Just watch it.
In just one month Obama has done more to bring back conservatism and energize the masses than anyone since Reagan.
I’m really starting to come around to him.
Fox should replace that fraud Hannity with this guy.
[quote]tedro wrote:
In just one month Obama has done more to bring back conservatism and energize the masses than anyone since Reagan.
I’m really starting to come around to him.[/quote]
o.O
You beat me to it. This is one of the best rant I have ever heard from Santelli.
And I agree also that Obama has been the very best thing for conservatism in a very long time.
[quote]skaz05 wrote:
You beat me to it. This is one of the best rant I have ever heard from Santelli.
And I agree also that Obama has been the very best thing for conservatism in a very long time.[/quote]
The backlash against Obama and the Dems will be enormous.
[quote]hedo wrote:
skaz05 wrote:
You beat me to it. This is one of the best rant I have ever heard from Santelli.
And I agree also that Obama has been the very best thing for conservatism in a very long time.
The backlash against Obama and the Dems will be enormous.
[/quote]
You can’t continue to tax and ignore the people who actually make this country work and stay afloat. We pay their salaries and they ignore the taxpayer.
I can see this coddling of the losers in our nation crumbling soon.
We are not gonna take this shit much longer. How come the people who already play by the rules have to pay for deadbeats, while at the same time the deadbeats are rewarded with the fair player’s money?
In my opinion the more “deserving people” of this nation are the ones who pay the highest rate of taxes.
Wonder if the Obama goons are looking into his history to discredit him. Hopefully he doesn’t have a child support issue or a nasty divorce in his background.
Of course if he just owes some back taxes he would be qualified to be treasury secretary.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
How come the people who already play by the rules have to pay for deadbeats, while at the same time the deadbeats are rewarded with the fair player’s money?
[/quote]
Have you learned nothing about democracy yet?
Have any of you seen Gibb’s smug & erroneous response today?
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
How come the people who already play by the rules have to pay for deadbeats, while at the same time the deadbeats are rewarded with the fair player’s money?
Have you learned nothing about democracy yet?[/quote]
I’m convinced of this much, those who pay nothing in taxes, or worse yet, consume taxes through redistribution programs, shouldn’t get a vote. I hate having to say that. But, if that isn’t a recipe for a self-consuming nation, I don’t know what is.
Who is John Galt?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
How come the people who already play by the rules have to pay for deadbeats, while at the same time the deadbeats are rewarded with the fair player’s money?
Have you learned nothing about democracy yet?
I’m convinced of this much, those who pay nothing in taxes, or worse yet, consume taxes through redistribution programs, shouldn’t get a vote. I hate having to say that. But, if that isn’t a recipe for a self-consuming nation, I don’t know what is.[/quote]
I agree. Poor people should not be allowed to vote.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
How come the people who already play by the rules have to pay for deadbeats, while at the same time the deadbeats are rewarded with the fair player’s money?
Have you learned nothing about democracy yet?
I’m convinced of this much, those who pay nothing in taxes, or worse yet, consume taxes through redistribution programs, shouldn’t get a vote. I hate having to say that. But, if that isn’t a recipe for a self-consuming nation, I don’t know what is.[/quote]
Can we do this state by state? Love to get rid of a few of those red states down south.
[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Have any of you seen Gibb’s smug & erroneous response today?
[/quote]
That was great, It’s amazing how hard it is for folks to you know, read the plan.
[quote]hedo wrote:
skaz05 wrote:
You beat me to it. This is one of the best rant I have ever heard from Santelli.
And I agree also that Obama has been the very best thing for conservatism in a very long time.
The backlash against Obama and the Dems will be enormous.
[/quote]
Why don’t you just stop making predictions? Damn, you never learn.
Santorum!!!
McCain wins PA!!!
[quote]100meters wrote:
Sloth wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
How come the people who already play by the rules have to pay for deadbeats, while at the same time the deadbeats are rewarded with the fair player’s money?
Have you learned nothing about democracy yet?
I’m convinced of this much, those who pay nothing in taxes, or worse yet, consume taxes through redistribution programs, shouldn’t get a vote. I hate having to say that. But, if that isn’t a recipe for a self-consuming nation, I don’t know what is.
Can we do this state by state? Love to get rid of a few of those red states down south.[/quote]
Government not big enough yet for you?
If the 9th and 10th Amendments meant anything it would not matter who the president was.
[quote]100meters wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
Have any of you seen Gibb’s smug & erroneous response today?
That was great, It’s amazing how hard it is for folks to you know, read the plan. [/quote]
Gibb’s response was filled with misleading bullshit - that guy is so fucking smug. He’s an ass-clown who is completely over his head and seems to think his clue-less-ness is amusing, and maybe even a bit laudable.
-
he threw out the red herring about speculators - santelli wasn’t talking about that, and he knew it.
-
whatever the plan actually says - and however many times BO assures us otherwise - there is NO WAY that in actual practice they’re going to be able to discern the difference between those who knowingly took on too much house/mortgage and those who were hoodwinked, or whatever. It’s a bullshit distinction - and they know it. Not that it matters anyway - neither should be “bailed out.”
-
the reason why Gibbs made such a big deal of it was to highlight an alleged connection between “derivative traders” and Santelli’s viewpoint - subsuming the fact that most Americans, and not just people on the Chicago trading floor, agree with him and not Gibbs or BO.
Santelli’s counter-response…
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/02/rick_santelli_responds_to_gibbs.html