Fox News’ wealthy white males get their chuckles from discussing ‘downscale voters.’
Fox News’ wealthy white males get their chuckles from discussing ‘downscale voters.’
While discussing the primary returns tonight, the “Fox News All Stars” — including Brit Hume, Fred Barnes, and Mort Kondracke — discussed what constitutes a “downscale voter.” Hume opened the segment by asking Barnes to elaborate on his view that many of Hillary Clinton’s supporters are “downscale.” Barnes could hardly contain his laughter as he explained that the term “working class” is a euphemism because “it’s kind of mean to say ‘lower class.’ It’s as simple as that.” He explained that the “lower class” are people of low “social class.” Watch it:
Kondracke attacked Barnes for “dissing” the “lower class.” Hume concluded the segment by assuring the Fox viewers, “We’re all for working families particularly, and those of you who are working families out there, we appeal to you to bear with us.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
99 Responses to “Fox News’ wealthy white males get their chuckles from discussing ‘downscale voters.’”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
Heh, It’s true: Great minds really do think alike.
May 6th, 2008 at 8:56 pmNo wonder those lower class voters can’t see how good we’ve got it.
May 6th, 2008 at 8:58 pm…………………….HOW ELITIST!
May 6th, 2008 at 8:59 pmThis we be on a flyer tomorrow and I’ll be handing it out to all my Republican friends. I decided after 2004 that there was a serious problem in this country. And I decided to do something about it. So I became friends with as many Republicans I could, and I have succeeded in changing their views of FOX and the Republican party. And I will never stop. Deep in the heart of Texas.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:00 pmUnf%*kingbelievable.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:03 pmThey insult middle America right to their face and people still watch these elitist multimillionaire pigs and buy their fear laden agenda. Unf%*kingbelievable!
These guys are spending a good portion of their lives sequestered in the world of Midtown Manhattan studios and restaurants, I doubt they actually speak much to “working class people” unless that person happens to be their waiter or waitress and they’re ordering lunch.
On the other hand they have a point about Hillary, she does seem to be targeting the dumbass-Homer Simpson vote, but I wouldn’t necessarily call that the same as the “working class” vote”.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:04 pmFred Barnes is one of the biggest idiots on the planet. No wonder he’s on Fox.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:07 pm“We’re all for working families….”
ALL EVIDENCE to the contrary.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:10 pmActually Barnes just knocked himself down several rungs by thinking he is on a higher social level when he isnt. Money doesnt make a person a better person especially when its not backed by anything.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:26 pmGuaranteed these guys have never worked a day in their lives. They are the leering men who snap their fingers at waitresses (if they like their boobs). They are the Italian-suited elite who walk to the other side of the street rather than come within four feet of a construction worker. They are the guys who think they are so special in their SUVs with their yellow magnetic ribbons and their flag pins who don’t know how to display the flag. They are the guys who cheer for war but hate the troops and won’t stop the enormous profiteering on these illegal and immoral occupations being perpetuated in our names (because they are making too much money). These are the guys with their eyes on their portfolios instead of our way of life. These are the white, rich, dishonest men who think they control everything. They are the minority in this country, and they are going down. And they know it.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:29 pmVile right-wing moron scumbags on parade at Faux Noise every day.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:29 pmWhat a worthless pathetic lot of liars, war-mongers, hate-mongers, fear-mongers and treason-mongers…
And Obama’s the elitist…And now for something completely different,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5ba1OKY7Xc
May 6th, 2008 at 9:31 pmMay 6th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Don’t know, don’t care. I’m too busy being wowed by Obama yet again. Why no election coverage thinkpro? I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again. If this man does not become the American President because of a backroom deals, there WILL be riots. Listen to this speech, ridiculous. I’m inspired just by hearing this man speak.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:34 pmFrom Edward R. Murrow….to Glenn Beck and Fox. The MSM is in full regressive mode. Next they’ll have crawls in illuminated text…
May 6th, 2008 at 9:35 pmYuck it up, you fat, old, rich, white sons-of-b*tches! When you fcukers are on your death beds, we’ll finally get fix the things you fcuked up with the country (in short, everything).
