Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The left has an odd way of defining "fairness", and they are always whining about some group not paying their "fair share" as they would define it.
Ninety-nine per-centers (in their minds) think the economy is just some some big pie, and some at the top have an unfair slice of it. They want Barrack Obama to take more of it, and redistribute it to them.
It's time these people learn that the word "fair" does not appear in the Declaration of Independence or anywhere in the Constitution of the United States.
And I'm sick of Barack Obama's definition of "fairness" as well. If I have to listen to him talk about what's fair in any more campaign stops, I think I'm going to throw up.
Quote:
Maybe in the ethically twisted universe in which Obama's brain resides it is fair for non-union taxpayers to work until they are 65 or even 72 to support the right of school teachers and other union slugs to retire at 50 or 55. Is it fair that these same union members be vested with gold-plated lifetime health care and still be allowed to go back out into the work force and double or even triple dip?
I am thankful liberals aren't in charge of sports. Every game would end in a tie no matter how much better one team was compared to the other. Super Bowl rings for everyone!
I am thankful liberals aren't in charge of sports. Every game would end in a tie no matter how much better one team was compared to the other. Super Bowl rings for everyone!
Oh, that's coming! Believe me. School children have already been exposed to the idea of that kind of "fairness." Everybody gets a trophy. Everybody wins. Competition is bad. No one should do better than someone else.
Wow how did truth in advertising laws escape the OP? I'll abide by the law and refer to him as tonsofnonsenseguy. Right wing oddjobs will always find it funny when people are homeless/poor/unfortunate. As happy as children starving on the street will make you, normal people don't like that. The right has a creepy satisfaction in seeing poor people fail and rich right wingers succeed no matter how horrible the person. People like Don Blankenship, who is a right winger who dumps coal waste into the water in his area destroying the environment in a huge part of West Virginia, is a hero to teabaggers because he bothers them. Bothering liberals is a higher priority to right wingers than other right wingers killing their children, an unfortunate state of events.
The left has an odd way of defining "fairness", and they are always whining about some group not paying their "fair share" as they would define it.
Ninety-nine per-centers (in their minds) think the economy is just some some big pie, and some at the top have an unfair slice of it. They want Barrack Obama to take more of it, and redistribute it to them.
It's time these people learn that the word "fair" does not appear in the Declaration of Independence or anywhere in the Constitution of the United States.
And I'm sick of Barack Obama's definition of "fairness" as well. If I have to listen to him talk about what's fair in any more campaign stops, I think I'm going to throw up.
Thanks for the strawman argument -- that you can recognize by the phrase "they are always."
But according to this post, because fairness isn't mentioned in the Declaration of Independence or in the Constitution, you have no reason to be care about income inequality or a system that is rigged in favor of the ruling class. That's pretzel logic. Lots of things aren't mentioned in the Constitution and the lack of everything under the sun predicted in a document over 225 years old doesn't mean we shouldn't be concerned today about issues not thought of in 1789.
Just look around at some of the ridiculous threads here. The left would be funny if they weren't such sad little sacks of nothing.
They remind me of the video I saw this morning where people were protesting Karl Rove. When asked who Karl Rove is, they didn't have a clue.
Humorous.
You obviously weren't captain of your High School debate team. You get no points for throwing around unsubstantiated insults. There is no merit in writing about your take of a Karl Rove video that you haven't provided for us to draw our own conclusions. A video, as you describe, is meaningless. It's what Jay Leno does in "Jay Walking" -- he goes into the street and asks questions to dozens of people. Of course, he only airs the few people who make fools out of themselves. One must be rather gullible to think that the agenda video you saw is a fair representation and not mere propaganda.
I am thankful liberals aren't in charge of sports. Every game would end in a tie no matter how much better one team was compared to the other. Super Bowl rings for everyone!
Ha! So true. Their attitudes just seem to pervade everything. I guess personal accountability is just too much for them to comprehend.
They misunderstand "equal."
Here is what I don't understand. Maybe someone can clear it up, WITHOUT THROWING INSULTS.
As I have heard, Republicans believe that the wealthy - CEOs, presidents, etc - are the ones who create jobs. Therefore the money should go to them so that they can create these jobs and therefore the economy will improve. Is this right?
I don't think that works. These rich people have money now - what are they doing with it? And aren't several of these business owners the same people who took bonuses while their company was doing poorly? Why would we give them more money? They abused it the first time.
I am young so maybe I have it wrong. Did I get it correct?
You design an unfair capitalist system that moves all the wealth to the top of a pyramid scheme, then complain when people want to make some needed corrections in it. The first thing you have to learn about the big eco-pie, is once all the wealth has reached the top, the 99% no longer have the ability to consume products. Guess what happens next.
I don't know if you read the OP's linked article by Ralph Alter. It's a whiny attack piece making all kinds of unsubstantiated accusations which can be expressed by this example at the end: "Obama's sense of fairness will have him believe he is entitled to take some souvenirs from the White House for his personal collection." The piece is a strawman. It asserts that Obama has this mythical sense of fairness (as if having a sense of fairness is a bad thing) and then wraps all kinds of nonsense around that myth.
News flash: Obama didn't invent the college entrance system and if Adler thinks that Obama got an unfair advantage I am sure he doesn't consider the unfair advantage that GW Bush got in the same process -- who benefited from being a legacy -- the child of someone who went to Yale.
Last edited by MTAtech; 06-27-2012 at 07:18 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
