all they do is have you sign a piece of paper that says you won’t handle guns for -x- amount of time. No checking to see if you HAVE any guns or access to any. That is one of the regulations they need to tighten, and like yesterday.

      • surfjac

        Why should you be allowed to carry?
        How much danger are you in? Is your family safe?
        Are you in law enforcement?
        How will you insure society that your gun won’t be used in a crime? How will you insure society that you will keep your gun safe and out of the hands of someone who shouldn’t get their hands on one?
        How’s that reasoning?

      • Leo

        Just take a look outside your country to countries where guns are restricted.(the rest of the OECD) Take the time to look at the statistics for gun crime based on population. USA 11 per 100,000 – Australia 0.93. I know where i’d feel safer.

      • Seth Williams

        Now look at those same countries and tell me what the gun culture was for the entire time the country has been a country. There wasn’t a huge “gun culture” in Australia to begin with. Not to mention, there’s more guns in the US than people in Australia. You can’t compare the two.

      • Scott Murkin

        Criminals also will not follow the murder laws and the theft laws. Should we repeal those as well? Actually based on the “criminals don’t follow laws” argument, we simply wouldn’t have laws at all.

      • Lucy Olivera

        On the good side, free marijuana and naked time for everyone!

      • truthbear

        But where’s the downside? There isn’t one.

      • Cathy Neal

        I would feel more comfortable with only criminals having guns. I actually come into contact with few criminals (other than politicians) in my daily life and do not hang around in their preferred locales. But my gun loving neighbor scares the hell out of me….waving his gun about if someone’s dog accidentally poos in his yard, always talking about his guns and how he is protecting his property….blah, blah. Obviously, he has masculinity issues but that is not my problem.

      • nette01

        Who is taking away the right to protection?

      • Sandy Greer

        I know a Dead Head with an arsenal of 20-30 weapons. 😉

        No such thing as ‘you gun people’. Just saying.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        And whaddya gonna do with 30 weapons? Just sayin’

      • Sandy Greer

        Well, he hunted. And collected. He grew up with them; always had them. Taught me to shoot. Bought my first, for me. Had a little ‘business’ – on the side. You probably know what I mean. 😉

        First husband. I call him the Big Burly Long Haired Hippie Motorcycle Dude Dead Head.

        I’ve moved on, but many fond memories of him.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Hunting and collecting is different from thinking everyone is out to get you. Sounds like he was a character. I’ve got a few of those in my past as well.

      • Sandy Greer

        Any man whose ex-wife speaks well of him has gotta be a ‘good guy’, LOL

        But I imagine anybody w/Skull & Roses avatar named suburbancuurmudgeon is a character in his own right. 😉 You be sure and have a good week ahead!

      • Mach1man_69

        How many gun owners do you actually know that have guns because they think people are out to get them? Just because you own a gun doesn’t make you parnoid it makes you prepared. Like owning a fire extinguisher doesn’t mean you think that your house is going to burn down, but I bet you have one easily accessible don’t you?

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Prepared for WHAT?

        I’m talking about the gun owners who keep saying the government is out to take the guns they need to protect themselves from the marauders and a tyrannical government.

      • Mach1man_69

        How about being prepared to protect my family from thieves, rapist, child molesters….the list goes on. You can choose to keep your head in the sand and your trust in the police. Back here in reality all these things are possible. 9 times out of 10 the police show up to clean up the crime scene and do the paperwork. Also, as far as marauders go, look up the LA Riots and how the owners were able to protect their businesses. And why is it so hard to believe that a governement can become tyrannical. I’m sure the jews in Germany, The christians in Africa, and everybody in Iraq under Sadam (to name a very few) could reassure you that it can happen. I’m not saying that OUR goverment is there yet but anything is possible. Look at how they have used the NDAA and PRISM to spy and detain US citizens….and that’s just a little reading material for you.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        So, you just made my point about “those gun people.” Seriously, YOU are going to take on the US military? Good luck with that. I’ll be on the sidelines with my popcorn watching.

      • Mach1man_69

        WHEN DID I SAY THAT? So putting words into people’s mouth is what you consider making your point? I just said it is eventually possible and it is…anything is possible. Please leave YOUR words out of MY mouth.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Your words: ” And why is it so hard to believe that a governement can become tyrannical.”

        Logical extension. “If MY government becomes tyrannical, I need to defend myself.” That is what you meant, is it not??? I rest my case.

      • Mach1man_69

        Saying it can become tyrannical and saying that it is are two totally different concepts. Either way, i never said that i wanted to fight them.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Yeah, you did: “How about being prepared to protect my family from thieves, rapist, child molesters….the list goes on.”

      • Mach1man_69

        I will shoot a rapist, thief, or molester in a second if they deserve it but i still did not mention fighting the government.

      • Mach1man_69

        IF it became tyrannical, yes. Some of us don’t like mass genocide. BUT I STILL SAID OUR GOVERNMENT IS NOT AT THAT LEVEL.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        I find it impossible to believe it would rise to that level. I don’t really worry about it.

      • Mach1man_69

        So did the jews, the Iraqis, the Chinese, the list goes on. It is possible but i hope it never gets that far. I highly doubt it too but i don’t count it out.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        We can agree to disagree. My response to government tyranny would be to move somewhere else, not to be delusional enough to think a bunch of us could pull off a John Wayne ride to the rescue.

      • Mach1man_69

        I am certainly glad that our founding fathers didn’t think the same as you because we would still be british. But why would you just move? Do you not believe in fighting for the things that matter? For your kids and grandkids?

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        That is an entirely different story, 200+ years ago and a lot more complicated than what you learned in school. If you want a different view, check out Colin Woodard’s book American Nations. Fairly enlightening. The “American Revolution” wasn’t universally embraced.

        But I’ll bet you and I would disagree on what constitutes “things that matter.” My kids and grandkids are screwed because we’re becoming an oligarchy.

      • Mach1man_69

        I agree that we are becoming an oligarchy but that’s exactly what the constitution is supposed to protect us from. Our founding fathers could see what politcal power does to people and they knew 200+ years ago that we would need a buffer (Constitution) against that.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Right…how has the Constitution protected us from becoming an oligarchy? You forget the Founding Fathers were rich people, not peasants.

      • Mach1man_69

        You have to follow the Constitution in order for it to work, a concept our politicians are not yet familiar with.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Please be specific. People like invoking the Constitution but interpret it to their liking, not according to what it actually says.

        Per our previous interaction:
        Things I consider worth fighting for:
        Universal health coverage
        Government of the people instead of the moneyed few
        Government that protects the weak from the powerful
        A justice system not influenced by money and status
        A strong social safety net
        A sense of community and obligation to one another
        Investment in education and infrastructure
        Fair compensation for one’s labor
        A more equitable distribution of income rather than the wide disparity we now have

        What’s your list?

      • Lucy Olivera

        Grow 28 more arms?

    • Mark Van Buren

      It won’t solve the problem, but it would help.

    • Phil Keast

      Australia implemented strong gun-ownership laws in 1996 after one of the few multiple death massacres in our history. People argued then that all it would do is take guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens and leave them in the hands of criminals. 18 years later, analysis of crime statistics has shown that it didn’t happen. Gun related crime was reduced. I understand the desire to own guns, I’d like to myself, and did before 1996, but the reduction in gun related crime, especially gun related deaths, makes restriction on gun ownership a price I’m willing to accept.

      If, however, you are referring to law abiding citizens buying them on the black market, why? What is it that makes so many people think that they need a firearm. Distrust of law enforcement officers? Crack down on corrupt cops. Distrust of the Federal government? Why? Democracy and federalism may have been an experiment that the states were wary of (one of the reasons for the amendment), but its been working for a couple of centuries now, its not a risky experiment, the “well trained militia” has become redundant. Distrust of the British coming back to reclaim the US (one of the reasons for the amendment in the first place)? Not going to happen.

      • Sandy Greer

        In 1996 what happened to your existing guns? Did people turn in their weapons?

        Hard to imagine it happening here, is why I ask.

        Here, law abiding citizens purchase at gun shops, or gun shows, some private sales.

        Criminals use the black market and/or ‘straw’ sales (somebody else buys for them) Ex-cons (even law abiding) can’t legally own a gun, so they do too.

