Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: More proof Obama is a socolaist look at what he says about Redistribution of Wealth

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836

    More proof Obama is a socolaist look at what he says about Redistribution of Wealth

    In this Audio Obama talks about the failings of the Supreme Court to change the FLAWED United States Constitution.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck

    I will break it down for you folks in this audio Obama says that he not only thinks that the "United States Constitution" was FLAWED when it came to redistribution of wealth, but thinks it was ok for the courts to change the "United States Constitution".

  2. #2
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Hey Havakasha what would you call Redistribution of Wealth?

  3. #3
    Havakasha is offline
    What is a socolaist? LoL.

    I would call redistribution of wealth what the Republicans have done to this country for the last quarter century and especially the last 8 years under Bush/Cheney. The figures dont lie. The rich have gotten much richer and the middle class are getting squeezed. Funny how Republicans were never concerned when they were doing it. When Democrats try to rebalance things and make things more fair its suddently brought to attention as redistribution of wealth. The bullies and the powerful are running a little scared

    I call that HYPOCRISY.

  4. #4
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    No what republicans do is let the people that risk it all, keep what they make and in that process give jobs to those that are not willing to risk a dam thing. When was the last time you got a job from a poor man.


    What democrats want is a system where noone is rewarded for risking everything to develope new ideas. You know what that gets you right.

    If not here is an example: In USSR a farmer was given 100 acres out of which 10 was given to him to do what he wants to do with and he would get to keep whatever he got from just the ten acres the other 90 he was only given 10% of the crops, the rest (90%) of which went to the state. 78% of the crops that did not fail came from the 10 acres the farmer was given to do what he wanted and got to keep for himself. While he was told he had to plant the whole 100 acres and tend to the whole 100 acres 78% of the crops came from the 10 acres he was given to do what he wanted.

  5. #5
    Havakasha is offline
    What is a Socolaist? John how come you never answer any questions?
    Are you a spoiled child or something?

    No.Republicans gave it to the rich through tax cuts, lax regulations and rewarding the giant corporations that support their agenda. They have been doing it for years. They had 6 years under Bush of unfettered control. Republicans had control of the House and Senate for those 6 years and look at what happened to income distribution during those years. You cant win on the facts John nor common sense. Provide the data during the Bush years please on income distribution and skyrocketing salaries for the Corporate heads who robbed this country blind. They rewarded their own base. But good try.

  6. #6
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Who are you trying to kid they had it was an even split in senate seats (one indepentant that voted with democrats) and only 12 extra seats in the house from 2000 to 2002. House added another 12 for a total of 24 extra seats in 2004. In the senate the republicans had 55 seats from 2002 to 2004.


    The best the republicans had was 5 extra seats for two years in the senate and in the house they had 24 seats for 2 years. For most of the rest of that 6 years you are talking about the republicans never held a real controlling body. For 2 years the senate was even and for the other 2 years the republicans only had 2 extra seats. THAT IS NOT "unfettered control".


    Now I saved the best for last. Hey dumbass when was the last time you got a job from a poor person????????????? Yea thats what I thought, NEVER. Hey dumbass who employs most people in the United States?????????? Yea thats what I thought, As you would say rich evil companies.


    Now while you think it is a bad thing that 30 years ago there where no billionaires and now there are many.


    Now while you think it is bad that 8 years ago there were less billionaires and millionaires and that it is bad that now there are many many more.


    I have news for you it is a good thing. Those are the ones that supply the jobs to people. YOU DONT GET JOBS FROM THE UNEMPLOYED. Increasing unemployment benefits largely just increases the time people stay unemployed. Look at what Newt Gingrich's bill on welfare reform did for the people on welfare. THEY MIRACULOUSLY FOUND JOBS THAT WHERE NOT THERE BEFORE.


    Like I said lloyd you want socialism because you cant make it on your own. You also dont think your kids can ether. You believe you will always need the governments help. Sad really, because you see I dont want the governments help because I dont need it and I will have tought my kids to excell so they wont need it. You really must have a low opinion of yourself and your offspring.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •