Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

# RomneyShamblesFollow

#402 Sep 20 2012 at 9:01 AM Rating: Excellent
******
41,245 posts
He didn't have the advantages of being Latino.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#403 Sep 20 2012 at 9:03 AM Rating: Good
Supreme Lionator
*****
13,907 posts
We've already done that one, haven't we?
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#404 Sep 20 2012 at 9:04 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
7,426 posts
Its funny because the majority of those 47% are likely GOP supporters. So his comments seem wonky. The majority of those who don't pay these net taxes reside in Red Block states, and the majority of them all are Old age folks who are already unsatisfied with Romney/Ryan plan to make medications vouchers.

Outside of his elite 50K a plate dinner party, I just do not see how these comments could be valuable to the campaign. Then again to be fair he didn't know he was being taped, and certainly couldn't have expected the tape to be released during the revamp period of his campaign.

In either regard, as the saying goes its best to not open your mouth and have people think you are stupid, than to open it and prove it.

Considering he came out within hours of the tape confirming that is how he felt was even stupider, then less than a week later recant on the underlying context of the comments, unbelievable.

Edited, Sep 20th 2012 11:05am by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. @#%^ OFF YOU. @#%^ YOUR BULLsh*t SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS @#%^ING sh*tTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#405 Sep 20 2012 at 9:06 AM Rating: Good
****
6,470 posts
Elinda wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
Eske Esquire wrote:
To be fair, he was speaking about securing votes.

He directly said that those 47% were too self-entitled, self-declared victims and too lazy and uninterested in personal responsibility to try and get their votes.

He can try and spin that now into "But I really do care about you" but that's his uphill road to travel.

Iir he said he was writing off the 47%. I took that to mean he was writing them off as perspective voters in the election versus writing them off as american citizens. But then yeah, he did go on to say stupid and stupider stuff.

He seemed to genuinely think, or at least genuinely think he could convince his audience, that the 47% that payed no net taxes were the same 47% that said they were voting for Obama in a poll. That seems rather self defeating whether trying to secure votes or campaign contributions.


Agreed (both of you). Just making a semantic point in response to rdm's wording.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#406 Sep 20 2012 at 9:07 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
28,585 posts
Its funny because the majority of those 47% are likely GOP supporters.

probably not. Living in Mississippi doesn't make you a GOP voter by default.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#407 Sep 20 2012 at 9:15 AM Rating: Good
******
21,715 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Its funny because the majority of those 47% are likely GOP supporters.

probably not. Living in Mississippi doesn't make you a GOP voter by default.

It does make your vote practically worthless if you aren't one.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#408 Sep 20 2012 at 9:30 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,426 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Its funny because the majority of those 47% are likely GOP supporters.

probably not. Living in Mississippi doesn't make you a GOP voter by default.


No you are right it does not make you a GOP voter by default, which is why I said likely GOP supporters.

http://taxfoundation.org:81/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/UserFiles/Image/Fiscal%20Facts/20100524-229-nonpayers-map-.jpg

Contrast those states to these numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2008#Result

The probability that the majority of these 47% are GOP supporters is pretty damn high, as a statistics guy I think you should be able to figure out why.

____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. @#%^ OFF YOU. @#%^ YOUR BULLsh*t SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS @#%^ING sh*tTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#409 Sep 20 2012 at 9:32 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
28,585 posts

t does make your vote practically worthless if you aren't one.


It does? I'd think the opposite. My vote for Obama in the 'Chussetts is virtually worthless. He's going to win by 1,000,000 votes. My vote for Romney has more utilitarian value. It offsets an Obama vote. If more Romney voters are motivated it might change something. If more Obama voters are motivated he wins by 2,000,000 votes.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#410 Sep 20 2012 at 9:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
10,369 posts
43% Voted for Obama and 45% didn't pay taxes in Mississippi. I smell a correlation...

Smiley: tinfoilhat
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#411 Sep 20 2012 at 9:36 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
28,585 posts

The probability that the majority of these 47% are GOP supporters is pretty damn high, as a statistics guy I think you should be able to figure out why.


No, it isn't. You're buying spin. The numbers exist already. The majority are Obama voters. Why do you think you're reading a presentation of such oddly compiled data. It's to argue a case. A case that happens to be demonstrably not true. It's easy to find how low income voters broke. They broke for Obama. Some of the very slight outlying cases of families who don't pay fed income tax for other reasons, military or whatever wouldn't be enough to make up the difference if they all voted GOP. They don't.

Don't be a sucker because you're being sold something you want to believe. It's just not the case that low income voters break republican, they don't. It'd be ironic, and a better story, but that doesn't make it true.

Sorry.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#412 Sep 20 2012 at 9:49 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,426 posts
But the Elderly voters went for McCain, and the Elderly voters represent about 27% of this 47%. Which McCain won. Same argument other side of the coin. The lowest income earners (who make less than enough to pay net taxes) only represent about 18% of this 47% (based on votes by income bracket) which Obama did win. He didn't single out the poor, he collectively labeled anyone who does not pay taxes as a victim, and dependent on government, firming it up saying they have no desire to help themselves.

The numbers show that the majority of the voters Romney labeled were GOP supporters in 2008, and likely to be GOP supporters in 2012.

As for being a sucker it doesn't matter to me who paid what and who didn't I live in Canada. I am just observing this with an open mind. I suspect realistically if you were to break it down that the numbers would end up at about 50/50 just like the average popular vote does in nearly every election. But I would bet that the majority of them are Republican supporters, based on demographics, and voting history.

Edited, Sep 20th 2012 11:50am by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. @#%^ OFF YOU. @#%^ YOUR BULLsh*t SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS @#%^ING sh*tTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#413 Sep 20 2012 at 9:49 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Vote share by income distribution (taken from CNN exit polls)

 
                               2004        2006        2008      2010 
Income between...              R-D         R-D         R-D       R-D 
Under $15k                    36-63       30-67       25-73     ----- 
$15-$30,000                   42-57       36-61       37-60     41-56 (under $30k) 
$30-$50,000                   49-50       43-56       43-55     46-51 
$50-$75,000                   56-43       48-50       49-48     52-46 
$75-$100,000                  55-45       47-52       48-51     56-42 
$100-$150,000                 57-42       51-47       51-48     56-42 ($100-$200k) 
$150-$200,000                 58-42       51-47       50-48     ----- 
Over $200,000                 63-35       53-45       46-52     62-35 


I put that together from another thread back when and am not trying to prove anything with it now other than it seemed topical. Variations in the 2010 numbers were, as I recall, due to CNN changing its classifications.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#414 Sep 20 2012 at 9:52 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
28,585 posts

The numbers show that the majority of the voters Romney labeled were GOP supporters in 2008


No, they really don't. I'm willing to look at some numbers, though. Unleash them.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#415 Sep 20 2012 at 10:03 AM Rating: Decent
******
21,715 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

The numbers show that the majority of the voters Romney labeled were GOP supporters in 2008


No, they really don't. I'm willing to look at some numbers, though. Unleash them.


Numbers.

The lower the income, the higher the margin for Obama in 2008, regardless of age. Interestingly, there is no such clear division between voters aged 50 and above.

rdmcandie, you're wrong. Give it up.


As far as the numbers go, the most disturbing thing for me is that regardless of age or income, white people still vote predominately republican, while other races favor democrats. Whether that's because other races still perceive themselves as some huge minority influence that is being "kept down by the man" or because too many white folk are so indoctrinated and/or retarded as to believe the whole trickle-down theory really helps them, the situation is just bizarre enough to reinforce my negative outlook on the American public in general.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#416 Sep 20 2012 at 10:05 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
****
7,426 posts
hmm it was 2010 when the Elderly flocked to the GOP, not 2008 my bad. I retract my postings because apparently I forgot how to read dates on the articles I was viewing.

(granted 51% in 2008 is still a Majority =D)

Edited, Sep 20th 2012 12:10pm by rdmcandie
____________________________
HEY GOOGLE. @#%^ OFF YOU. @#%^ YOUR BULLsh*t SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS @#%^ING sh*tTY BINARY ASS. ALL DAY LONG.

#417 Sep 20 2012 at 10:12 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
BrownDuck wrote:
As far as the numbers go, the most disturbing thing for me is that regardless of age or income, white people still vote predominately republican, while other races favor democrats. Whether that's because other races still perceive themselves as some huge minority influence that is being "kept down by the man" or because too many white folk are so indoctrinated and/or retarded as to believe the whole trickle-down theory really helps them, the situation is just bizarre enough to reinforce my negative outlook on the American public in general.

