No Truer words

[osrb]

[duke]

"Carolla has occasionally stirred up controversy due to sweeping generalizations he sometimes makes during unscripted broadcasts, the more notorious being about specific ethnic groups or women. In late 2003, Carolla stated on the air during Loveline that Hawaiians are "dumb." Carolla further elaborated that Hawaiians are "stupid," "in-bred," "retarded" people who are among the "dumbest people we have." These comments were met with anger in Hawaii, and resulted in the loss of radio affiliates for Loveline there.[30]

On the April 4, 2010 episode of The Adam Carolla Show, Carolla referred to Filipino boxer Manny Pacquiao as being illiterate, having brain damage, and being someone who prays to chicken bones.[31] Carolla said of the Philippines, where Pacquiao makes his home, "They got this and sex tours, that's all they have over there. Get your shit together Philippines. Jesus Christ. I mean, again, it's fine to be proud of your countrymen. But that's it? That's all you got?"[32] Filipino leaders, including the office of President Gloria Arroyo, responded to the incident.[31][32] Carolla later apologized via Twitter, saying, "Read your comments. Sorry if I offended many of you. I don't preplan my commentary. I try to be provocative [and] funny but I crossed the line and I'm sorry."[33] Carolla received death threats over the incident.[34]

In August 2011, Carolla attracted the ire of the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation after a podcast in which, referring to transgendered people, he asked, "When did we start giving a shit about these people?" The segment was in response to a proposed initiative to have the puppet characters Bert and Ernie, from the children's television show Sesame Street, enter into a "gay marriage." He went on to say that the LGBT moniker ought to be replaced with "YUCK," and that LGBT activists ought to "shut up," and that they are "ruining [his] life."[35] The GLAAD organization also referred to previous offensive remarks by Carolla, including an assertion that, "all things being equal," heterosexual parents are better than homosexual parents. Carolla responded to GLAAD via TMZ.com, stating, "I'm sorry my comments were hurtful. I'm a comedian, not a politician."[36][37][38] GLAAD responded by identifying Carolla's apology as "empty."[39]"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Carolla

OSRB: Are you already in the top 1% or or simply do not want that door closed to your aspirations by government taxes?

[osrb]

OSRB: Are you already in the top 1% or or simply do not want that door closed to your aspirations by government taxes?

No I am a member of the 53% who actually pay taxes.

[duke]

So it is your opinion that it will not be much longer before you will be in the top 1% that would be affected by a higher tax burden? Therefore you feel obligated to speak out in support of that 1%?
What is you estimate of time before reaching the lofty goal of being in the 1%?

[Half-Tard]

Carolla hits the nail on the head. If people get offended by what a comedian says their fucking idiots. Including Tracy Morgan etc...

[Tsavodiner]

Dec 1, 2011 17:30:27 GMT -5 duke said:

So it is your opinion that it will not be much longer before you will be in the top 1% that would be affected by a higher tax burden? Therefore you feel obligated to speak out in support of that 1%?
What is you estimate of time before reaching the lofty goal of being in the 1%?

If Obama's re-elected, about four years, after he taxes everybody and thing ELSE to death and gets to ME.

And another thing, to all these aggrieved special somebodies: "I'ts SATIRE, you dumb fucks".

[duke]

Note that the senate [Republican Majority] has voted twice not renew the payroll tax reduction for the middle class in opposition to the administration's stated desire. The one class most of us will need to pass through on our way up to the 1%.

[osrb]

dukie you are wrong again the Dems control the Senate not the repubs.

This is a better headline. Dems block 2 dozen jobs bills passed by house.

[BlackFox]

Dec 5, 2011 9:01:11 GMT -5 osrb said:

This is a better headline. Dems block 2 dozen jobs bills passed by house.

Agreeing with the Speaker, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said that by the end of this week, the House of Representatives will have passed 25 bills which would encourage job creation that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) “refuses to take up.”

