One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
A Response to Obama's "income ine******y" Speech.
Feb 26, 2014 14:20:35   #
PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.
 
In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on WHAM
1180 AM, said this in response to Obama's "income ine******y speech":

Two Americas

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas.

The America that works, and the America that doesn’t.

The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.

It’s not the haves and the have-nots; it’s the do’s and the don’ts.

Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society, and others don’t. That’s the divide in America.

It’s not about income ine******y, it’s about civic irresponsibility.

It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office.

It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. That’s not invective, that’s t***h, and it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income ine******y.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.

That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. V**e Democrat.

That is the philosophy that produced Detroit. It is the e*******l philosophy that is destroying America.

It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have ens***ed them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope.

The president’s premise – that you reduce income ine******y by debasing the successful – seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.

Because, by and large, income variations in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income.

You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.

You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course.

Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant

income ine******y between us. Our lives have had an ine******y of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in e******y of effort. While my doctor went to college and then dev**ed his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant.

He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.

Does that mean he c***ted and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It is not ine******y Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail.

There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure.

The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy.

Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach e******y of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring ine******y of effort.

The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.

Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster e******y through mediocrity.

He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the v**es of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow.

Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the t***h to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.'

Reply
Feb 26, 2014 14:34:34   #
vernon
 
Old_Gringo wrote:
In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on WHAM
1180 AM, said this in response to Obama's "income ine******y speech":

Two Americas

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas.

The America that works, and the America that doesn’t.

The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.

It’s not the haves and the have-nots; it’s the do’s and the don’ts.

Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society, and others don’t. That’s the divide in America.

It’s not about income ine******y, it’s about civic irresponsibility.

It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office.

It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. That’s not invective, that’s t***h, and it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income ine******y.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.

That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. V**e Democrat.

That is the philosophy that produced Detroit. It is the e*******l philosophy that is destroying America.

It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have ens***ed them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope.

The president’s premise – that you reduce income ine******y by debasing the successful – seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.

Because, by and large, income variations in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income.

You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.

You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course.

Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant

income ine******y between us. Our lives have had an ine******y of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in e******y of effort. While my doctor went to college and then dev**ed his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant.

He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.

Does that mean he c***ted and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It is not ine******y Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail.

There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure.

The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy.

Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach e******y of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring ine******y of effort.

The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.

Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster e******y through mediocrity.

He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the v**es of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow.

Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the t***h to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.'
In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester ... (show quote)


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Feb 26, 2014 15:59:13   #
faithistheword
 
Old_Gringo wrote:
In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester talk radio personality on WHAM
1180 AM, said this in response to Obama's "income ine******y speech":

Two Americas

The Democrats are right, there are two Americas.

The America that works, and the America that doesn’t.

The America that contributes, and the America that doesn’t.

It’s not the haves and the have-nots; it’s the do’s and the don’ts.

Some people do their duty as Americans, obey the law, support themselves, contribute to society, and others don’t. That’s the divide in America.

It’s not about income ine******y, it’s about civic irresponsibility.

It’s about a political party that preaches hatred, greed and victimization in order to win elective office.

It’s about a political party that loves power more than it loves its country. That’s not invective, that’s t***h, and it’s about time someone said it.

The politics of envy was on proud display a couple weeks ago when President Obama pledged the rest of his term to fighting “income ine******y.” He noted that some people make more than other people, that some people have higher incomes than others, and he says that’s not just.

That is the rationale of thievery. The other guy has it, you want it, Obama will take it for you. V**e Democrat.

That is the philosophy that produced Detroit. It is the e*******l philosophy that is destroying America.

It conceals a fundamental deviation from American values and common sense because it ends up not benefiting the people who support it, but a betrayal.

The Democrats have not empowered their followers, they have ens***ed them in a culture of dependence and entitlement, of victim-hood and anger instead of ability and hope.

The president’s premise – that you reduce income ine******y by debasing the successful – seeks to deny the successful the consequences of their choices and spare the unsuccessful the consequences of their choices.

Because, by and large, income variations in society is a result of different choices leading to different consequences. Those who choose wisely and responsibility have a far greater likelihood of success, while those who choose foolishly and irresponsibly have a far greater likelihood of failure. Success and failure usually manifest themselves in personal and family income.