Immigration debate, "anchor baby" attacks, Southern Strategy, Reagan's Cadillac welfare queens, Scary black president is going to end work requirements for welfare, "citizenship papers please" legislation, revival of poll taxes under the guise of "preventing (non-existent) voter fraud", etc.

What's confusing?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#418 Sep 20 2012 at 10:15 AM Rating: Good
******
41,245 posts
Not sure if you forgot a comma, or gay people.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#419 Sep 20 2012 at 10:20 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I'm more curious about the Jewish vote. For all of the GOP cries about Obama abandoning Israel, he's still polling nearly 3:1 over Romney in that demographic. I know Netenyahu isn't terribly popular even in Israel so expecting American Jewish voters to flock under than banner is a bit silly but Jewish voters are a traditional Democratic voting bloc regardless. A lot more socially progressive Jews than conservative orthodox ones? I hate to assume it's only religion (for instance, Catholic Democrats are often more labor-oriented than Rome-oriented for completely non-religious reasons).
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#420 Sep 20 2012 at 10:28 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
10,369 posts
Wow, the Asian vote really swung fast; from 31/55 to 63/35 (D/R) over just 16 years. That's pretty drastic.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#421 Sep 20 2012 at 10:31 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
28,585 posts

I'm more curious about the Jewish vote. For all of the GOP cries about Obama abandoning Israel, he's still polling nearly 3:1 over Romney in that demographic. I know Netenyahu isn't terribly popular even in Israel so expecting American Jewish voters to flock under than banner is a bit silly but Jewish voters are a traditional Democratic voting bloc regardless. A lot more socially progressive Jews than conservative orthodox ones? I hate to assume it's only religion (for instance, Catholic Democrats are often more labor-oriented than Rome-oriented for completely non-religious reasons).


I don't spend much time in or know many people from Florida, but most Northeast Jews I know are far less concerned with Israel than most evangelical Christians I know. I imagine the rhetoric is aimed at both places.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#422 Sep 20 2012 at 3:29 PM Rating: Excellent
******
21,715 posts
I'm not saying I believe it, but lol anyway.
____________________________
R.I.P. Jessica M. 5/3/2010
This post brought to you by Carl's Jr.
gbaji wrote:
You guys keep tossing facts out there like they mean something.


#423 Sep 20 2012 at 3:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,528 posts
BrownDuck wrote:
As far as the numbers go, the most disturbing thing for me is that regardless of age or income, white people still vote predominately republican, while other races favor democrats. Whether that's because other races still perceive themselves as some huge minority influence that is being "kept down by the man" or because too many white folk are so indoctrinated and/or retarded as to believe the whole trickle-down theory really helps them, the situation is just bizarre enough to reinforce my negative outlook on the American public in general.

Republicans believe either (A) We've fixed all the institutional racism problems and everyone actually has an equal opportunity, therefore minorities only become poor due to laziness; or (B) It doesn't matter if opportunities for minorities are unequal. All that matters is letting the free market reign in order to create the most efficient economy, which will, in the long run, end up helping the poor minorities (become ever-so-slightly less poor).

It's not terribly bizarre, it's been that way for a while.
____________________________
Na Zdrowie
#424 Sep 20 2012 at 4:08 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
19,321 posts
trickybeck wrote:
BrownDuck wrote:
As far as the numbers go, the most disturbing thing for me is that regardless of age or income, white people still vote predominately republican, while other races favor democrats. Whether that's because other races still perceive themselves as some huge minority influence that is being "kept down by the man" or because too many white folk are so indoctrinated and/or retarded as to believe the whole trickle-down theory really helps them, the situation is just bizarre enough to reinforce my negative outlook on the American public in general.

Republicans believe either (A) We've fixed all the institutional racism problems and everyone actually has an equal opportunity, therefore minorities only become poor due to laziness; or (B) It doesn't matter if opportunities for minorities are unequal. All that matters is letting the free market reign in order to create the most efficient economy, which will, in the long run, end up helping the poor minorities (become ever-so-slightly less poor).

It's not terribly bizarre, it's been that way for a while.


Republican platforms quite obviously favor the white middle class over minorities or lower classes. It's not really subtle, so I don't see why it would be surprising that minority and lower-income groups would gravitate towards the Democratic platform. Race was a leading factor in the creation of the New Right, so I don't see why that would have changed, especially not with the Tea Party Movement.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#425 Sep 20 2012 at 4:47 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
27,889 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I'm more curious about the Jewish vote. For all of the GOP cries about Obama abandoning Israel, he's still polling nearly 3:1 over Romney in that demographic. I know Netenyahu isn't terribly popular even in Israel so expecting American Jewish voters to flock under than banner is a bit silly but Jewish voters are a traditional Democratic voting bloc regardless. A lot more socially progressive Jews than conservative orthodox ones? I hate to assume it's only religion (for instance, Catholic Democrats are often more labor-oriented than Rome-oriented for completely non-religious reasons).



It's a bit complicated but yeah, you're on the right track. American Jews in general are progressive with special sympathy for causes around social justice. They're also pro-education and largely pro-labor, again in general. They tend not to go in for social conservatism being imposed on others in any big way, although many, possibly most, would be considered fairly conservative in their own behavior.

Someday I'll write a paper about the core differences between groups that do proselytize and those that don't, mainly because I'm curious about what I'd end up saying.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#426 Sep 20 2012 at 5:04 PM Rating: Good


"Browning points'! Hilarious!!!
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#427 Sep 20 2012 at 5:07 PM Rating: Excellent
******
41,245 posts
Looks like he oversampled the bronzer.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#428 Sep 20 2012 at 5:57 PM Rating: Excellent
****
6,470 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:


Top comment is amazing. Romney, in sombrero and mustache. "He is the Juan Percent."
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#429 Sep 20 2012 at 6:02 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
28,585 posts
Someday I'll write a paper about the core differences between groups that do proselytize and those that don't, mainly because I'm curious about what I'd end up saying.

Nebbishy kvetching, we assume.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#430 Sep 20 2012 at 6:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
27,889 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Someday I'll write a paper about the core differences between groups that do proselytize and those that don't, mainly because I'm curious about what I'd end up saying.

Nebbishy kvetching, we assume.



Vas! Vhy vould you assume such a ting?

Vey ist mir.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#431 Sep 20 2012 at 6:27 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
This is not the sign of a confident, winning campaign:
Reuters wrote:
A comment that Obama made in an interview with the Spanish-language television network Univision in Florida gave Romney an opening to charge that the president is ineffective.

Obama told Univision his 2010 U.S. healthcare overhaul was a result of Americans exerting pressure on Washington for action.

"You can't change Washington from the inside, you can only change Washington from the outside," he said. "That's how the big accomplishments like healthcare got done, because we mobilized the American people to speak out."

An animated Romney quickly pounced on the remark as evidence that Obama cannot break the political gridlock that has seized Washington as lawmakers grapple with massive debt and annual $1 trillion deficits.

"The president today threw in the white flag of surrender again. He said he can't change Washington from the inside, he can only change it from outside. Well, we're going to give him that chance in November. He's going outside," he said at a Sarasota rally.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#432 Sep 20 2012 at 6:48 PM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,618 posts
Samira wrote:
Jophiel wrote:
I'm more curious about the Jewish vote. For all of the GOP cries about Obama abandoning Israel, he's still polling nearly 3:1 over Romney in that demographic. I know Netenyahu isn't terribly popular even in Israel so expecting American Jewish voters to flock under than banner is a bit silly but Jewish voters are a traditional Democratic voting bloc regardless. A lot more socially progressive Jews than conservative orthodox ones? I hate to assume it's only religion (for instance, Catholic Democrats are often more labor-oriented than Rome-oriented for completely non-religious reasons).


It's a bit complicated but yeah, you're on the right track. American Jews in general are progressive with special sympathy for causes around social justice. They're also pro-education and largely pro-labor, again in general. They tend not to go in for social conservatism being imposed on others in any big way, although many, possibly most, would be considered fairly conservative in their own behavior.