Boehner was asked if he would potentially switch up his approach after criticism from Senate Republican Lindsey Graham (SC) who stated, “Fifteen bills coming from the House that no one ever heard of — including me — is probably not the best marketing plan.”

Pretty bad when Lindsay Graham calls bullshit on his own party.

[ibghetto]

Dec 5, 2011 9:01:11 GMT -5 osrb said:

dukie you are wrong again the Dems control the Senate not the repubs.

This is a better headline. Dems block 2 dozen jobs bills passed by house.

If Dems blocked 2 dozen jobs bills it's because they come with serious strings attached that's not good for the average American citizen.

Always read the fine print before supplying your signature.

[osrb]

Dec 5, 2011 22:06:22 GMT -5 @ibghetto said:

Dec 5, 2011 9:01:11 GMT -5 osrb said:

dukie you are wrong again the Dems control the Senate not the repubs.

This is a better headline. Dems block 2 dozen jobs bills passed by house.

If Dems blocked 2 dozen jobs bills it's because they come with serious strings attached that's not good for the average American citizen.

Always read the fine print before supplying your signature.

I wish the Dems would at least read bills. Not "We need to pass the bill before we can know what is in it"

[LimitedRecourse]

"If Dems blocked 2 dozen jobs bills it's because they come with serious strings attached that's not good for the average American citizen."

You seriously believe that democrats have the country's best interests in mind? Reality is calling.....

[TNBear]

I believe that Democrats have more of the country's best interests in mind than the Republicans do. Republicans have the best interests of the 1% in mind, to the exclusion of pretty much anything else. Excepting perhaps eliminating a woman's right to choose.

[osrb]

Dec 6, 2011 20:43:33 GMT -5 TNBear said:

I believe that Democrats have more of the country's best interests in mind than the Republicans do. Republicans have the best interests of the 1% in mind, to the exclusion of pretty much anything else. Excepting perhaps eliminating a woman's right to choose.

The ONLY interest that either party has is keep their selves in power. Neither one cares a lick about the people.

[LimitedRecourse]

"Republicans have the best interests of the 1% in mind, to the exclusion of pretty much anything else."

How does that kool-aid taste, TNBear? You have bought the liberal claptrap hook, line and sinker.

The Republican party stands for self-reliance and independence. Working hard and being paid fairly for your labor. Small government and less taxes. The right to choose from whatever viable choices are available on the market with as little government interference as possible. The principles of life, respect, country and self-reliance.

Contrast that with the Democratic viewpoint that government should be big----so big that it meets all needs for everyone EXCEPT those that actually pay the taxes that government mismanages. Democrats believe in taking from those who work hard, and giving it to those who work little or not at all. No respect for life, values or the country's borders.

Take a look around and see which philosophy is better for individuals and the country.

[Tsavodiner]

Dec 4, 2011 15:16:45 GMT -5 duke said:

Note that the senate [Republican Majority] has voted twice not renew the payroll tax reduction for the middle class in opposition to the administration's stated desire. The one class most of us will need to pass through on our way up to the 1%.

This is one of the all-time great illusions since the days of Houdini;

reduce the amount of tax taken at point of pay WITHOUT reducing the actual tax RATE.

You STILL owe the full amount April 15!
Thanks for the LOAN, assholes!

[TNBear]

I think you have been hitting the Kool-Aid yourself LR. If you think that republicans are really looking out for the little guy you're dumber than I am.

[professorx]

Dec 7, 2011 20:40:44 GMT -5 TNBear said:

I think you have been hitting the Kool-Aid yourself LR. If you think that republicans are really looking out for the little guy you're dumber than I am.

I don't think that either side looks out for the "little guy". I believe the left has done zero to help the little guy, and the right onliy helps indirectly.

The right is pro-business and helps to stimulate the overall economy.

"A rising tide lifts all boats"...

If politicians are anti-business, then we all suffer as a country. A clue is the unemployed cannot pay taxes. The unemployed cannot afford insurance, The unemployed cannot afford many things. A pro-business government is the only way to stimulate the economy.