May 6th, 2008 at 9:40 pmThe class envy and racism is quite apparent on this site. Since when does the color of someone’s skin automatically dictate his behavior? Do y’all not see your liberal government heroes in the same light? The NYTimes, NBC, CBS, etc brass are all guilty of the same behavior as the FOX types. It’s all the same. When you THINK you’re better than everyone else, you act accordingly. When you KNOW you’re better than everyone else, you let your actions speak for you. That’s why we don’t have any competent honorable folks with real-life experience and integrity serving in government: they spend all their time telling you why they’re better than you, but absolutely no time actually doing anything that proves they’re better. The day this country took a wrong turn was when politics became a full-time job.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:41 pmWTF is with twit humorless?? Is he constipated? He looks like he needs to take a big DUMP!
May 6th, 2008 at 9:42 pmThanks for the edifying lecture, there, Sven.
We’ll take your well-intentioned criticisms to heart. Really.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:44 pmNow i know why theses people are so so BITTER!!!
May 6th, 2008 at 9:45 pmY’know, at least Brit was sharp enough to realize that he’d better buy the audience some flowers to smooth things over. The other clowns probably had no idea how they sound to thinking Americans.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:46 pmI see our troll who can’t spell has gotten loose from his protective restraints again…
May 6th, 2008 at 9:48 pmAnd he’s writing on the walls with his feces too,ralph. ;)
What these trolls don’t get is there is alot of us here who are not well off and many of us didn’t go to an Ivy League school. Hell,I am only a high school grad. I got most of my education about the world in the Army.
May 6th, 2008 at 9:52 pmSpeaking of trolls who can’t spell—”twsited”
ralph the wonder llama Says:
——————————————————————————–
And right on cue, when the thread seems abandoned, come the apologist trolls to get their last twsited word in.
Nice work, guys!
May 6th, 2008 at 9:57 pmAh, Twajie nails me to the wall with a typo. Ouch!
Now maybe you can work on crafting a reasonable argument for anything.
That oughta keep you busy for a while.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:01 pmOh SNAP!!! A typing error! Good find Friend!
May 6th, 2008 at 10:05 pmWait- is your name really ‘Friends’ of Ron Mexico??
Or did you mean ‘Fiends’ of Ron Mexico?
Now I know why yours comments so SWEET!
GL2814 Says:
Yuck it up, you fat, old, rich, white sons-of-b*tches! When you fcukers are on your death beds, we’ll finally get fix the things you fcuked up with the country (in short, everything).
This sounds strangely familiar to me. I think this sentence was first uttered by Tom Builder in 1120. I suspect if we were to live another 1,000 years we’d be hearing it still.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:07 pmThe urine content of all of these guy’s soup just went up.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:07 pmOld “Ese” is patting himself on the back for catching ralphs typo. Now he will stagger off to bed and dream of fat pasty white guys like Jeff Christie and turd butter. Sweet dreams ese.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:12 pmnot much worse than arrogant know-nothing elitist putzes.
but not the least surprising from fux nuz.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:13 pm.
I assume you’ll understand what I mean by that gibberish Friends of Dog Fighters, ’cause your comment is just so much gibberish to me…
May 6th, 2008 at 10:14 pmTo the_svedberg:
There is a class war on and you and your white racist friends started it. To quote a very unwise head of state: bring it on. There are many, many, more real people out here than you and your faux-news heroes. Go get a beer and think about maybe reading a book or a newspaper (or several). You have been deceived, my friend. I pity you.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:26 pmArrogance and hubris. I so want to live to see these bastards pay for their hubris.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:43 pmClass warfare is a tool of Karl Marx and his minions. I don’t buy into the “to each according to his need…” creed. I do read books, and newspapers, and political blogs, in addition to the scientific literature I read for my occupation. I read stuff from both “sides” because news today is so wrapped up in its own agenda that you have to read twice as much just to get the whole story. I look at sites like this one that love government and think anything uttered by a conservative is “troll-speak” and I read sites that are more right-leaning, that way I can formulate my own opinion. So please tell me how I’ve been deceived, because I didn’t believe my leftist teachers in high school without empirical evidence? Because I think that productivity, and not mediocrity, should be rewarded and encouraged? Because I believe freedom and choice are good things and the market is a better allocator of these tangibles than government? That I believe that all a person needs to succeed in this country is the freedom to do as he/she pleases without interfering with or interference from another’s life liberty or property? Do these truths ring a bell to you? Another head of state (much wiser) once said they were self evident.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:45 pmsvedberg, do you think it is right not to get healthcare, enough food, or enough education because you are born into a poor family? Do you think growing up like this does not effect whether you succeed?