      • Phil Keast

        People handed in their guns, voluntarily. There was an amnesty, a no questions asked period when illegal guns (like assault rifles, etc.) could be handed over. There was some compensation, but not much. The laws were enacted after a gunman killed 35 people and wounded 23 people at a popular tourist location. There was a sense of universal shock, and almost unanimous agreement that it should never happen again. There were protests over the stricter gun laws, but it was overwhelmed by the vast majority approving of the new laws. Haven’t had a multiple-victim murder, other than one group of criminals shooting at other criminals, since. And even then casualties have never exceeded single digits. After the laws were enacted, each years for the next few years there was an amnesty period so that those who didn’t hand over their guns during the initial amnesty could do so on a no questions asked basis.

        [Edit: there have been three “massacres” in which 10 or more people have died since 1996, all of them being the result of arson. And the death tolls have been 15 (June 2000), 11 (February 2009), and 10 (November 2011), respectively. Even so, not a bad record over and 18 year period]

      • Sandy Greer

        Serendipity; I’m reading about it now, on Wikipedia.

        I’m simply appalled. I can see why there was shock. I’m shocked, just reading about it.

        We’ve had many here. SO many. I would’ve thought, after the children at Sandy Hook (Dec 2012) that would be the time. But our ‘universal shock’ passed, without unanimous agreement. That’s why I don’t see it happening here. Sandy Hook should have been our catalyst. But wasn’t.

        Our country is so polarized – Dems/Repubs, Left/Right. Each distrustful of the other. The Right honestly believes Lefties (Obama) are coming for their guns.

        Other countries must think us crazy. Maybe we are.
        Sometimes I think there’s going to be another war here.

        Thanks for getting back to me. And thanks for your input on this issue. If somebody like you can’t get through – I don’t know what hope there is for us.

        Just too depressing, for words.

      • Seth Williams

        On the other side of the coin, Chicago has very strict gun laws but that hasn’t stopped the violence.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Chicago has a bad gang problem, exacerbated by high unemployment among the minority population. Since the concealed carry ban was overturned, it will be interesting to see what happens over the next 5 years or so. My guess is the cops will have more of an effect than “law-‘bidin’ citizens” carrying guns in Chicago.

      • John M

        So gun crimes went down. How about crime in general? We did have a ban on certain weapons. And all indication were that it had zero effect on crime. Criminals just chose a different weapon of choice. And that’ the thing. A criminal will find a way to be a criminal. Take the guns out of the hands of gangs and they will find another way of killing each other. Perfect example is Norther Ireland. Very heavy gun restriction there. So what did the IRA do? They built bombs.

      • Phil Keast

        Yes, I’m terribly sorry to tell you this, but the rates of crime of all types has been steadily decreasing for years. Admittedly, not all of that decrease is related to tighter gun laws. So while gun-related crime almost disappeared, overall rates of crime also decreased. When the odds of successfully committing a crime go down, less people commit crime, especially crimes of violence. The justifications, and fears, and ducking and weaving of those who oppose sensible gun ownership restrictions just don’t hold water. When the experience of other countries that do have restricted gun ownership are examined, gun-related crime virtually disappears, violent crime rates fall (not so easy to be a bully if you can’t carry a gun to compensate for your inadequacies), and overall crime rates also fall.

        As for the IRA, that wasn’t a criminal gang, it was/is a war against foreign rule by the English colonial government. Sound familiar?

      • John M

        I have no problem with sensible gun ownership laws. But it’s the illogical ones I have a problem with. And as for the gun crimes that have “virtually disappeared” in other countries. That’s just not true. Yes, they have been greatly reduced. But look at a country like Great Britain. They have thousands of gun crimes a year. And this is a country extremely strict gun laws. As for the IRA. Call them what you will. This was a group of people that didn’t have easy access to guns, so they built bombs.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Crime in general has gone down. http://www DOT fbi DOT gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime

      • John M

        crime rates have been dropping for 30 years. But even the FBI has stated, and the stats prove it, that gun legislation has had no real effect on crime.

    • surfjac

      This is not a Zero-sum game. It will not solve all the problems but hopefully some of them. We’ll never end all the gun violence in this country; we’re too uncivilized.

    • truthbear

      But there is no “downside” to better background checks. If people looked at all issues and considered the actual pros and cons of each one ( ie: no nonfactual Fox news “facts”, which are simply made up to confuse the people who don’t think on their own ), the Republican shit storm would end, because the truth and common sense would prevail.

    • ClemCadidlhoper

      Background checks won’t STOP anyone from acquiring guns legally, but can be a step toward limiting available guns on the black market.

    • lindylou

      Problem, if the “Good guy with a gun” is also practicing safe gun owning practice, he or she would keep the gun locked up separately from the ammunition (also locked up) … That allows absolutely zero quick reaction time when the crazed mobs are coming to take away your food or something.

  • suburbancuurmudgeon

    Add:
    Obama is a Kenyan socialist communist.
    Obama only got elected because of voter fraud
    Democrats don’t pay taxes and are moochers
    Regulations stifle job creation and innovation (said as they list innovations that actually weren’t developed in the US).
    Elect Republicans and we’ll be awash in jobs (paying $3/hr.)
    The 1% works harder than everyone else, that’s why they deserve obscene pay.
    You can be rich if you work hard enough; if you’re not rich, it’s your own fault.
    People choose to be poor (and gay).
    Critical thinking is bad and we shouldn’t teach it to our children.

    My favorite recent one: Red states pay more in taxes to bail out the blue states that ran out of money. (Actually, we blue states pay more in federal tax than we get back, while the reverse is true for the red states).

    • Live_Peace

      Great first line.

    • Lucy Olivera

      I thought Obama is a Kenyan Gay Muslim Socialist Communist Wimp Dictator ?

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Yeah, I’m still trying to reconcile the Wimp/Dictator paradox.

      • Heather Hakenewerth

        Cracked me up! XD

      • Stephen Barlow

        Wimptator?

      • Naes

        In mom jeans.

    • Nancy B

      A new one I’ve recently noticed: Obama’s not black. He’s part white and part Arab.

      • Eoin Maloney

        Better yet, through a series of careful interbreedings, Obama is 1/3 white, 1/3 Kenyan and 1/3 Arab (done via binary fractions to approximate 1/3 within a tolerance of 1*10^-10)

      • Eg Kbbs

        I vote that they’ll soon say Obama is 3/4 black, 1/8 white, 3/4 Arab / Muslim, and 3/4 Kenyan.

        After all, math isn’t their strong suit.

  • fifthdentist

    One of my favorites from my fundie Christianist, conservative oldest brother when discussing climate change or other environmental issues: “Man cannot destroy what he didn’t create.” Meaning that man can do whatever the hell he wants to with the planet without causing serious damage and is incapable o doing anything that would destroy all human life. Because apparently destroying all life on earth is his idiot, murderous god’s job.
    The sad thing is, he at one time was intelligent and funny. Now he sees everything as black/white, yes/no. There is room for thought, as his belief is absolutely 100 percent correct and no amount of information can make him budge. Perfect example: If a Republican nominee for Congress were indicted for child molestation in the days before an election, it would not be acceptable to vote for a Democrat. I actually asked him this question. Voting for a Democratic candidate, any time, for any reason makes one a “socialist.” Even if the Republican alternative rapes boys.

    • Seth Williams

      Apparently your brother knows nothing about nuclear explosions….

      • Mark Van Buren

        Humans created matter. So that doesn’t count.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        But they’re still working on anti-matter…

      • lindylou

        Anti-matter = Tea Party Brain.

      • Jerry Boyer

        Actually it’s

        Doesn’t matter = Tea Party

    • terribletwos

      Wow! De ja vue.

      • Eoin Maloney

        I hate to be a grammar Nazi (if it’s French grammar, does that techinically mean I’m actually a grammar collaborateur?), but it’s actually “Deja vu”, meaning lit. “seen already”.

    • surfjac

      Well, your brother is right. We can’t destroy the planet, just our ability to live on it.

  • Live_Peace

    Thanks for the list .