If the business sector is too afraid to hire or retain employees, then it is a sad indictment on the present political groups in power.

The solution to sagging "revenues" is not to keep raising tax rates to compensate for declining taxable revenue. If we keep raising taxes to compensate for all the taxes not paid by the poor, unemployed, etc., then we will tax our way into a hole.

The sole goal of politicians should be to stimulate the economy, or get out of the way and stop trying to prop up the economy with expensive and stupid quick fixes.

[professorx]

If Obama's re-elected, about four years, after he taxes everybody and thing ELSE to death and gets to ME.

I was once in the Atlanta area and a gas station owner bitched to me "The gas companies can raise their fuel prices and but we never get a raise. Regardless of the price we only make the same 3 per cent."

The guy didn't get that if a base price increases, his same 3 percent is already an increase.

This percentage analogy reminds me of everyone that wants to raise the tax percentage when tax revenues are low. If things are more expensive now, then the same percentage tax rate should bring in more revenue without raising the tax percentage.

A percentage that was good yesterday should be good today for businesses or governments.

If a percentage rate does not bring in enough taxes, it means the economy is in the crapper, and the worst thing would be to increase taxes. We would put the economy in a death spiral to tax, business lags, then tax more, business lags more, etc.

[duke]

Dec 12, 2011 22:23:21 GMT -5 professorx said:

Dec 7, 2011 20:40:44 GMT -5 TNBear said:

I think you have been hitting the Kool-Aid yourself LR. If you think that republicans are really looking out for the little guy you're dumber than I am.

I don't think that either side looks out for the "little guy". I believe the left has done zero to help the little guy, and the right onliy helps indirectly.

The right is pro-business and helps to stimulate the overall economy.

"A rising tide lifts all boats"...

If politicians are anti-business, then we all suffer as a country. A clue is the unemployed cannot pay taxes. The unemployed cannot afford insurance, The unemployed cannot afford many things. A pro-business government is the only way to stimulate the economy.

If the business sector is too afraid to hire or retain employees, then it is a sad indictment on the present political groups in power.

The solution to sagging "revenues" is not to keep raising tax rates to compensate for declining taxable revenue. If we keep raising taxes to compensate for all the taxes not paid by the poor, unemployed, etc., then we will tax our way into a hole.

The sole goal of politicians should be to stimulate the economy, or get out of the way and stop trying to prop up the economy with expensive and stupid quick fixes.

Since the Pro business model has been handed trillions in government money, by your own statements this economy should be begging for workers that pay real wages rather than a bunch of minimum wage part time jobs that no single person can reasonably survive on much less a family.

[duke]

Dec 12, 2011 22:34:50 GMT -5 professorx said:

If Obama's re-elected, about four years, after he taxes everybody and thing ELSE to death and gets to ME.

I was once in the Atlanta area and a gas station owner bitched to me "The gas companies can raise their fuel prices and but we never get a raise. [Only due to competition from the large corporations.] Regardless of the price we only make the same 3 per cent."

The guy didn't get that if a base price increases, his same 3 percent is already an increase.[When gas prices raise my more per gal than the retail markup, the retailer must finance the extra out of his own pocket. That cannot continue for long or the retailer will be out of business with no cash to pay wages, employment taxes, rent or property taxes, and gross receipts taxes.]

This percentage analogy reminds me of everyone that wants to raise the tax percentage when tax revenues are low. If things are more expensive now, then the same percentage tax rate should bring in more revenue without raising the tax percentage. [State governments with a sales tax. Income tax revenues would not change.]

A percentage that was good yesterday should be good today for businesses or governments. [Yet the state government have increased their percentage take from the original 1/2 percent to now 9.75% in most TN counties.]

If a percentage rate does not bring in enough taxes, it means the economy is in the crapper, and the worst thing would be to increase taxes. We would put the economy in a death spiral to tax, business lags, then tax more, business lags more, etc.

[Occupy and others are asking those that spend only about 10% or less of their income on necessary living expenses to pay more so that those who the top 1% refuse to hire can feed and house their families. ]