You choose to drop out of high school or to skip college – and you are apt to have a different outcome than someone who gets a diploma and pushes on with purposeful education.

You have your children out of wedlock and life is apt to take one course; you have them within a marriage and life is apt to take another course.

Most often in life our destination is determined by the course we take.

My doctor, for example, makes far more than I do. There is significant

income ine******y between us. Our lives have had an ine******y of outcome, but, our lives also have had an in e******y of effort. While my doctor went to college and then dev**ed his young adulthood to medical school and residency, I got a job in a restaurant.

He made a choice, I made a choice, and our choices led us to different outcomes. His outcome pays a lot better than mine.

Does that mean he c***ted and Barack Obama needs to take away his wealth? No, it means we are both free men in a free society where free choices lead to different outcomes.

It is not ine******y Barack Obama intends to take away, it is freedom. The freedom to succeed, and the freedom to fail.

There is no true option for success if there is no true option for failure.

The pursuit of happiness means a whole lot less when you face the punitive hand of government if your pursuit brings you more happiness than the other guy.

Even if the other guy sat on his arse and did nothing. Even if the other guy made a lifetime’s worth of asinine and shortsighted decisions.

Barack Obama and the Democrats preach e******y of outcome as a right, while completely ignoring ine******y of effort.

The simple Law of the Harvest – as ye sow, so shall ye reap – is sometimes applied as, “The harder you work, the more you get." Obama would turn that upside down. Those who achieve are to be punished as enemies of society and those who fail are to be rewarded as wards of society.

Entitlement will replace effort as the key to upward mobility in American society if Barack Obama gets his way. He seeks a lowest common denominator society in which the government besieges the successful and productive to foster e******y through mediocrity.

He and his party speak of two Americas, and their grip on power is based on using the v**es of one to sap the productivity of the other. America is not divided by the differences in our outcomes, it is divided by the differences in our efforts. It is a false philosophy to say one man’s success comes about unavoidably as the result of another man’s victimization.

What Obama offered was not a solution, but a separatism. He fomented division and strife, pitted one set of Americans against another for his own political benefit. That’s what socialists offer. Marxist class warfare wrapped up with a bow.

Two Americas, coming closer each day to proving the t***h to Lincoln’s maxim that a house divided against itself cannot stand.'
In early January 2014, Bob Lonsberry, a Rochester ... (show quote)



GREAT ARTICLE !
Do you think Bo and Retired669 and the rest will read it ? Probably not. They'll read the title and rip you, the author, and his employer to bits for having the courage to tell it like it is !

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2014 16:01:04   #
Kevyn
 
In your silly rant, so far today's nut job manifesto, you forgot to include the folks who chose to be born to wealthy parents and get their income from investments and trusts that are taxed at a far lower rate than earned income. They can hire lawyers and accountants for a very small portion of their income to set up creative tax shelters that allow them to pay even less of their share. In the mean time they use a far greater amount of government services. For instance subsidized harbors for their yachts airports for their jets you get the idea. Thease are the folks of entitlement not some working mom who gets four bucks a day worth of food stamps and this is the ine******y the president is speaking of.

Reply
Feb 26, 2014 16:02:26   #
PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.
 
faithistheword wrote:
GREAT ARTICLE !
Do you think Bo and Retired669 and the rest will read it ? Probably not. They'll read the title and rip you, the author, and his employer to bits for having the courage to tell it like it is !


They are so insignificant, I could care less what they think, believe, or say.

Reply
Feb 26, 2014 16:07:10   #
PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.
 
Kevyn wrote:
In your silly rant, so far today's nut job manifesto, you forgot to include the folks who chose to be born to wealthy parents and get their income from investments and trusts that are taxed at a far lower rate than earned income. They can hire lawyers and accountants for a very small portion of their income to set up creative tax shelters that allow them to pay even less of their share. In the mean time they use a far greater amount of government services. For instance subsidized harbors for their yachts airports for their jets you get the idea. Thease are the folks of entitlement not some working mom who gets four bucks a day worth of food stamps and this is the ine******y the president is speaking of.
In your silly rant, so far today's nut job manifes... (show quote)


If you want to assess the blame on someone, try Congress. They are who wrote the laws for the IRS.

