+263

Conservative parties helped Obama win. Because while they staged their radical protests, in costumes, with guns at their side, holding up flags that said, "Obama is a terrorist", Americans said "Yeah, I'm gonna vote for the calm black guy," amirite?

96%Yeah You Are4%No Way
Share
6 33
The voters have decided that this post is right! Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.

I think this would be better worded as "radical right wing political groups" because the average conservative was pissed that they gave us a bad name. But good post I agree.

Pedo_Cats avatar Pedo_Cat Yeah You Are +11Reply

Okay, so people, don't be idiots this time, and vote for Ron Paul.

Anonymous 0Reply
@Or Herman Cain.

Herman Cain's tax plan is highly regressive. The reason we don't tax items such as food is so people with lower income will be able to afford them too. If we slap a 9 percent tax on food, the poor people will be impacted the most, because they spend a greater percentage of their paycheck on food than people with higher salaries. It's a great plan if you're rich though, but most of us aren't.

Anonymous +1Reply
@Herman Cain's tax plan is highly regressive. The reason we don't tax items such as food is so people with lower...

Even those at the poverty line have much more than people in other countries. Everyone needs to sacrifice at least a little to get out of this recession.

Anonymous -3Reply
@Even those at the poverty line have much more than people in other countries. Everyone needs to sacrifice at least...

The people who are poor should NOT have to sacrifice anything. They weren't the ones who got us into this crisis.

Anonymous +1Reply
@And the rich are?

Everyone's a little at fault, but least of all the poor people. It's not fair to put a greater burden on them than on everyone else.

Anonymous +1Reply
@The burden is the same, it's just a little harder to bear.

It's not actually the same burden. Imagine Household A that makes 100 grand a year. They spend 5000 a year on groceries (that's low to average). That's 5% of their paycheck. Now imagine household B that makes 20 grand a year, and they spend the same amount on groceries. That's 25% of their paycheck. Now imagine that the price goes up on groceries by 9%, so they now cost 5450, a .45% increase for Household A, but a 3.25% increase for Household B, who probably is struggling to make ends meet as it is. How on earth is this fair? It's a lot harder to bear.

Anonymous +1Reply
@It's not actually the same burden. Imagine Household A that makes 100 grand a year. They spend 5000 a year on...

If you're in America, that is. Many other places would have much lower net income.

Anonymous 0Reply
@If you're in America, that is. Many other places would have much lower net income.

Other places have nothing to do with it, what the hell is wrong with you? People want to elect Herman Cain to run THIS country, and if he gets nominated or even wins, that would be tragic for people with low income levels, and that percentage of the population is growing daily. And by the way, I come from a low income family, and if they raise the price of groceries by 9%, we won't be able to pay our rent. To take this out on the poor while corporations and banks rake in billions (they got the bailouts, let's not forget, and that didn't make life better for anyone else) and so to try to fix the economy by taxing the poor is the epitome of stupidity. Frankly, I find it disgusting. And no, I'm not whining, and I'm not for handouts or anything, I'm using common sense. And I suggest you do to.

Anonymous 0Reply
@World economy and population has everything to do with us.

How so? How can you use the world economy and population to justify such a burden on our working class? You know, you can't just throw arbitrary statements out like that, you need to support them with evidence.

Anonymous 0Reply
@How so? How can you use the world economy and population to justify such a burden on our working class? You know...

I agree. To many politicians, the economy is everything. But some thongs are more important than money. Economics is a social construction; hunger is not.

angels_001s avatar angels_001 Yeah You Are 0Reply
@How so? How can you use the world economy and population to justify such a burden on our working class? You know...

We definitely aren't helping the economy by keeping everything we have for ourselves. A small pool of resources dedicated to many causes will be much less useful in solving problems than a larger pool of resources dedicated to a more focused cause. Granted, federal government currently sucks with spending their money (a high school class was able to solve a large portion of the debt problem in about 50 minutes just be rewriting Congress's budget). That doesn't mean that government is the whole problem. We need reforms on all levels.

As for world population/economy- The entirety of our resources comes from the world. Other countries have demand, too. It's not like we're the only ones that need resources. One might say our situation is caused by the huge consumption of resources compared to other countries. I quote from a new textbook on biology "When the total area of ecologically productive land on Earth is divided by the global population, we each have a share of about 2.1 gha..." The ecological footprint of the United States is about 9.4 gha (and we only have about 5 gha per person). Earth's population has doubled in the last 50 years and the trend is continuing, so we can...

Anonymous 0Reply
@We definitely aren't helping the economy by keeping everything we have for ourselves. A small pool of resources...

...expect the figure of 2.1 to drop (unless Earth gets bigger or we manage to start self sufficient colonies; neither is likely to happen).

What I'm saying is that we have an awfully massive resource intake compared to production and we expect it to stay that way when all logic says it cannot.

Anonymous 0Reply
@Or Herman Cain.

or that woman

Anonymous -3Reply
@or that woman

Bachmann is an idiot who embarrasses intelligent women everywhere.

Anonymous +10Reply
@Bachmann is an idiot who embarrasses intelligent women everywhere.

Bachmann is an idiot who embarrasses Christians everywhere. I'm ashamed to say many of my evangelical friends and relatives support her...

angels_001s avatar angels_001 Yeah You Are 0Reply

He is a terrorist, you liberal idiot.

Anonymous 0Reply
@He is a terrorist, you liberal idiot.

A rich black man in America is hardly a terrorist.

@Neighbor A rich black man in America is hardly a terrorist.

What does being rich and black have to do with being a terrorist? Also, he's not American. He's Kenyan.

Anonymous 0Reply
@What does being rich and black have to do with being a terrorist? Also, he's not American. He's Kenyan.

He was born in America. He is an American citizen.
Besides, how many terrorists are from Kenya?

@Neighbor He was born in America. He is an American citizen. Besides, how many terrorists are from Kenya?

It doesn't matter how many terrorists there are in Kenya. They found terrorists in Australia, which isn't considered to be a terrorist country. Also, why didn't Obama show his birth certificate?

Anonymous 0Reply

Actually, a lot of Republicans did vote for Obama. I happen to know quite a few. My dad himself almost did until he found out what he was.

Please   login   or signup   to leave a comment.