May 6th, 2008 at 10:51 pmit doesn’t matter if i think it’s right or not, but if you rephrase the question, I can answer. If you say “do you think it is A right to get heathcare, food, education…” then no those are not rights as put forth in the Constitution nor by our Creator. I also think that a huge effect on whether or not a person succeeds has roots in the environment in which they were brought up. Something like less than 2% of current millionaires were born into their wealth (sorry I just got a new computer, don’t have that link anymore, I’ll try and find it). A person who is born into a household that values a strong work ethic, staying out of trouble, taking proper care of one’s body and mind, and participating in the learning process has a good chance of succeeding later in life, regardless of how much money their parents make. On the other hand, simply PROVIDING people with education, healthcare, etc does not necessarily culminate in that person using those tools to the best of their ability, they have to grow up in an environment that places VALUE in such tangibles. If those tangibles are perceived as free of charge (which in a government run system they are most certainly not), where is the value applied? BTW, poor people in America eat more food and consume more space than average people in Europe.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:06 pmSorry, didn’t know you had a direct line to the Creator. I don’t. The US used to have the highest standard of living in the world. Today it is about 16th and everyone ahead of us is to the left of us. The US is 36th in healthcare and everyone ahead of us is to the left of us. Our educational system is going straight downhill. Public schools are underfunded. The bottom half of the population cannot afford $25,000 per year per child for education. The biggest cause of poverty is poverty. All of Western Europe is passing us in social mobility. Poor children do worse in school. Everything I am referring to is backed by scientific studies—not just my or your opinion.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:16 pmMeant to say the biggest cause of poverty is being born into poverty.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:25 pmthe_svedberg Says:
Class warfare is a tool of Karl Marx and his minions.
_____
Then how do you account for the fact that there has always been class warfare in America? Waged from the top down, of course, ans successfully, for the most part.
Are American plutocrats minions of Marx? Hmmmmm?
May 6th, 2008 at 11:29 pmUsing Creator was merely a reference to the Declaration of Independence. The rankings you have sighted are extremely subjective and vary widely from study to study, depending on what criteria they employ. The healthcare ranking in particular is suspect since takes into account all the things that statists want in a healthcare system as positive and all the things that freedom-loving individuals would want in a healthcare system as negative. Our educational system is most certainly on the decline precisely because of too much government action. There is absolutely no correlation whatsoever between money spent per pupil and scholastic performance. $25000 per year is a bit farfetched, seeing as the government (i.e. the taxpayer, me, dont know about you) spends more in the $10k per pupil, much more if you go to a govt school in Washington DC. As far as social mobility is concerned, why do you think you have all the answers? Do you know what makes people climb social ladders? Should we let politicians who think they know the answers use us a lab rats in their experiments? I would argue our decline in social mobility is also a side-effect of government intrusion into folks’ lives…as applied to my discussion earlier of values versus handouts. If you value something, you work at it and are thankful for having it, if you are given something, you take it for granted.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:29 pmthe_svedberg Says:
… If you value something, you work at it and are thankful for having it, if you are given something, you take it for granted.
_____
Such as wealth & power. Just ask George W. Bush.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:32 pmSvedberg, You are giving all the same conservative talking points I have heard for decade after decade after decade, etc. I must have heard them 500,000 times! They are not true! Sociologists DO know what they are talking about.
try this for starters:
May 6th, 2008 at 11:37 pmhttp://economicmobility.org/ assets/ pdfs/ EMP_American_Dream.pdf
to jonny:
I concur.
People who are born wealthy and then set out in life are not necessarily “successful.” Success is a very subjective thing to measure…it is different for you, me, the guy living in an Oak tree here in Berkeley, or the aspiring dictator-politician.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:37 pm“… If you value something, you work at it and are thankful for having it, if you are given something, you take it for granted.”
Sounds like you are totally opposed to inheritance. I agree. As jonny said, look what it did to W. Born on third base and thinks he hit a triple! They even gave him part of a baseball team. Baseball team screwed the taxpayers and W walked away with $millions.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:40 pmWhy does the job growth rate ALWAYS improve going from Repub to Dem and ALWAYS worsen going from Dem to Repub? Do people get more industrious under Dems and lazier under Repubs? Or do the people stay the same, but liberal policies are better than conservative policies?
May 6th, 2008 at 11:46 pmSociology classes are dead-ends when it comes to free-thought in education. If you disagree with the professor, your ideas are not welcome for discussion.
My “talking points” are not decades old, they are centuries old, starting with Hobbes and Locke. Actually, only recently have they been considered “conservative,” originally people who champion freedom and the individual like me were considered liberals and statists like you were considered conservatives.
Class warfare has always been around, since before the founding of America, it has just been made famous and put into words by Mr. Marx. It is a tool of those whose own labors are insufficient for their own personal glory and attempt to use the naivety of the public for their own ends. Currently, class warfare is being waged by playing on the public’s lack of economic knowledge. I personally think this was intentional, seeing as many government schools either refuse to teach or neglect to emphasize economics in the real world (why do more than 60% of taxpayers require professional help these days?)
Every good progressive loves to talk about Bush’s “tax cuts for the rich” but did you know that the top 1% are paying MORE of the tax burden than they used to? In 2005 (newest data available), the top 1 percent of tax returns paid 39.4 percent of all federal individual income taxes and earned 21.2 percent of adjusted gross income, both of which are significantly higher than 2004 when the top 1 percent earned 19 percent of AGI and paid 36.9 percent of federal individual income taxes.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html
Basically, the top earners have the best ability to determine how to report their income. If income tax for the top bracket is high, they can choose not to report their money as income and pay less in taxes. On the other hand, if taxes are lower, they are more inclined to report income and pay taxes on that. The data clearly demonstrates this logic.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:50 pmKeith Says:
_____
We can expect legacy babies to be completely ignorant about the struggles of their fellow citizens, and hold them in contempt.
What truly offends me are people who have undoubtedly worked to achieve economic success, and then kick their fellow citizens to the curb.
No one gets wealthy independently. All achieve wealth by utilizing publicly-funded infrastructure & services. And the wealthy, through ownership, are by far the heaviest users of said infrastructure and services.
Yet they keep using their economic power, through political influence, to shift societal burdens onto their fellow citizens, all the while propagating the myth that wealth is the only measure of success, and that taxes “penalize” them for being “successful.”
What part of “you use it, you pay for it” don’t they understand?
The rest of us do.
May 6th, 2008 at 11:56 pmKeith:
Looks like both Republican and Democrat presidents have mixed showings for job growth:
http://usbudget.blogspot.com/ 2008/ 03/ job-growth-under-bush-and-prior.html
Clinton, Carter, Johnson, and Truman didn’t fare too well but neither did Reagan, or Nixon. I think what you said is a fallacy of false cause, that is, you say it’s the presidents who are responsible for job creation. The people who engage in the economy create and don’t create jobs; the government’s policies can have influence, but you should probably think about following the business cycle more than the president. Eisenhower left Kennedy with an America that was in pretty good shape, while Clinton left GWB an America that was teetering on recession, as did GHWB for Clinton.
