The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: Freeper on September 24, 2011, 10:55:06 AM
-
cap (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep-24-11 11:48 AM
Original message
Republicans and Media Teeing up attack on Elizabeth Warren
Edited on Sat Sep-24-11 11:49 AM by cap
I notice that they are all calling her "Professor" and not "Dr.". I think that the campaign ads against her are going to be running as effete, out of touch academic. They are going to start saying that she is "lecturing" when she beats the pants off of them. Watch and see.
I think it will be fun to watch her turn this all against them. Watch and see. She will say "What are your values?" Reality TV?
Also, I think she will have a special appeal from middle age women. I think she will have that vote in her back pocket.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1996377
I've seen posted on DU, "If you don't want people laughing at your beliefs, don't have funny beliefs.".
In other words she said something stupid, and she will get called on it.
bluerum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Sep-24-11 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. They are trying to get out front of her media appearances. Once
you hear her and watch her debate, and hear her story, you will understand that we need this woman representing us.
The rw spinners need to smear her and create an alternate persona as much a possible before people get to know her.
Trust me, there is no spin needed to show how wrong she was.
-
I said it before, and I'll say it again:
Elizabeth Warren = Martha Coakley.
-
I don't understand this post. Are you attacking Elizabeth Warren? If so, I don't see any substantive attack. I also don't see the M$M attacking her, just ignoring her. She's been proven right about damned near everything, and the Obama Administration, especially the Secretary of the Treasury, hate her guts as much as Wall Street does. Because they ARE Wall Street.
Elizabeth Warren wants to return to the days of intelligent and necessary regulation of Wall Street. Obama and the Republicans do not. Please tell me, just what is the difference between the Obamacrats and the Republicans when it comes to Elizabeth Warren?
-
I don't understand this post. Are you attacking Elizabeth Warren? If so, I don't see any substantive attack. I also don't see the M$M attacking her, just ignoring her. She's been proven right about damned near everything, and the Obama Administration, especially the Secretary of the Treasury, hate her guts as much as Wall Street does. Because they ARE Wall Street.
Elizabeth Warren wants to return to the days of intelligent and necessary regulation of Wall Street. Obama and the Republicans do not. Please tell me, just what is the difference between the Obamacrats and the Republicans when it comes to Elizabeth Warren?
So you subscribe to the accusation that the evil factory owner only got his factory because only other people paid taxes for the roads and so forth that he uses?
You think that the owner didn't pay taxes before he opened that factory, and that he isn't paying taxes while running that factory?
That factory owner pays much more in taxes for all those "free services" that she is claiming he gets.
If the factory owner wasn't paying any taxes and never did, then she would have a point.
-
So you subscribe to the accusation that the evil factory owner only got his factory because only other people paid taxes for the roads and so forth that he uses?
You think that the owner didn't pay taxes before he opened that factory, and that he isn't paying taxes while running that factory?
That factory owner pays much more in taxes for all those "free services" that she is claiming he gets.
If the factory owner wasn't paying any taxes and never did, then she would have a point.
You are overgeneralizing. I must admit, you overgeneralize well. I am not referring to the factory a few dozen blocks away that manufactures just a few items and employs maybe a couple of hundred people, and usually far less.
In fact, I wasn't talking about factories of any kind at all. Neither was Elizabeth Warren. She's been focused primarily on the financial sector, which doesn't make anything at all other than good or bad bets. Why is it that glorified gamblers get more breaks from our government than small factories or farms do? Why is Wal-Mart allowed to pocket all local sales tax collected for a number of years just for opening a superstore in some small town just to hire a few hundred people at part-time minimum wage, so little that the employees qualify for Food Stamps and Medicaid? Why is JP Morgan bailed out while small farmers are allowed to lose their farms and homeowners their homes?
And, speaking of factories, why are American factories allowed to fail so that new ones can be opened in China? Sorry, but for me, American patriotism and self-interest outweighs pure corporate profits. This isn't just a firebagger position, it's a good old fashioned conservative American one. On that one, I agree with Pat Buchanan. Not exactly a socialist, he.