  • Dave Somerville

    Get off your high horse people, because it hurts like hell when you fall. We better start coming together or we will be a has been.
    1. Tax cuts free up capital for businesses to invest in R&D thus jobs. It is a chicken or egg scenario. Many products were developed before there was a demand. Overall, us companies pay 35% in taxes, some cheat, but the vast majority are responsible. Economics is much more complicated than consumerism.
    2 & 3 No contest. 4. There are background checks, what we are lacking is a responsible way to catagorize people as mentally unstable long before they have a chance to do harm. Registering firearms has nothing to do with this, that is over reach.
    5. Rich people spend their money, which does create many more jobs than those of lesser means like myself. An aircraft purchase, or boat, etc. employees thousands of people with good paying jobs, who in turn can buy TVs and ATVs – yes trickle down. The average house built impacts 260,000 incomes.
    6. Domestic oil production (and continuing responsible use) does keep prices down. There is a global market and supply and demand is extremely relevant. The ‘subsidies’ help to keep our prices low. Europe pays over $7 per gallon. China and India, etc. have incredible demand which raises the price. Making it here and keeping it here costs much less than importing.
    7. Pollution is a problem, but climate change has occurred at different rates long before we were a factor.
    8. Yesterday, all of those examples were Democrats. Now, your crazies jumped ship because of a black president.
    9. Government will do everything less efficiently and at more cost, the lies are the humiliating kick in the crotch on this one.
    10. Iraq war vote: 48:1 Republicans, 29:21 Democrats. There are plenty of veteran programs, the need to be run better, they don’t need more money.

    • gmartini

      Ahhh—The first comment that I read on this thread happens to be from another person who worships at the altar of the rich. Have you received your crust of bread and such? Did you get “trickled on?” How much are the Kocheads paying you to post such nonsense?

      • Dave Somerville

        You are so ignorant. I have worked for several small businesses, one major corporation and the military twice. I am far from rich and can account for every misstep that I have taken that has kept me from there. I have great respect for the small business owners that have paid their dues and have genuine concern for their employees, both in their welfare and continuing their business model to ensure their employment. The major corporation I worked for has a CEO that was just ranked one of the 10 richest this year. He is an asshole, he is a hired gun that is destroying the company. He got over a 50% raise while he has frozen pay cuts for his workers and every year reduces benefits and lowers working conditions. Office employees are encouraged to bring in their own supplies while their stock value is at record highs. The solution, is to not work for a company like that. My time in the government has not made me fond of their inefficiency and wastefulness. I have personal friends that are hard working business owners and people like you are an insult to them and what they do and what they go through to make payroll.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        So if that’s the case, why do you defend the 1%? As far as I’m concerned, most of them are assholes. We are not talking about small businesses (who usually get trotted out periodically as political pawns) but the people at the top that wrecked our economy and should be in prison.

      • gmartini

        The 1% are the ones screwing small businesses the most—One of the main reasons I avoid chains unless I have no other choice.

      • DoctorButler

        Small businesses are as vulnerable as anyone.

        The feds (on both sides, but ESPECIALLY The GOP) favor an unregulated free-market, because it allows major-conglomerates to wipe out all of the small-businesses, eliminating competition, and establishing a monopoly. The corporations then give the politicians that money back in the form of “donations” (Super PACs, dark-money, etc.) that keep those politicians elected.

        One hand washes the other, with a lather made from corruption. No one is insulting the Small Businesses owners that do their employees right, and demonstrate integrity.

      • gmartini

        You do not know anything about me. I once was a small business owner myself. I had to close the doors right before the Great Bush Recession; the writing was on the wall. Thanks for playing—-IGNORANT one.

      • Dave Somerville

        unfortunately, small business are vulnerable, especially early on and gmartini I wish you the best. But that is the risk. In New York there are so many regulations that it actually costs more than 100% of income to operate in some cases. It only takes $400k annual income/assets to be in the 1% so nearly any owner of profitable company of a dozen or so employees most likely are in that category. There are a few high profile assholes, but there are so many more business owners that are stand up men and women. But don’t get confused, their goal is always to make money. I’ve seen some sell off personal items and go into deeper debt to make payroll but when it is no longer a burden they can bear, the employee gets to walk away. The business owner gets stuck with the debt plus any assets/equipment/real estate, etc. I am still of the thought of pull yourself up by the boot straps and deal with it. People, need to take responsibility and be less reliant on the government or others. The reason why fast food and Walymart pay shit wages is because for every job opening they get 100 applicants. Clean yourself up and take the city bus down to the industrial section of town and knock on doors and offer yourself at minimum wage (same as fast food) to be an apprentice for a skilled trade. By the tenth business, you will have an acceptance. In most cases raises to a livable wage come quickly. It does work, it has worked for 100+ years.

    • Seth Williams

      1. Tax cuts don’t free up capital if they are just sitting on it. Businesses are making TONS of money as you can see from the Dow Jones. They just arn’t expanding. As for the 35% tax rate. Heh, most pay on average about 19%.

      4. We just need laws that make owners more responsible for their guns. If their firearm is used in a crime and i wasn’t reported stolen, that is on the owner.

      5. There are a LOT fewer rich people than middle class and poor. Not to mention the middle class is shrinking. A few thousand rich people is not going to create more demand than millions of middle class and poor. That’s just plain math.

      6. Nationalizing our natural resources and keeping them HERE would be better than sending our oil overseas. MOST of what we produce, isn’t used here.

      7. I agree, climate change is real but the fallacy that we are the cause of it is not. We are just speeding it along.

      8. Both sides have racists. The right just seems to be little more vocal about it.

      9. Socialized healthcare DOES work. This doesn’t mean though that you end all private sector healthcare. There does however need to be a government subsidized system in place to take care of those that can’t afford the private sector. Most European nations have a system just like that. You can use the government system if you want but you can also pay more and use your own doctor if you so choose as well.

      10. I’m in the military and I’m seeing how they are treating and us and pretty much taking away most of our benefits. Yes, i understand that some of the democrats are doing it as well but the Republicans are doing NOTHING to stop it. They’ll block everything else but they won’t block bills that strip service members of their benefits? They are not for the troops anymore.

      • Dave Somerville

        ahh A reasonable person. WRT corporate profits, in many sectors sales are actually low and stagnant, but stocks have been artificially inflated and that merit is what the CEO compensation is based on, because it makes money for the stock holders as well as anyone with a 401k, pension plan or other investment. Corporations are smarter than the average bear (that is how they survive), they know that committing to a larger workforce or higher wages during a period of false economy (quantitative easing) like we have is suicide. Unfortunately, the true problem with the strength of the middle class is that we have not changed with the times. Many students are getting irrelevant degrees that don’t have the return on investment. Currently, there are 4 million jobs that sit vacant because there are not employees with the skill sets to perform the required tasks. This should have been addressed years ago. We are in a heated fight with the rest of the world to produce workers with these skills.

        I was in the military in the 1990’s as well as `09-`12. In the `90’s budgets were slashed as well as retirements, etc. It is a giant industry and every period produces decades of commitments to veterans. This must be kept in check and able body veterans need to suck it up and move on. Everyone grabbing here and there for for theirs is just ripping it apart. Anyone that thinks that there is not enough education for Veterans hasn’t a clue. A 4 year ride at college plus tuition assistance during active duty is more than reasonable.

      • Seth Williams

        Oh I agree that the education part is fine (Though there was talk of getting rid of TA). I’m talking about the talk about getting rid of commisarrys, slashing retirement, slashing tricare (forcing soldiers to pay a copay), It really doesnt seem like they want to take care of those they keep putting in harms way.

        Yea I know it’s a false high. Banks are just tossing out money and the businesses are holding on to it. Sales though are up from 2009 across the board. Maybe not as high as they should be but they are higher. The problem is they got used to doing a certain amount of sales with a certain amount of people, now they don’t want to hire more and just keep the extra profit for themselves instead of hiring more and putting more disposable income out there.

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      1. A lot of R&D money comes from the public
      sector; the private sector only gets involved when there’s money to be made. Let me get you a list ofinnovations that came from those “socialist-hell holes” in Europe. The effective tax rate is far less than 35%;some companies pay no federal tax and some even get back more than they payin. The vast majority are not “responsible;”
      they are playing by the rules of a rigged game they helped create.
      4. What’s wrong with registering your firearms? You have to register your car. Stolen cars get ID’s by VINs. Same should be true of guns.
      5. Rich people park their money in the Caymans. Business is sitting on an estimated $3 trillion in cash. I don’t see it creating jobs. Ooo!
      Let’s use more luxury goods to tell the common folk how good they have it!
      6. Oil prices are set by a global market and what we produce has very little to do with that. Our gasoline prices around Chicago fluctuate widely for no apparent reason. European gas is higher because 60% of the price is tax and 40% is the price of crude, while in the US it’s the reverse.
      7. We’re talking about climate change that has occurred rapidly (the past 30 years). And what’s wrong with mitigating our own impact? Does EVERYTHING have to be about the almighty dollar?
      8. Those “Democrats” of yesteryear were called “Dixiecrats”
      and had little to do with the rest of the Democratic party. They became Republicans when Nixon employed his Southern Strategy some 45 years ago. Nice try.
      9.And the private sector will do everything less efficiently at more cost because it’s profitable. Flown a domestic airline lately? Crappy service, inefficient and costly. On the other hand, Medicare covers all seniors with no exclusions and the overhead is 5% rather than the 30% of private insurers. So, yeah, government often does work.
      10. And why do you always say, “The Democrats voted for the war!” as if it absolves you of all guilt? My mother used to say, “If
      your brother told you to jump off a bridge, would you do that too?” Why not just admit Iraq was a colossal, expensive blunder based on lies and the Democrats voted for it because Bush told them “You’re either with us or your with the terrorists.”? Stop using the Democrats to cover your butts.

      • Dave Somerville

        The Democrats did vote for the war. Don’t give me a hard time because THEY disappointed you. The vote was to declare war on another country and send Americans in harms way. Are you telling me that they are so weak that they were influenced by peer pressure and unable to perform their own due diligence? Democrats need to stop back peddling and take responsibility for their own actions. This was 2003, it wasn’t September 12, 2001. From the end of conflict in the first Gulf war to 2002, Saddam Hussein engaged US and coalition forces over 400 times and amassed his troops for a second invasion of Kuwait. The chemical weapons issue was one that everyone took as a talking point, and it did bite the Bush admin in the ass. But it was not the only factor, it was the easiest. It is now 2014 and we have been arm chair quarter backing and adjusting opinions to suit ever since. The air from the mid 1990’s to 2002 was much different, even during the Clinton years we were bombarded with the threat of Iraq chemical weapons, and his statements, non compliance and uncooperative actions.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        No, I am saying the GOP is so weak it uses the “But the Democrats let me do it” defense. Man up. You went to war on lies. Even Colin Powell said, “THis is bullshit.”

      • Dave Somerville

        No, it was a decision made by the US Government using the democratic process that it is founded upon. I don’t blame anyone, but Democrats are trying to position themselves as omniscient when over half of their contingent was in agreement as well as our allies. Obama also could have wound down the Afghanistan war but instead, he chose to ramp it up. And that decision was made when we had a Democratic controlled Congress and a Democratic President.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        No, you’re still hedging. Own up to the fact that Bush had a jones for Iraq and wasn’t going to let fact in his way instead of hiding behind the Democrats spinelessness.

        We were initially in Afghanistan for the right reasons but Bush chose to wander into Iraq. Obama’s military people recommended a surge and that recommendation wasn’t based on lies. By all accounts it worked. Now we’ll be out of there by the end of the year. Had he wound it down sooner, the GOP would have made the usual “soft on defense” argument. They wish we would have invaded Libya, Syria, Iran and Crimea, but thankfully cooler heads are now at the helm.

    • Nicholas A Kocal

      Sorry but you are wrong
      1. R&D is an expense so it is not subject to being taxed. SO no, lower business taxes does not create jobs. Lower taxes allow the executive board to take more out of the company.
      4. Background checks are not universal and in some places they are a joke.
      5. Rich people buy expensive cars that require no more labor than a cheap car. Sorry but no jobs there. They also gamble in the market, again, no jobs created
      6. Domestic oil production does not help when the oil is shipped overseas. And the cost of oil products in other companies is driven by taxes.
      7. The only group of people in the world who do not believe that man is contributing to climate change belong to the republican party.
      8. All of the racist democrats from before the civil rights act are now republicans.
      9. In almost EVERY case it has cost more for a private company to do the job than the government. For example medicare has a 2-3% overhead, private health insurance 30% or more.
      10. And no, the VA needs more funds as it is servicing hundreds of thousands more VETs now than it was before the Bush wars.

      • Dave Somerville

        you are wrong.
        1. Not every business is a mega corporation, get your head out of the sand. Every dollar that a company doesn’t have to pay to the government goes towards the company growing. Artificial stock prices are fueling CEO compensation, that’s why it has gotten crazy at the same time the stock market has.
        5. A Ferrari costs $400,000, not because it cost $10k to make and they pocket the rest. They require higher skilled engineers, R&D, manufacturing processes and maintenance over the average car. YES they do contribute more to the economy. And that is the most minor example. A Jet for instance impacts the economy 100’s of times more than a car, just in maintenance alone, not to mention what was required to bring it to market.
        6. Gas has a short window before it goes bad, over production as well as free markets goes into the global economy, the more that there is the lower the cost. The more that the US produces, the less it imports. Me personally, I think we should use everyone else’s oil first and keep what we have for the future. I am also adamant about reducing our use. I don’t think we should leave great debt and reduced natural resources for future generations.
        10. Vast funds have been pushed to the VA and we do have long term commitments. They need to manage their programs better.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        “Gas has a short window before it goes bad.” Right. how long does gas ever sit around? Why do I see that tanker truck refilling the pumps every couple of weeks.

        And a Ferrari is made in Italy. Does us no good.

      • Dave Somerville

        are you 15 years old, you are very narrow minded? Import duties alone are more than what a regular car taxes would be. Then you have all of the trickle down technology, carbon fiber, direct injection, super alloys, tires, other composites, safety, etc. Plus all of the super cars have been working on next generation hybrids, it just keeps going on and on. High end luxury cars have technology that trickles down as well. Back up assist, park assist, collision avoidance, lighting, on board entertainment. Its a global economy, Americans work over seas, foreigners work here. The Tesla Model S is an excellent example of all of this.

        Oil is brought to the surface, refined and quickly brought to market, the demand is extreme, that is why you see fuel trucks constantly and it doesn’t go bad. But if we were to just make it for our consumption, it can’t be stored long term.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        What makes you think all that technology originates here or has anything substantial to do with our economy? Where are the jobs, then, if all this is so great?

        Rich people don’t buy as much as poor people because there are far fewer rich people. They stash their money in the bank. Poor and middle class people, on the other hand, spend their money on things they need to live on, not on luxury cars.

      • Dave Somerville

        Are you aware that after the tsunami, Japan ceased operation of ALL of their nuclear power plants and now use fossil fuel generated power? So that increased demand. Countries like China and India have billions of people and their needs grow exponentially. Just talking about automobile sales, China is the largest market in the world now and it has just begun. There are dozens of other emerging markets and just population growth in general factors in. Shit, just searching for the missing Malaysian Jet probably used as much oil as everyone contributing to this thread would use in their lifetime. Transporting raw materials to China and manufactured crap back and forth is always taking more and more resources. Innovation like 3D printing and local manufacturing will help to curb the demand.

        As insensitive as it sounds, a poor or middle class person doesn’t generate much economy by just buying daily items. Our economy is based on consumption and medium and large purchases have a greater impact towards growth. That is one reason why durable goods are a measurement of economic growth. Rich people do spend their money, you ever watch TV? Just catch a specialty show and the amount of money spent on a motor home, a residence, their own movie theater, etc. Sounds shitty, but it has been like that for years. Check out all of the fancy islands on the Great Lakes from the industrial revolution. Another thing no one recognizes is that places like McDonalds have franchises. They worker pay comes from the franchisee, not the corporation. The CEO gets paid based on overall performance of the corporation. They don’t cut pay checks below the headquarters. Some places like California should have higher minimum wage, but when it costs 60% less to live in Phoenix than San Francisco, across the board increases are not reasonable. South Dakota pays $15 to start in fast food because they currently have a booming economy that requires that high of pay just to keep someone more than a week. People have to have the skills needed by industry and they must be in an area that is hiring. Phoenix, has a huge demand right now for skilled trades and everyday those jobs go unfilled, the economy remains stalled and someone is relegated to working a shit job like fast food or Walyworld.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Try a couple hundred million people buying stuff. Makes a big impact. What rich people spend, not so much.