Reply
Feb 26, 2014 18:19:24   #
faithistheword
 
Kevyn wrote:
In your silly rant, so far today's nut job manifesto, you forgot to include the folks who chose to be born to wealthy parents and get their income from investments and trusts that are taxed at a far lower rate than earned income. They can hire lawyers and accountants for a very small portion of their income to set up creative tax shelters that allow them to pay even less of their share. In the mean time they use a far greater amount of government services. For instance subsidized harbors for their yachts airports for their jets you get the idea. Thease are the folks of entitlement not some working mom who gets four bucks a day worth of food stamps and this is the ine******y the president is speaking of.
In your silly rant, so far today's nut job manifes... (show quote)



"Oh, ye of little brains !' You're showing your envy there, Kevyn ! Liberals always h**e the rich ! Who do you think signs the paychecks in this country ? barackhussein ? Hardly ! But he's the one making all the new regulations ! He's never worked a day in his life, but knows all about industry, space, weather, food, school---you name it, he's the expert ! You're going to wake up one of these days, and I don't think you'll be able to handle the t***h !!!!!

Reply
 
 
Feb 26, 2014 21:05:53   #
Kevyn
 
faithistheword wrote:
"Oh, ye of little brains !' You're showing your envy there, Kevyn ! Liberals always h**e the rich ! Who do you think signs the paychecks in this country ? barackhussein ? Hardly ! But he's the one making all the new regulations ! He's never worked a day in his life, but knows all about industry, space, weather, food, school---you name it, he's the expert ! You're going to wake up one of these days, and I don't think you'll be able to handle the t***h !!!!!


Actualy I live quite comfortably, this dosn't preclude me from taking deep offense that the ruling class has taken from the middle class what for decades was the American dream. Simply A living wage for full time work, reasonable job security, an old age pension after working a career and insurance in case the worker or their family gets sick or is injured. They have also done a decent job convincing those who have lost those things that they should be envious of, and blame their neighbors who still enjoy a middle class lifestyle for their misfortune.

Reply
Feb 26, 2014 21:50:32   #
PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.
 
Kevyn wrote:
Actualy I live quite comfortably, this dosn't preclude me from taking deep offense that the ruling class has taken from the middle class what for decades was the American dream. Simply A living wage for full time work, reasonable job security, an old age pension after working a career and insurance in case the worker or their family gets sick or is injured. They have also done a decent job convincing those who have lost those things that they should be envious of, and blame their neighbors who still enjoy a middle class lifestyle for their misfortune.
Actualy I live quite comfortably, this dosn't prec... (show quote)


It is the very Liberal Democrats, Progressives, that have destroyed the middle class in order to inculcate the 'poor' with the notion that the government is their nanny, looking out for their welfare, so they will continue to v**e for the nanny state. Convince the 'have not's' that the working class is depriving them of the largess to which they are 'entitled'. Class warfare at its best.

Reply
Feb 26, 2014 22:43:42   #
mpix Loc: NorCal
 
Old_Gringo wrote:
It is the very Liberal Democrats, Progressives, that have destroyed the middle class in order to inculcate the 'poor' with the notion that the government is their nanny, looking out for their welfare, so they will continue to v**e for the nanny state. Convince the 'have not's' that the working class is depriving them of the largess to which they are 'entitled'. Class warfare at its best.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Feb 27, 2014 06:09:23   #
rjoeholl
 
And you choose to ignore those who would like to be born.....but are not allowed.
Kevyn wrote:
In your silly rant, so far today's nut job manifesto, you forgot to include the folks who chose to be born to wealthy parents and get their income from investments and trusts that are taxed at a far lower rate than earned income. They can hire lawyers and accountants for a very small portion of their income to set up creative tax shelters that allow them to pay even less of their share. In the mean time they use a far greater amount of government services. For instance subsidized harbors for their yachts airports for their jets you get the idea. Thease are the folks of entitlement not some working mom who gets four bucks a day worth of food stamps and this is the ine******y the president is speaking of.
In your silly rant, so far today's nut job manifes... (show quote)

Reply
 
 
Feb 27, 2014 11:37:53   #
PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.
 
rjoeholl wrote:
And you choose to ignore those who would like to be born.....but are not allowed.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
Feb 27, 2014 17:21:49   #
vernon
 
Old_Gringo wrote:
They are so insignificant, I could care less what they think, believe, or say.


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.