-
I did not have a so called factory but we did put out about 3-4 custom machines a month, during the republican prosperity years of 1994-2007. The city. county, state, and federal government did NOTHING to help me. What they did do is throw innumerable roadblocks, inspections, fees, taxes, paperwork,... in my way. There was nothing helpful about it.
No if anything the various deal and job killers did their best to make sure I did not grow my business.
Ms. Warren would not know how to run a business nor hold a real job in the private sector. She is the type of person that is forcing American business off shore. Until these types in the 0bama mold are out of power there will be no recovery.
-
You are overgeneralizing. I must admit, you overgeneralize well. I am not referring to the factory a few dozen blocks away that manufactures just a few items and employs maybe a couple of hundred people, and usually far less.
I was responding to what she said with the reality of the situation. I know that "fair share" is the phrase of the month with 0bama and all the lefties, so everything coming from them will imply that the rich don't pay their fair share.
In fact, I wasn't talking about factories of any kind at all. Neither was Elizabeth Warren. She's been focused primarily on the financial sector, which doesn't make anything at all other than good or bad bets. Why is it that glorified gamblers get more breaks from our government than small factories or farms do? Why is Wal-Mart allowed to pocket all local sales tax collected for a number of years just for opening a superstore in some small town just to hire a few hundred people at part-time minimum wage, so little that the employees qualify for Food Stamps and Medicaid? Why is JP Morgan bailed out while small farmers are allowed to lose their farms and homeowners their homes?
I was pointing out what was wrong in her little story. Whether she meant actual factory owners or if it was a parable, like you claim, the parable is flawed.
You have to ask 0bama why JP Morgan got bailed out.
And, speaking of factories, why are American factories allowed to fail so that new ones can be opened in China? Sorry, but for me, American patriotism and self-interest outweighs pure corporate profits. This isn't just a firebagger position, it's a good old fashioned conservative American one. On that one, I agree with Pat Buchanan. Not exactly a socialist, he.
I guess that raising their taxes is what you consider American patriotism, since that is what Elizabeth Warren, and 0bama are pushing for.
-
I was responding to what she said with the reality of the situation. I know that "fair share" is the phrase of the month with 0bama and all the lefties, so everything coming from them will imply that the rich don't pay their fair share.
I was pointing out what was wrong in her little story. Whether she meant actual factory owners or if it was a parable, like you claim, the parable is flawed.
You have to ask 0bama why JP Morgan got bailed out.
I guess that raising their taxes is what you consider American patriotism, since that is what Elizabeth Warren, and 0bama are pushing for.
Tariffs are different from other sorts of taxes, but I quibble. Yes, taxes on the upper 2%, anyway, should be raised dramatically. Job creators, my ass. Not here. Not in America, they ain't. As for bailing out JP Morgan, both Bush AND Obama did that, and I know perfectly well why they did: they have the same paymasters. Well, judging by your handle, Freeper, you'll reply. I may not do the same. No offense meant, but I simply do not have the time to get into a snark contest here. I'm going to a football game tomorrow.
-
Tariffs are different from other sorts of taxes, but I quibble. Yes, taxes on the upper 2%, anyway, should be raised dramatically. Job creators, my ass. Not here. Not in America, they ain't. As for bailing out JP Morgan, both Bush AND Obama did that, and I know perfectly well why they did: they have the same paymasters. Well, judging by your handle, Freeper, you'll reply. I may not do the same. No offense meant, but I simply do not have the time to get into a snark contest here. I'm going to a football game tomorrow.
How high should taxes be raised on that 2%? What exactly is their "fair share"?
It wasn't the 2% that mismanaged the money in the treasury, so why is it up to them to pay for the mistakes that greedy politicians made?
What right does 0bama have to ask them to pay even more when his party hasn't been responsible with what they already have taken?
-
I said it before, and I'll say it again:
Elizabeth Warren = Martha Coakley.