And I am taken aback at the suggestion that recent Republican financial policy be regarded as conservative (i.e. old liberal). To the victor goes the spoils, I accuse the Republicans of establishing big government just as much as Democrats. George W. Bush has had one of, if not the most, liberal economic policy track record of any president before him.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:05 am34.the_svedberg Says: I look at sites like this one that love government and think anything uttered by a conservative is “troll-speak” and I read sites that are more right-leaning, that way I can formulate my own opinion. So please tell me how I’ve been deceived, because I didn’t believe my leftist teachers in high school without empirical evidence? Because I think that productivity, and not mediocrity, should be rewarded and encouraged? Because I believe freedom and choice are good things and the market is a better allocator of these tangibles than government?
Golly, svendberg, all that reading didn’t bestow the ability to think beyond stereotypes or prejudicial preconceived generalities. So far, you’ve used the term “liberal” as a pejorative and pronounced this entire site as “government loving.” Look up the word “liberal” sometime. You’ve decided to judge by blanket presumption, not by individual merit. That renders your opinion, however much you claim “well read,” as merely and obviously bigoted and condescending.
Go read a book.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:10 amthe_svedberg Says:
George W. Bush has had one of, if not the most, liberal economic policy track record of any president before him.
_____
Jesus wept.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:10 amjonny Says:
the_svedberg Says:
George W. Bush has had one of, if not the most, liberal economic policy track record of any president before him.
_____
Jesus wept.
Jesus! Another liberal. Handing out all those fish and loaves to the poor for free! That’s like welfare! They should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:15 amthe_svedberg Says:
——————————————————————————–
Sociology classes are dead-ends when it comes to free-thought in education. If you disagree with the professor, your ideas are not welcome for discussion.
My “talking points” are not decades old, they are centuries old, starting with Hobbes and Locke.
—
Don’t forget that arrogant Socrates and his Socratic Method.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:15 amSvedberg, I asked you why the job growth rate always increases going from a Republican presidency to a Democratic and always decreases going from a Democratic president to a Republican.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:16 amKeith Says:
Jesus! Another liberal.
_____
Don’t let him off so easy. He was a blankety-blank COMMUNIST!
May 7th, 2008 at 12:18 amHonshiro, you’re points are well thought out and interesting, I will consider. However, I fail to see how I’ve used the word “liberal” in any context besides whatever context it is placed. I mentioned earlier how the word has changed definitions over time; basically it isn’t a very good word to use because it’s so subjective, and frankly I haven’t really used it much other than to point out how weird of a word it is. I believe I used the word “progressive” once or twice, which is the word that is used in the title of this blog and its followers have chosen to label themselves as (without regard to the historical baggage associated with the word).
As far as “government loving” is concerned, all one has to do is go to the homepage of TP and see that what they are fighting for is all pro-government: using government to promote social and economic justice, using government to make communities more healthy, using government to lead America in the world, etc). But you’re right I will keep my generalities to myself and focus on intellectual conversation. I welcome thoughtful dissent, this is how I learn and how I’ve arrived at my present viewpoints, by talking to people with whom I disagree.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:21 am53.Keith Says:
Svedberg, I asked you why the job growth rate always increases going from a Republican presidency to a Democratic and always decreases going from a Democratic president to a Republican.
http://www.bls.gov/
May 7th, 2008 at 12:24 amKeith I’m having trouble finding data for “job growth rate” maybe you can enlighten me. I confess the site I linked was job growth in actual numbers, but even if the population stayed steady (as it most certainly does not) a negative slope on the graph would imply a negative derivative/rate. You’d have to take into account population growth to see if the positive slope numbers were actual increases in rate, but the downward slopes speak for themselves.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:24 amSvedberg, Why do you choose such a biased group as Tax Foundation? Because they say what you like to hear?
From your link for job growth rate:
Truman 4.3
Eisenhow 2.9
JFK 6.6
LBJ 4.9
Nixon 3.4
Ford 4.9
Carter 7.5
Reagan 7.3
GHWB 5.4
Clinton 7.3
GWB 4.2
The pattern is very clear to someone who is not ideologically blind.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:28 amThe job growth rate has been kept since 1921 and it always worsens changing to Repub and always improves changing to Dems.