Would that include the orthodox Jews, or just the normal people who happen to be Jewish?
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#433 Sep 20 2012 at 7:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
27,889 posts
Orthodox Jews don't go out of their way to insist others follow their laws.My theory is that this is directly tied to the fact that Jewish people don't try to convert others. You're born Jewish or you aren't; and even that depends on your mother's ethnicity. Having a Jewish father isn't enough. Conversion isn't particularly encouraged; you have to convince a rabbi that you really want to convert.

Compare that to evangelicals, who try to convert you to save your soul and also make every effort to regulate your behavior while you're on earth. I could be wrong, but I see a correlation.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#434 Sep 20 2012 at 8:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
19,321 posts
Samira wrote:
Orthodox Jews don't go out of their way to insist others follow their laws.My theory is that this is directly tied to the fact that Jewish people don't try to convert others. You're born Jewish or you aren't; and even that depends on your mother's ethnicity. Having a Jewish father isn't enough. Conversion isn't particularly encouraged; you have to convince a rabbi that you really want to convert.

Compare that to evangelicals, who try to convert you to save your soul and also make every effort to regulate your behavior while you're on earth. I could be wrong, but I see a correlation.


I have a friend who grew up in an orthodox family who said that was exactly the case. Very, very few Jewish groups are interested in converts, and many do it begrudgingly. Some still exist who won't allow it at all. And conversion is a really intensive process.

They also do hold standards for Jews and Gentiles to be different. Most Jewish groups do not judge gentiles according to their own laws--they don't care that you refuse to eat Kosher. Most religions tend to see the laws of God as being universal. Jews believe that those laws were set down for them. They don't care that other people don't follow them, because other people aren't the promised ones.

But their own history has taught them what happens when a culture collectively casts aside another group, so they tend to strongly favor social programs that prevent this from happening.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#435 Sep 20 2012 at 8:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
That doesn't explain the D ballots though.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#436 Sep 21 2012 at 2:47 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,618 posts
Ah, okay. I never really knew what the deal there was.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#438 Sep 21 2012 at 6:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
2,405 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:

Iir he said he was writing off the 47%. I took that to mean he was writing them off as perspective voters in the election versus writing them off as american citizens. But then yeah, he did go on to say stupid and stupider stuff.


He did. The most damaging one is too subtle to use on most voters, though. "I inherited nothing" as if Daddy's connections and the guarantee of a robust safety net in the case of any failure allowing him to risk at will was an identical circumstance to someone born into abject poverty.



And yet that fails to compare to obama's "if you have a business you didn't build that" speech

Even if Obama does win its looking like the gop is going to take the senate. Fortunately Obama's losing ground fast in the swing states


Do you research things before posting?
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#440 Sep 21 2012 at 6:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Even if Obama does win its looking like the gop is going to take the senate.

Not by any current metric.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#441 Sep 21 2012 at 7:18 AM Rating: Excellent
******
41,245 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Why not go suck some more dick you're obviously good at it.
Why do you think about dick sucking when someone asks you about research?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#442 Sep 21 2012 at 7:22 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
"This is for science, son"
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#443 Sep 21 2012 at 7:59 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
28,585 posts

And yet that fails to compare to obama's "if you have a business you didn't build that" speech


True, Obama's speech was completely accurate and an excellent talking point that demonstrates how idiotic the GOP fantasy of Randian superheros is.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a whore. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. @#%^ off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#444 Sep 21 2012 at 8:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Gurue
*****
16,227 posts
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:

Iir he said he was writing off the 47%. I took that to mean he was writing them off as perspective voters in the election versus writing them off as american citizens. But then yeah, he did go on to say stupid and stupider stuff.


He did. The most damaging one is too subtle to use on most voters, though. "I inherited nothing" as if Daddy's connections and the guarantee of a robust safety net in the case of any failure allowing him to risk at will was an identical circumstance to someone born into abject poverty.



And yet that fails to compare to obama's "if you have a business you didn't build that" speech

Even if Obama does win its looking like the gop is going to take the senate. Fortunately Obama's losing ground fast in the swing states


Do you research things before posting?


Yeah I get that you have nothing positive to say about Obama. Why not go suck some more dick you're obviously good at it.

Why can we never get any truly witty new people anymore?
#445 Sep 21 2012 at 9:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
10,369 posts
Nadenu wrote:
Why can we never get any truly witty new people anymore?


Youtube.

Kids these days, they're just rotting their brains away there. Can't do anything witty unless you have a camera to exploit it for your 15 minutes of fame.

Smiley: disappointed
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#446 Sep 21 2012 at 9:35 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
11,699 posts
New YouTube sensation: 'Smasharoo haughtily yells at passersby for 15 minutes'

That will get the traffic numbers up.
____________________________
What if the bird will not sing?
Nobunaga answers, "Kill it!"
Hideyoshi answers, "Make it want to sing."
Ieyasu answers, "Wait."
Timelordwho answers "Just as Planned."
#447 Sep 21 2012 at 9:37 AM Rating: Excellent
******
41,245 posts
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#448 Sep 21 2012 at 10:10 AM Rating: Decent
Prodigal Son
*****
19,618 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Nadenu wrote:
Why can we never get any truly witty new people anymore?


Youtube.

Kids these days, they're just rotting their brains away there. Can't do anything witty unless you have a camera to exploit it for your 15 minutes of fame.

Smiley: disappointed

Actually youtube shows are coming along quite nicely. Ever watch Ray William Johnson? My son *loves* his shows.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#449 Sep 21 2012 at 1:43 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Romney does the Friday afternoon new dump and releases his 2011 taxes.

People immediately notice that he overpaid, claiming far less in charitable deductions than he was allowed. Assumption is that this was to keep his rate over 14%. He said earlier in the year that he's always paid at least 13%.

Edit: From Romney's website and to clarify that he wasn't hiding this information...
Quote:
The Romneys’ generous charitable donations in 2011 would have significantly reduced their tax obligation for the year. The Romneys thus limited their deduction of charitable contributions to conform to the Governor's statement in August, based upon the January estimate of income, that he paid at least 13% in income taxes in each of the last 10 years.


Amusingly, Romney previously said that if he paid more in taxes than he was legally required to, he wasn't qualified to be president.

Edited, Sep 21st 2012 2:47pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#450 Sep 21 2012 at 5:33 PM Rating: Excellent
From Gawker:

Gawker wrote:
According to a summary of their 2011 return released by the Romney campaign, the Romneys paid $1,935,708 in federal income taxes last year on $13,696,951 in income, almost all of it from his investments. That comes out to a 14.1% tax rate, far below the top rate of 35% for earned income. But here's the thing: Had Romney taken full advantage of all the deductions available to him, the rate would have been much lower, perhaps as low as 9%. He donated $4,020,772 to charity (good for him!), but only claimed a deduction on $2.25 million of that. Why? His campaign told BuzzFeed:

The Romney Campaign wrote:
He has been clear that no American need pay more than he or she owes under the law. At the same time, he was in the unique position of having made a commitment to the public that his tax rate would be above 13%. In order to be consistent with that statement, the Romneys limited their deduction of charitable contributions.


In other words, Romney picked a tax rate and told his accountant to hit it. "Just get me somewhere north of 13% so people don't get mad at me." It's just an accounting gimmick; numerical smoke and mirrors. The tax return version of "I'm running for office, for Pete's sake—I can't have illegals!" Romney's reasoning is that he has previously said he never paid less than 13% in taxes. BUT HE WAS WRONG! Because in 2012, his burden under our galactically unjust tax system was less than 13%. So in order to retroactively render his remarks accurate, he simply rejiggered some numbers, neglected to take some deductions, and paid 14.1%. See—all fixed!


He is the prime candidate, retroactively amending tax returns to coincide with statements made after he filed them. Good game, sir.

Edited, Sep 21st 2012 7:33pm by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#451 Sep 21 2012 at 6:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
I liked how the campaign says they'll have a notarized summary of his taxes from the past 20 years.

I can take a photocopy of my dick, write "Loch Ness Monster" under it and get it notarized. Notarization isn't evidence of accuracy or truth, just that the person who claims they signed it was witnessed signing it.

Even more realistically, notarization is proof that someone pressed a piece of inked rubber to it for a moment since I've never had a notary raise a fuss over being given a pre-signed piece of paper and asked to notarize it
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 42 All times are in CDT
Debalic, Kakar, Technogeek, Timelordwho, Anonymous Guests (38)