        And I’ll bet those jobs go unfilled because (A) conservatives have made college obscenely expensive, (B) the parents of potential employers have had shit jobs for years and (C), those industries want to pay lower than market wages. Again, how about some figured. What industries are hiring? How much are they paying?

      • Dave Somerville

        Those couple hundred million people are already buying their stuff. There will be no gain if we pay a higher minimum, because then they will just lose their government subsidy and we won’t pocket more money, because we will have to pay more for the goods and services. Many people are irresponsible with their college funding. Since 1970 bachelor degrees have doubled, those in engineering have increased 60% while liberal arts and social services have increased 300 and 500%. Dwight Eisenhower couldn’t afford college so he and one of his brothers made a deal, one would work while the other went to school and they would alternate one year at a time. Then Dwight applied for West Point and was accepted. He worked two years to put his brother through school. A community college can get a person pretty far and when they start to make a good wage they can continue their education. Hands on experience goes a long way when you compliment it with education. There is no reason that someone has to got fight from high school to university especially when they haven’t a clue on what they want to do. That is just a waste of money. They don’t want to pay, is such a lame attitude.

        Manufacturing is hot right now, so machine operators, manual and CNC machinists, shipping/receiving, Quality control, management, etc. So everything from $8 to $30/hr

      • schwarherz

        “A community college can get a person pretty far and when they start to make a good wage they can continue their education. Hands on experience goes a long way when you compliment it with education. There is no reason that someone has to got fight from high school to university especially when they haven’t a clue on what they want to do. That is just a waste of money. They don’t want to pay, is such a lame attitude.”

        What? Just…what? Are you that deluded that you think University is a cakewalk to fund and people just “don’t want to pay”? I was forced to drop out of college because of lack of funds and no, I wasn’t going for a Liberal Arts degree. And yes, I did know what I wanted to do. Know what I’m stuck doing now? Food service. So I have two words for you, the first is an expletive, the second is a pronoun.

      • Dave Somerville

        they don’t want to pay was a response to the other guy saying that the tech jobs I mentioned were junk.

        You will just have to figure it out and overcome the obstacle. You aren’t stuck anywhere. Unless food service is the means to the end, i.e. they offer tuition assistance, get into something else asap.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Those have got to be the dumbest things you’ve ever said.
        1. WE are paying their government subsidy if their employer pays for shit (WalMart and McDonald’s). So what if we have to pay more for goods and services? Someone estimated the price of a big Mac would go up 68 cents. BFD.
        2. I went to a public university in the early 1970s. Tuition was about $250/semester. 35 years later, my nephew went to the same school where tuition was about $9000/semester. There is nothing “irresponsible” about college funding except the cuts in funding that have made public university education exorbitantly expensive. You want an education? You got to get the money somewhere.
        3. So if Arizona’s education system is so great, why are those jobs begging? Or are there really jobs to be had?

      • Dave Somerville

        Currently many minimum wage workers are on government assistance, right? If they earn a higher wage, they will lose that government assistance. So their buying power and quality of life did not increase. We were paying for that assistance, but we will not get more money in our pockets because the cost of goods will go up and the gov’t surely isn’t going to issue refunds. A place like McDonalds clears about 9% profit. They also pay additional taxes, insurance, workman’s comp, etc which is an additional 40% over the hourly wage. So $8/hr =$11, $10/hr =$14 and $15/hr = $21. Even if a Big Mac goes up $0.68 (it will go up more than that), that is about 15% increase. If a family or individual spends $500/week on goods and services that use minimum wage workers, that would be a $4000 increase in their annual spending. Your buying power just decreased considerably. And because businesses earn their profits from percentages, you put even more money into the pockets of those you despise. Workers, need to move on and move up to jobs that pay legitimate higher wages, not falsified ones like the rest of our economy. There is just more to it than waving a magic wand and giving people more $ arbitrarily.

      • golfdawg11

        I’ll agree with you on the community college, tech school, welders, etc. part, but you’re way off on the government subsidies. You have to make less than $5,000/year in practically any state to qualify for Medicaid and SNAP (food stamps). Wal-Mart has so many part-time workers who make so little in wages that their employees are the largest group of Medicaid participants in many states. Why does the taxpayer have to subsidize Wal-Mart employees because they won’t pay a living wage? That’s why I prefer CostCo, a company that pays a living wage *and* offers benefits.

      • golfdawg11

        Just a sidebar. College loans now are much more expensive, with higher interest rates, because the GOP wanted the “free market” to handle loans. In addition, when the individual bankruptcy laws were changed (I think I’m right on this one), you can’t discharge those loans, so the college graduate never gets out from under it. But, you can be like Trump and have your corporations go bankrupt multiple times, and start with a clean slate. Not so in individual bankruptcies anymore.

      • Dave Somerville

        Not all of technology originates here, but a vast majority of it does or is developed here. Often using foreign engineers and scientists, because this is still were things happen. Elon Musk came here for a reason. The economy is not a convenient on off switch. We don’t just pick up were we left off. A lot changed during the recession. There wasn’t just a housing bubble, there was a overmanned bubble. People that were filling a seat that now doesn’t even exist and never will again. Industry made investments in automation and lean manufacturing. Slashing the number of workers required previously. Innovations are one of the things that HAS kept this boat afloat. Slowly their is a change in the trend of sending all mfg to China. But if we get ahead of ourselves and raise our pay scales, we can kiss that opportunity good buy. There is absolutely no reason why a person can’t start at a job for $8/hr and move up the ladder as they build skills. It is people that have unfortunately found themselves obsolete that can only find work at fast food or Walymart.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Yeah, there are several reasons one cannot move up the ladder. We’re not all college material; sometimes a minimum wage job is the best one can do. Try spending a little time in rural America and you’ll see what I mean. Or maybe you won’t, since you are pretty myopic. I don’t see anything wrong with a $15/hr min wage. If I have to pay a little more for something, oh well.

        They don’t call ’em the 1% for nothing. The average person’s chance of getting to the 1% is slim and none, and Slim is out of town. The game is rigged.

      • BaliHai84

        The game is not rigged. People are just too lazy to do the work it takes to get rich. They don’t want to take risks to build a business. There are hundreds of stories of immigrants that come here with a few dollars in their pockets that build empires.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        So what point are you trying to make about gasoline? We’ve become a net exporter but our gas prices are still up to $4/gallon.

      • Steve Sapp

        Dave you have the wrong information. 1 in 4 corporations don’t pay any taxes that means the middle class has to make up the difference. And demand creates jobs not tax cuts. Come on man quit listening to fox news or who ever gives you that bull.

      • Kay Rowell

        To Nicholas A Kocal, I am in agreement with you on all counts. Wish there were more people who think for themselves and if you out there agree please get out and vote in the mid term elections. Don’t think that your vote doesn’t matter because that is one thing the nut cases who voted in all those tea party candidates are counting on. They think that because the Republican governors in so many states have made it so much harder for certain sectors of the population to vote that the tea party can continue to rule the people in this country. I say enough is enough. It is time for rational thinking people to make a stand!!!

    • 1EdMeadows83

      Your concept would be wonderful if it were true. The truth is when very wealthy people make more money it is shuttled off to Switzerland or the Cayman islands. Jobs are not created when that happens

      • Dave Somerville

        Here in Arizona which is a reasonable state, it is very expensive to register a motor home. It is less expensive for owners to buy and maintain an acre of land in a state such as Oregon or Texas and register it there. Thus, Arizona loses out on any revenue from that registration. Also, in Arizona, a company has to pay tax on any inventory even if it was there the previous year. Thus, creative accounting and restricted buying/investment are the result. Same thing with off shore accounts. When you have a million plus that the government wants to grab it is worth it for them to stash. When you or I have $1000 it isn’t worth the effort. Now, no one ever complains that when a US citizen is employed abroad or profits from overseas transactions that they must pay US income tax on that amount even if they do not reside in the US. We have so many of these BS laws that we just chase our tails going from fighting one to the other.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Arizona is NOT a reasonable state. You’re actually pretty much a joke.

