Comments on: The Difference Between Conservative and Liberal Talk Radio

By: Uchiha

Uchiha — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 20:27:59 +0000

Uh oh, John! Looks like you are just another hater who’s been brainwashed by liberals! Conservatives, descend upon his ludicrous beliefs and prepare to mock!

…

Seriously though, while you are fairly correct, remember that they don’t actually want to “understand something”. They want to believe that you are just full of hate because you are desperate and stupid. They want to feel validated that everything good is associated with them and everything bad is associated with you.

What good would understanding us do, when Rush Limbaugh and others clearly have liberals all figured out for them already?

By: John Jarzemsky

John Jarzemsky — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:53:08 +0000

Robbie, please tell me how Rush Limbaugh is not a hypocrite. The same man who spent his entire career going and on about drug users and how they are poxes on society was and is himself, an pathetic addict. If Rush’s own opinions about the proper way to “treat” drug abuse were enacted in this country he’d be rotting in jail.

Not to mention the time he spent on unemployment, how he opted out of Vietnam, and the bible-length list of just plain WRONG information he spews on his show on a daily basis, among them:

*There are more Native Americans in the continental united states than at the time Columbus arrived
*Styrofoam is biodegradable and paper is not

All you right-wing yahoos need to understand something: Rush Limbaugh doesn’t piss me off. Bill O’Reilly doesn’t piss me off. They just make me sad that Americans are so fucking stupid and easily led by the nose that they can be swayed by a bunch of overgrown fratboys who like to yell at people.

By: no2liberals

no2liberals — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 04:00:08 +0000

Not what they mean to a devoted Marxist, that’s for certain.
Those numbers tell me that everyone that pays taxes gets a tax cut. That the wealthiest people in this country pay significantly more than a share that is proportionately fair. Even if the wealthiest citizens had the same rate as the lower middle class, they would still be paying more, so why should their rate be even higher? Because the left needs to continue the class envy, to keep their voters on the economic plantation.
Honestly, a nearly fifty percent tax cut for a single person making $30K under Bush’s tax cuts, from Clinton’s rates, and you are obsessed with being unfair to those who make and produce more.
You sicken me with your collectivist beliefs.

By: Preston

Preston — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 03:13:03 +0000

Tax cuts for the rich is a lie,

What do all of those numbers mean to you then?

By: no2liberals

no2liberals — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 21:20:36 +0000

Your supposition requires a different debate.
Tax cuts for the rich is a lie, with the small exception that they pay most of the taxes collected anyway, so any reduction in their rate, regardless of the reduction in rates for the other groups, is in your pretzel logic, wrong.
Gee, you must still be all torn up about the Berlin Wall falling.

By: Preston

Preston — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:38:34 +0000

Uh, yeah, charity worked so well in the Depression. I suppose you also want to go back to the ‘traditional’ way of food inspection or drug regulation or ‘labor negotiations’.

Well, luckily Americans rejected that ideological nonsense.

By: no2liberals

no2liberals — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 17:23:16 +0000

Excuse me?

No, I won't. The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $29,019 and up in 2003, and they paid 96.54% of all income taxes. The top 1% pay over a third, 34.27% of all income taxes. (Up from 2003: 33.71%) The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes (Up from 2002: 53.80%). The top 10% pay 65.84% (Up from 2002: 65.73%). The top 25% pay 83.88% (Down from 2002: 83.90%). The top 50% pay 96.54% (Up from 2002: 96.50%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.46% of all income taxes (Down from 2002: 3.50%). The top 1% is paying nearly ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! Requires Excel. Your Marxist desires are evident. You want equality of outcome, irrespective of effort. If the tax system were fair to all American's, we would all pay the same rate, but people like you aren't interested in fairness, you want to punish those who achieve, by not only confiscating more of their earnings with an equal percentage, but by raising the confiscation percentage to an absurd level. How did we ever take care of our poor and unfortunate before FDR's Raw Deal, and LBJ's War on ~~Poverty~~ Achievement? Here's how.

By: Preston

Preston — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 15:02:04 +0000

So Robbie- I'm not sure what you think the importance of the popularity of Limbaugh and other right wing media. That popularity obviously isn't being represented at the ballot box. Part of the explanation of the popularity of right wing radio is simply the greater willingness of liberals to sample across the ideological spectrum. While I listened to Rush Limbaugh for many years out of curiosity of the right wing spin there are few conservatives who do the same at left wing media.

By: Preston

Preston — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 14:49:09 +0000

Excuse me? 112,000 dollars certainly sounds like a “tax cut for the rich”.

By: no2liberals

no2liberals — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 14:43:52 +0000

So your real objection is that those who earn more should be taxed even more severely than they already are. I understand.
Just as long as you understand the lie of “tax cuts for the rich” is exposed.