Clinton averaged 237,000 jobs created per month and GWB has averaged 72,000 per month. About 120,000 are needed to keep up with population growth. Why the difference? Is W more liberal than Bill? Did people get lazy under W because of all the welfare handouts? Ask yourself why.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:34 amFood, healthcare and education are HUMAN RIGHTS, and frankly, I don’t give a shit if they’re not mentioned in our Constitution.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:35 amNow Zooster, is that any way to speak towards James Madison?
May 7th, 2008 at 12:41 amIs that what rhf meant by b!+(hy ?
May 7th, 2008 at 12:43 am:D
The American corporatocracy/plutocracy loves gummints — as long as they’re for sale. As long as nobody tries to get “government to promote social and economic justice,government to make communities more healthy, using government to lead America in the world, etc.”
One-stop candyland — buy favorable legislation, sell corrupt contracts — it’s a MALL!
Of course, all the while condemning gummint as an evil. Especially that pesky “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” The people are a blankety-blank commodity, for chrissake. Like pork bellies.
As long as we got gummint of Exxon, by Exxon, and for Exxon (backed by gummint military might worldwide, of course,) gummint shall not perish from the earth.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:44 amHi Keith,
I guess he should have thought about those things, huh? :)
May 7th, 2008 at 12:45 amHey Zooey,
May 7th, 2008 at 12:46 amA nice glass of wine and a decent cheese seems reasonably as well. In fact I think the Constitution is really lacking when it comes to the culinary rights. Who stuck that stupid hard-on guy gun stuff in there at the expense of the important stuff
the_svedberg Says:
Honshiro, you’re points are well thought out and interesting, I will consider. However, I fail to see how I’ve used the word “liberal” in any context besides whatever context it is placed.
Then you are also intellectually dishonest.
…basically it isn’t a very good word to use because it’s so subjective, and frankly I haven’t really used it much other than to point out how weird of a word it is.
Not even close, svedberg.
As far as “government loving” is concerned, all one has to do is go to the homepage of TP and see that what they are fighting for is all pro-government: using government to promote social and economic justice, using government to make communities more healthy, using government to lead America in the world, etc).
That’s creatively false, svedberg. Government regulation is not exclusively “pro government” but “pro consumer protection.” Just ask anyone whose “self-correcting-free-market” experience lost them a loved one to Vioxx, lost a pet to the pet food recall or got sick from e-coli in spinach or american beef (which the industry demands to be exempt from mad cow screening.)
Social services also doesn’t make one “pro government” as much as invoking a common-sense collective plan. Police, 9-11 emergency, roads, infrastructure, are all government-run regulated programs. Deregulation has been responsible for some of the most heinous rip-offs (and lest we forget how fast businesses line up for government bailouts, corporate welfare and subsidies…) in US history.
…this is how I learn and how I’ve arrived at my present viewpoints, by talking to people with whom I disagree.
Your blatant prejudices reveal your bias and reduce the perception of impartiality.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:46 amKeith Says:
Is that what rhf meant by b!+(hy ?
:D
May 7th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Actually, rhf was dying to call me the c-word — as per usual — but I think it makes him have problems posting on TP….for some reason. ;)
May 7th, 2008 at 12:47 amZooey Says:
——————————————————————————–
Actually, rhf was dying to call me the c-word — as per usual — but I think it makes him have problems posting on TP….for some reason. ;)
—–
Are you sure that he isn’t just afraid of those of us who would not tolerate such disrespect to a lady?
May 7th, 2008 at 12:51 amdbadass Says:
Hey Zooey,
A nice glass of wine and a decent cheese seems reasonably as well. In fact I think the Constitution is really lacking when it comes to the culinary rights. Who stuck that stupid hard-on guy gun stuff in there at the expense of the important stuff
May 7th, 2008 at 12:46 am
Really, especially the wine part. Who needs guns when there’s wine? :-)
May 7th, 2008 at 12:51 amdbadass Says:
Are you sure that he isn’t just afraid of those of us who would not tolerate such disrespect to a lady?