I think you are being awfully hard on Martha. :rotf:
-
I think you are being awfully hard on Martha. :rotf:
Any sentence that has 'hard on' and 'Martha' next to each other must be false..... :popcorn:
-
Any sentence that has 'hard on' and 'Martha' next to each other must be false..... :popcorn:
Lizzie goes beyond a double bagger. Martha, while no prize hog, at least wouldn't leave young childred scared for life. :whistling:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Martha_Coakley_crop.jpg)(http://images.businessweek.com/mz/11/17/600/1117_mz_29polwarren.jpg)
-
Tariffs are different from other sorts of taxes, but I quibble. Yes, taxes on the upper 2%, anyway, should be raised dramatically. Job creators, my ass. Not here. Not in America, they ain't. As for bailing out JP Morgan, both Bush AND Obama did that, and I know perfectly well why they did: they have the same paymasters. Well, judging by your handle, Freeper, you'll reply. I may not do the same. No offense meant, but I simply do not have the time to get into a snark contest here. I'm going to a football game tomorrow.
Bitch slap for not finishing what you started
-
So you subscribe to the accusation that the evil factory owner only got his factory because only other people paid taxes for the roads and so forth that he uses?
You think that the owner didn't pay taxes before he opened that factory, and that he isn't paying taxes while running that factory?
That factory owner pays much more in taxes for all those "free services" that she is claiming he gets.
If the factory owner wasn't paying any taxes and never did, then she would have a point.
I think the factor owner would only receive tax rebates or exemptions in areas that are near desperate for that factory to remain in its location. Save for rural towns (where the tax rate is usually the same as residential homes), commercial property usually pays a higher mill rate. Unless of course they are located in a city where that city can't afford for that factory to leave.
Warren is a coffee shop intellectual that we have had quite enough of with this administration. Disaster ensues if her theories ever met practice.
-
I haven't seen one of these in years but you used to see a trailer truck with a sign on the back saying, "This vehicle pays $4,267 in federal road use tax annually". Do DUmmies pay that much to use the road?
The overall "tax" cost of operating a truck would be much higher than that now.
-
I haven't seen one of these in years but you used to see a trailer truck with a sign on the back saying, "This vehicle pays $4,267 in federal road use tax annually". Do DUmmies pay that much to use the road?
The overall "tax" cost of operating a truck would be much higher than that now.
I have never seen them -- excellent idea though.
-
I have never seen them -- excellent idea though.
I've seen them, but not damned near enough.
This is the same reason I think that prices shouldn't be quoted as a single total; they should be the price, and then the taxes involved, for the total price, to remind people what they're paying for.
-
I've seen them, but not damned near enough.
This is the same reason I think that prices shouldn't be quoted as a single total; they should be the price, and then the taxes involved, for the total price, to remind people what they're paying for.
Another thing they should put on the back of trucks are..."Driver gets tested for drugs and alcohol often....you, only if you get caught"....and another, "My vehicle gets inspected by the DOT several times a year...does yours?"
Shoot, you could put a library on the back doors of trailers for DUmmies to read. And at the very bottom, "If you can read this, you are following to closely."
-
She emits arrogance like a freshly-chopped onion emits pepperine, Atman emits hyperbole and invective, and Pitt emits self-serving and nacissistic BS.
Elections are political processes, not merely analytic exercises, and the results therefore have to do with both substance and perception. I don't know how her 'Czarina knows best' attitude will play with the Massholes, but in this part of the country she'd be dead meat.
-
For me the taxes are secondary. It is the regulations that kill manufacturing. These go from labor through out the entire cycle to selling and shipping. In kalifornia the state itself estimates that 35% of the price of an end product is for regulations. The funny part is the smartest people in the room keep asking why business is leaving at an average rate of 5 per day for the last 6 years. Taxes play a part, a large part, but are 5 to the regulations that are a 9.
As to being patriotic to stay in some over regulated and taxed area. If you can't compete and sell your product at a minimum at break even, then there is no business. This simple fact can't get truth a DUchebag's simple mind.
Someone here or at another board said this, "Other countries make products and businesses, we only make government." That's true and is why we are in the economic mess we are in. Sadly, the only solution the collectivists have to fix this problem is to make more government faster.