      • Dave Somerville

        what wonderful state do you call home?

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Illinois. We pay more in federal tax than we get back. Your state gets more than you pay. I grew up in Bisbee. Yours isn’t the Arizona I knew 50 years ago.

      • Dave Somerville

        yup, North Eastern Democrats and Californians bring the dysfunction to Arizona that they left. Before the recession the Californian’s came in and drove home prices through the roof, that is why AZ was so hard hit during the collapse. I would have to venture that the federal funds that Arizona receives are for state lands/parks and Indian relations, because prior to the recession the state had quite the nest egg and currently AZ has reasonable debt. $5k less per person than Illinois.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        How about giving us some reliable figures instead of your guesses? According to a 2013 report, you’re $8.6 billion in the hole and have an AA- rating.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        But he will never believe that.

    • 1EdMeadows83

      “some cheat” Yeah, and some skunks smell bad. “(Veteran programs) ..don’t need more money” Neither does Wall Street.

      • Dave Somerville

        The Obama admin is the one pumping all the money into the stock market and banks creating a false economic recovery. There is tons of money already allocated for veteran programs. They need to be managed better. People have gotten way to accustomed to throwing money at the problem. Money tends to disappear when that is done.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        And what is your solution, Kemosabe? Seems Bush started “pumping all the money into the stock market” with that bailout.

        Actually, throw money at the common folk and they’ll spend it, creating more demand, which creates more jobs, which creates a stronger middle class.

      • Dave Somerville

        I remember Bush also sending every single American a bailout check twice. Conveniently forgotten. A one time save is different than a 6 year open check book. Bush tried to save the banks from failure, he didn’t prop up the stock market. The banks are now bigger and more influential than they have because of the Fed’s actions. All under the watch of Obama who said he would do the opposite. Hard times are what America needs, but average American’s can’t handle it. So the rest of us just continue to get taken advantage of. 1/3 of the country being responsible for the bills won’t cut it. A considerable number of Americans need to go to work and live with in their means, then move on and move up. Hand outs, paying people to stay home and falsely increased wages are destroying us.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Bullcrap. Bush did not try to save the banks from failure. Try reading the FCIC report (Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission), which laid the blame at Wall Street’s feet. Congressional Republicans have stonewalled Dodd-Frank, calling it a “job killer” even though nothing killed jobs like screwing the economy. [http://www DOT nytimes DOT com/2011/09/21/business/dodd-frank-act-is-a-target-on-gop-campaign-trail.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0)Their rich buddies don’t want any kind of regulation. Bush looked the other way while Wall Street got into the subprime market (and dont try telling me Fannie and Freddie and the Democrats invented credit default swaps.). Bush pushed for homeownership back in 2002 (http://ww DOT nytimes DOT com/2008/12/21/business/worldbusiness/21iht-admin.4.18853088.html?pagewanted=all)

        No, we DON’T need hard times. The 1% need hard times. We aren’t in trouble because people have credit card debt. We’re in trouble because Bush cut taxes twice while waging two wars on a Chinese credit card, passed an unfunded Medicare D benefit that was a giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry, looked the other way while Wall Street jumped headlong into the subprime market and then bailed out the bastards without demanding scalps in return. Wages are NOT going up; I’m not sure what fantasy world you live in, but they’ve been stagnating for 30 years. Those rich folk at the top outsourced most of our jobs.

        Seriously, what is WRONG with you?

      • BaliHai84

        Bush tried 12 times to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie mac and the Financial Ways and Means committee led by Barney Frank prevented the Regulation.

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        Uh, you do remember that bailout check a tax rebate. And I never got one.

      • Lucy Olivera

        I never got one either, and we pay over $10,000 a year in taxes. Anyway, financial wizards say that if Bush had taken those rebate checks and put them into an interest yielding account it would have earned a pretty hefty amount and it was a major error of the Bush Admin. Funny that David Somerville should bring that up! LOL

      • suburbancuurmudgeon

        I pay about $35,000/year in taxes. But, unlike some people, I don’t whine about it and say it helps lazy people.

      • giankeys luvs shemale porn

        you mean all the 568% profit my portfolio has made in past 6 yrs is “false”??
        NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

    • Phil Keast

      1) Company tax cuts result in more profit for companies. This could be used as capital, but generally just goes into shareholder dividends and executive bonuses. R&D is almost always listed as a business expense, coming out of the profit margin before taxes are calculated. As for companies paying 35% tax rate, yes, theoretically. However by “investing” money into tax exempt activities, listing shell companies and subsidiery companies in off-shore tax havens, moving expenses between productive and non-productive subsidiaries so that none of the branches of the company make a profit, and other creative accounting, companies pay 35% on the profit they declare, which is never the profit they generate.

      2&3) Agreed, non issue.

      4) I’ve already addressed gun control further up in this thread.

      5) Spending money on a luxury yacht doesn’t generate long term jobs. There are only so many people buying luxury goods, and those goods don’t create as many jobs as a new manufacturing plant for affordable consumer goods. Or spending the money on skills training so that people aren’t caught in the “you have no qualifications or experience, so you are unemployable” trap.

      6) the economics of oil production is such that companies sell their oil on the international market, then buy it back at subsidized prices. Win Win, get paid for the same oil twice.

      7) I disagree with the proposition that climate change is occurring as rapidly as some would suggest (Al Gore’s disaster movie predicting the end of civilization within 10 years is already proven to be wrong, it hasn’t happened yet). However, there can be no doubt that human activity does have an effect on the climate (and the environment on general), and given the exponential growth of industry and population, it will only get worse. But that can and will be solved by scientists and engineers, the exponential rate of scientific advances pretty much guarantees it. So, acknowledge that it is happening, fund the necessary research (green power is not yet a viable solution, more research needed), and get out of the way while reputable scientists and engineers can get on with the job of addressing it.

      8) The Democrats jumped ship a long time ago on these issues. They have been arguing against the fallacies listed above through many administrations now, both Democrat and Republican.

      9) How many times does it need to be said. Cost effective universal health care is possible, most of the other first world countries have it, and it works. The massive cost difference between government projects and the same project done privately is due to the failure of governments to stand up to the price gouging of suppliers. Demand that suppliers justify their prices, don’t just roll over and let them charge whatever they think they can get away with. An example. In Australia we have the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). The government subsidizes medications so that all PBS medications cost the same to the consumer ($36.50), with the difference between that cost and the price being paid to the pharmaceutical company paid by the government. Sounds like a disaster in the making, but it works. For a medication to be listed on the PBS the manufacturer must demonstrate that it does what they claim [evidence form scientists NOT paid for by the company or the industry]. The medication must be new, it can’t be a variant of an existing medication that doesn’t do anything the existing medication does but with an added, non-therapeutic ingredient. And it must be affordable, the government will not pay what the pharmaceutical company demands, they will negotiate what they see as a fair and reasonable price. And since a medication not listed on the PBS is virtually dead in the water, the pharmaceutical companies will and do negotiate. By standing its ground and not letting non-government suppliers to gouge them, prices are kept down. When a government sets the price as to what they will pay, instead of being dictated to by suppliers, the suppliers drop their prices rather than losing market share.

      10) I’m reminded of the quote “A pox on both their houses”. The WMD didn’t exist. And sending in an army is unnecessary. You want a regime change [whatever your justification], stop acting like massive loss of life on both sides is the best way to get it. Use small elite units to bring down infrastructure, disable military installation, hell assassinate the dictator if it comes to that. Mass army versus army confrontations are an anachronism. And when veterans come home, give them the treatment they need. Of course if the government had the courage to stand up to the entrenched interests of the insurance industry controlled health system and implement a more cost effective patient/government controlled system, providing the post-service care would be more affordable.

    • Sandy Greer

      I have a question WRT #4: Why do you think gun registration ‘over reach’?

      I register my car. Businesses are registered – requiring licenses and/or corp papers, bonds paid, etc, etc…

      ^^^Those, just off the top of my head. Are they ‘over reaches’, as well? Or is it just the guns?

      I know folks won’t bring in their guns for registration. But what about new sales – grandfathering existing firearms? I could support that, as well as periodic tests in proficiency and safety – similar to licensing, for cars.

      And, I wouldn’t call it cheating – exactly – but it’s easy to ‘hide’ stuff when you own a business. 😉 It’s not often spoken of, save among business owners. But IRS audits small businesses for a reason.

      Other than that, good job on your post!

      • Dave Somerville

        Thanks Sandy. Cars and Businesses are for use in the public domain, on public roads, with the public, using public resources, etc. If a vehicle is not being used in public, it is not registered, such as farm trucks, race cars or parts cars for restorers, etc. A fire arm is a personal item. If used for hunting, a permit is required for the person using the fire arm. The fire arms are serialized and the original purchaser is documented. I think that I have a reasonable solution for private fire arm sales. I think there should be a Paypal type of web sight were parties need to register and be background checked in accordance with the same laws that stores use. During the process, the seller looks up the buyer and gets an approval. Also the same as employers with e-verify. The actual weapon is not registered, just a verification that the buyer is not prohibited from owning a fire arm. The seller can retain the paperwork with other important documents for future proof. If this isn’t reasonable, then a licensed dealer can be used like a notary service.

      • Sandy Greer

        Sounds like a good idea. But, WRT registration – I’m still not clear why you think it an ‘over reach’?

        I don’t – is why I ask. At least, not for new weapons. I know people won’t bring in existing ones, LOL But for new – I don’t think it ‘over reach’. I’m armed myself, if it helps. Tho not to ‘carry’.

        Is it the government you fear?

        You posted the 2nd was not to protect us against our own govt tyranny. So why the balk at registration?

        And, what I liked most about your post was the ‘high horse, LOL Nice touch, that. 😉

      • Dave Somerville

        That wasn’t me that talked about the 2nd amendment. But currently the understanding (by way of current laws) of the 2nd amendment is that it is a right to bear arms. No mention of that with any other possessions. But the other thing that I forgot was recent situations where that one paper posted the address of every registered gun owner in the community, that is an invitation for criminals to target in an attempt to obtain fire arms illegally. Rosanne Barr published George Zimmerman’s parent’s house and an angry mob descended upon them. A situation like that could have happened after Sandy Hook, going from house to the other that is on a registered fire arm owners list. Remember, they are not convicted sex offenders, we are talking about law abiding citizens who are in legal possession of firearms.

      • Sandy Greer

        OK, I see. Sound reasoning. I’ve friends in NY; know about that case. Hadn’t heard about the other.

        I agree – anti-guns can get just as weird as the pros.

        BTW, I tried to Reply to your post below Phil’s. It said I couldn’t; you were ‘not active’. Know anything about that?

      • Dave Somerville

        maybe we were typing at the same time? I’m not a big gun person, but I did buy my first and only one last year and truthfully it is because I don’t know what our government is doing or would do in certain situations. I try to stay level headed but are you aware that we have had more acts of foreign terrorism on US soil in Obama’s first five years than every preceding administration? Being in Arizona the border is a sieve and there are all kinds of unchecked persons coming and going. There was a coordinated attack on the power grid in California the same week of the Boston Bombing that was close to taking out the entire nation’s electrical system. Talk about the chance for mayhem.

      • Sandy Greer

        Oh, God. Are you a Libertarian?

        I got into an argument about the border with one recently, and I’m not gonna do it again, LOL

        I’m in California. I’ve been stopped, in the Coachella Valley (approx 75mi north) and down in Organ Pipes (10mi north?) So I know they’re trying.

        Quit w/the foreign terrorism/Obama link. You’re gonna lose me, I promise. All I gotta do is mention 9-11. Foreign terrorists will probably come thru Canada – now THERE’S a border ‘unchecked’. Longer, too.

        I hate to say it, ’cause we were getting along so well. But I’m suspicious of folks worry about the border w/Mexico – as opposed to Canada – think it largely xenophobic.

        I know about the power grid; they don’t know ‘who’ (foreign/domestic) I’d guess domestic, but, just a guess. Truth be told, terrorism or no – the US power grid is antiquated; needs an overhaul.

        I hope, when you bought yours – you took a safety course? Obviously, that wouldn’t apply if you’re ex-military (can’t remember, too many posts to keep track) but I worry about folks buying their ‘first’ for fear of our govt. Just saying.

        Oh. And Arizona is one beautiful state. But everything is two hours from everything else. 😉

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      I found this to counter your claim about those poor overtaxed companies: http://www DOT forwardprogressives DOT com/10-companies-paid-taxes-despite-earning-billion-revenue/

      Verizon Communications: Profits: $19.8 billion Effective tax rate: -3.8%
      General Electric: Profits: $19.6 billion Effective tax rate: -18.9%
      Boeing: Profits: $14.8 billion Effective tax rate: -5.5%
      NextEra Energy (North America’s largest solar and wind power operator, based in Florida): Profits: $8.8 billion Effective tax rate: -2%
      American Electric Power (Electric utility based in Columbus, Ohio): Profits: $8.2 billion Effective tax rate: -6.4%
      Pacific Gas & Electric (California electrical utility): Profits: $6 billion Effective tax rate: -8.4%
      Apache: (Houston-based oil and gas company): Profits: $6 billion Effective tax rate: -0.3%
      Consolidated Edison: (New York energy company): Profits: $5.9 billion Effective tax rate: -1.3%
      El Paso: (Houston-based energy company that operates
      the country’s largest natural gas pipeline): Profits: $4.6 billion
      Effective tax rate: -0.9%
      CenterPoint Energy (Electric and gas utility company based in Houston): Profits: $3.1 billion Effective tax rate: -11.3%

  • Matthew Zierke

    The second amendment is not solely for self protection against criminals. The second amendment is to protect the citizens of these Divided States against a tyrranical government. You know the kind that tells you what you can and cant eat. If i want to supersize it thats what Im going to do.

    Its not the governments job to take care of you. Its their job to look outside these borders so you dont need to worry about getting nuked or invaded.

    Im a conservative, God fearing man, I served my country, I dont need anyone outside myself to make my life better. You want the government to hold yor hand?

    • gmartini

      So, what can you eat and/or not eat?

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      Right…let’s see and your idiot compadres take on the US army. What you are advocating is usually called “treason.” Stop whining. Some of us like government help. You obviously did because your military salary (and I’ll bet benefits) were paid for by the taxpayers. I think they call that “socialism.”

      • giankeys luvs shemale porn

        he worked 4 free as he is a true “patriot” akin to cliven bundy
        ================================================

    • Seth Williams

      Actually the 2nd amendment was not made to protect the citizens against a tyrannical government. It was made to protect the citizens against Great Britain. We didn’t have a standing Army and that was a way to have something in case the British were to come back and try to retake us.

      • Mach1man_69

        Actually the second amendment has nothing to do with Great Britain except for the fact that they were the reason why our founding fathers felt it necessary to add the amendment. The constitution is the law of the land for the United States of America. The second amendment was added to ensure that everybody reserved the RIGHT to bare arms, not just for protection against criminals or for hunting, but quite literally as a check and balance to ensure that our government never became as oppressive as Great Britain.

    • Lucy Olivera

      Oh puke. Move to Somalia.

  • annienfla

    They say they are “pro-life” but they are not. They don’t want to provide prenatal care for mothers, health care for children once out of the womb, food assistance, educational assistance, anything that actually is helpful for a good life.

    • 2Smart2bGOP

      They don’t understand the difference between being pro-life and only being pro-birth.

    • Edward Gutierrez

      The income tax form should say: “pay this amount to raise unwanted children”_____________ See how quickly they would change their mind about abortion.

      • Mr Creosote

        That number would be less than the tax incentives we give to the rich folks that adopt kids from China, and deduct all of those expenses on their taxes.

      • Edward Gutierrez

        Yes, its just not right.

  • Eg Kbbs

    I’d respectfully suggest adding a number 11: Any bill signed into law between 1980 and the present was the work of either Obama or Clinton. (corollary: Dr. Who has a TARDIS. Obama doesn’t).

    • suburbancuurmudgeon

      You mean like “Obama’s response to Katrina was pitiful” along with “Barry Frank is responsible for the housing bubble bursting.”

      • Lucy Olivera

        LOL! And Obama was responsible for the financial crash in 2008.

      • giankeys luvs shemale porn

        because he WANTED 2 be president

  • Beyonder

    Can’t wait for part 2.

  • Finn

    I haven’t read all the comments, but for me one of the biggest was when one of the Republicans during the last election said: “I know how to run a business. I will run US as a business and solve all the economic problems.”
    That was a statement that told me he had no idea on how to run a country. There are a few similarities: Income and expenses. However, employees and people are different. An employee you can say goodbye to and never see again. If you want to say goodbye to parts of your people, you have to kill them, deport them or remove their voting rights. Heard that one before?
    Another example is freedom of speech. In a company the employees will normally not speak out towards the person above them. In a country you can only do so by limit the channels that are available for them to use. Or to get information through.
    I guess this could go on forever. 🙂

  • BaliHai84

    Dumb things Democrats say: The Occupy movement is a peaceful movement, and the TEa Party is dangerous and violent. Not supported by fact. Ask the people of Oakland, NY, St. Louis and other cities which group did the violence and which group gathered peaceably.

    • giankeys luvs shemale porn

      final score: 10 to 2
      ========================================
      up next– comparing the federal policies of the past 25 yrs between dems and repubs and the overall effects they had cumulatively upon ALL americans

  • katherine norton malek

    My old (favorite) Uncle in FL – I love him to pieces but we must stay off the subject of politics. Here are a couple of his quotes: 1. “GWB was the best Pres. since Geo. Washington. He went in there & got those terrorists who bombed the World Trade Ctr”. Um, no unc, Osama Bin Laden was actually caught & killed by order of Pres. Obama. 2. “If you want the REAL news, the truth, you need to watch Fox. That Bill O’Ryan (sic) knows his stuff”. It just slays me. This is the guy who stepped up to the plate for my absentee father; went to the Girls Scouts’ daddy/daughter dance & pretended to be my dad because I wanted him to; took me back-to-school shopping & bought me the ridiculous shoes that I wanted; took me to every Disney movie as soon as it was released, even if it was in Boston, 1 1/2 hrs. from Hartford. He’s a victim of brainwashing. Fox (& othere media outlets) prey on ppl like him. They know these folks will never research or fact check. The death of Journalism in America. We should hold a funeral. Walter Cronkite is rolling over in his grave.

  • Joe Randazzo

    Sorry, but I just had to repost here…

    Does the “Forward Progressives” website use proofreaders? I am a former ’60s peacenick radical. I read the stories on this site every day. Here’s my problem: irrespective of the author, the grammar and usage are appalling.

    Most of these articles have errors in basic agreement in number between the subject and predicate. Somewhere out there nuns are cringing. There are other glaring errors daily. Agreement in person is violated with regularity. Let me just say this; the word “their” is a third person, plural possessive adjective. Please stop making it singular.

    There are many more examples I could give, but space and time make that prohibitive. May I suggest you have someone with some basic grammar and usage skills proofread your output.

    Your stories would be much more enjoyable if they read correctly.

  • Joe Randazzo

    Btw… I did not intend my posts to be mean. I love this site and will continue to come here daily. My suggestion was intended to make the stories more credible and enjoyable.

  • Stephen Barlow

    Too right in too many ways for an honest response from ANY Republican.
    #10 should be the First though.

    Supporting the Troops with 513 discharges, forcing as many as 75,000 vets to sleep in the street, begging for food because they no longer qualify for FOOD STAMPS?

    WHY is there ZERO MENTION of Walter Reed in the Bush Memorial Library? Why is 20% of it about the Mission Accomplished flight.

  • JAMEJO

    Psychological studies have shown that at one time or another, a vast majority of us, being “normal” people, will be mentally unstable, even if for only a very short time. Should we have general access to guns when this happens? My own feeling is that merely wanting guns for “protection” is a sign of mental instability. The odds of needing a gun for that reason are probably worse than the dds of winning the lottery; people DO win the lottery, but how often? How often have people benefitted from having a gun, and how often have they suffered more from having a gun? I think, from the statistics that are available, more people are harmed be legal guns than have ever benefitted from them.

    • giankeys luvs shemale porn

      that is awesome!!……………never saw that stated that way!

  • Michael

    I don’t know what the Democrats do in this case, but don’t Republicans usually make huge cuts to the VA to pay for more corporate tax breaks?

  • mencik

    Re: #10, Which party has been filibustering the Democrats bill to provide veterans with better benefits.

  • Traci Roberti

    the one that irritates me the most is “A vote for (insert democrat presidential candidate’s name here) means you’re voting for dead babies”. The first time I heard that I just looked at her and blurted out “WTF?!” and I normally don’t curse around strangers or older people (she was both). But ya, tax cuts create jobs, we support our troops, we need more of our own oil to lower prices and immigrants/homeless/prisoners aren’t people since they are seen as just an expense are my top complaints usually.

  • sooradar

    Rich people create jobs? Grand Cayman has been catering to the ‘rich’ for the past 10 years or so. Building super expensive condos and forcing the ‘middle income’ bracket away from the island as it is becoming unaffordable. The result is that the islands economy is collapsing. The ‘rich’ do not spend their money in GC and as there are fewer of them, the islands total economy is in trouble. The ‘rich’ do not create jobs just by being rich!!!

  • Curtis Scarbrough

    One I see a lot is “Hitler, Stalin and Pol Pot were all leftists”

  • Edward Gutierrez

    Obama has never been aggressive enough. We would have said: Follow me into my office, shut the door and I’ll show you something more impressive than my Birth Certificate.

  • Gabriel Gentile

    So what do we do about #8 when they mention Robert Byrd?

  • Mr Creosote

    #5 – -rich job creators…
    Seems all of the Fortune 400 list create jobs.
    128,000 people work at Microsoft.
    Turn #5 around – – how many people have the poor hired directly?

  • Xcalicoco

    The Mother Lode of GOP-Think is Rush Limbaugh. For 30 years, 3 hrs a day, he’s been crafting a whole new language, new ways of interpreting reality, usually preposterous in their convoluted logic, ways that always put “Liberals” in his gun sights. Then, his pronouncements, always catchy, become part of the jargon repeated by his devotees like schoolyard chants.

  • 1NedSprockethead1

    Now I know how Obama got elected: there is no limit to stupidity. As proven right here.

  • Marty Bundy

    Mildly interesting. Now do an article on the dumbest things Democrats say. Would be equally interesting. Seems to me criticism by both parties of the other is the pot calling the kettle black. You have to be at least mildly retarded to blindly Adhere To THE Views Of Either party.

  • alison grimes big toe

    spot on as usual #5. the middle class, those who buy goods and services with most of their income create jobs. Jobs are an expense for the 1% and only increase staff with increased demand.

  • A Clarke

    “Dumb and dumber” is not strictly limited to Republicans, but Caribou Barbie does seem to have one of the most successful franchises.

  • Eg Kbbs

    RE: #8 – and avoiding the changes of the parties over time, could you remind me which party the politicos belonged to who, in just the last few month, sued to do away with Judicial oversight of their gerrymandering ?

  • Michael Rath

    I agree with all but #4 and #7.

    #4 – What the hell makes you think the bad guy is going to subject himself/herself to a universal background check? Yes, there are a lot of potentially bad guys caught by UBC’s but far less then are not. The black market for criminals is extensive and is what needs to be stopped.

    #7 – The science is never settled. Once they claim that, all bets are off. You cannot find 97% of scientists who back up all the lies put out there – it’s a falsehood generated by alarmists from a simple search done by an Australian scientist. They took his research results and turned them around to a false fact.
    Climate change is real and may have a less than significant impact by man. The real question is not how to stop it – mother nature will determine the final outcome – but how to live with it. You cannot deny that severe climate change has never happened in the past. We have adapted to it and we can do so in the future. That doesn’t mean we should stop trying to pollute the world. We should instead learn how to reduce the pollution to as close as possible to zero.

    Just shows Republicans (the assholes) are not the only ones who make dumb-ass remarks, Allen. Democrats do the same (I did not _____ … fill in your own Clinton remark).