May 7th, 2008 at 12:51 am
Why would it start to matter at this point? :)
May 7th, 2008 at 12:53 amyou mean “conservative”?
May 7th, 2008 at 12:57 am:D
Keith, bite your tongue!!
May 7th, 2008 at 12:59 am“Why would it start to matter at this point?”
Yeah, why we got to start repecting her this late in the game? :)
May 7th, 2008 at 1:01 amMay I take this opportunity to tell these white male jackasses from faux to kiss my middle class ass. No french kissing, even though y’all would enjoy that, just a respectful peck.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:02 amOy…is there something in the air this evening? :D
May 7th, 2008 at 1:04 amHey Mistress Z! WTHF is with the trolls tonight.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:06 amObama is soooo close to Mrs. WillyJeff tonight in IN…Just 16,000 votes.
C’mon SDs, do your damn job!
Hanshiro, nice take down on the Svorgassborg…
May 7th, 2008 at 1:07 amIn light of all the tongue biting and french kissing, let’s remember that all of this is just are ancestral hardwiring causing us to simulate food sharing
May 7th, 2008 at 1:08 amHi RUC,
The world as the trolls know it (especially rhf) is about to end. It makes ‘em twitchy.
Any bets on whether or not Hil is hugging the porcelain throne right about now?
May 7th, 2008 at 1:09 am77. RUCerious Says:
Hanshiro, nice take down on the Svorgassborg…
It’s that “truth/liberal bias” thing…
May 7th, 2008 at 1:10 amdbadass Says:
In light of all the tongue biting and french kissing, let’s remember that all of this is just are ancestral hardwiring causing us to simulate food sharing
May 7th, 2008 at 1:08 am
Works for me. ;)
May 7th, 2008 at 1:15 amWill you still respect me if I regurgitate me meal into your gullet?
May 7th, 2008 at 1:17 amThat’s new here. A conservative who can actually name the great thinkers that helped found the American Conservative cause. I wonder how Svedberg views Bush. Any true American Conservative should shudder at the mere mention of this man’s name, both because he’s hard-core anti-Conservative and because of how he managed to coopt the Conservative message and ruin its marketability to middle-class Americans for the foreseeable future.
Getting to the topic of this thread, the forces that have coopted the original Conservative mantra of less government look upon the working man who wants that mantra so he can live his life freely to screw him over. Instead of the classical ‘Live and let live’ philosophy, current Conservatives argue that Big Government is OK when it is directed against the little people.
The DMCA, or Digital Millennium Copyright Act, now makes it a crime to circumvent copy protection, even to make archival copies for your personal use!
The Patriot Act, which, up until last September, allowed the FBI to examine your personal evidence without notifying you first in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Those are just two things off my sleep-addled mind. The list grows very long, what with ‘protecting ourselves from Terrorists’ and ‘keeping drugs out of our kids hands’ and ‘keeping kids from having sex’ and ‘protecting the family’. Every sound-bite is an excuse to invade our privacy and let government intrude on us.
If svedberg is truely a libertarian, he’s not gonna be here to support Bush. I wonder what his responses to these accusations are…and his reaction to the fact that some talking head on Faux Noose referred to the working people the Republicans need to win elections as ‘lower class people’.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:19 amdbadass Says:
Will you still respect me if I regurgitate me meal into your gullet?
May 7th, 2008 at 1:17 am
Um, no.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:22 amSo best to stick just with the sumulated food sharing! I suppose I just always have to take it one step beyond.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:25 amdbadass Says:
So best to stick just with the sumulated food sharing! I suppose I just always have to take it one step beyond.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:25 am
Biologists….
**eyes rolling**
:D
May 7th, 2008 at 1:27 am.
Such Rovian euphenisims coming from a Democrat’s camp…
I suppose spelling it out helps… NO?
Hillary (R) Clinton!
… because (R) isn’t just for (R)odham anymore…
.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:05 amJeremy in Denver Says:
If svedberg is truely a libertarian,
_____
Libertarian, n.: “If the gummint won’t let ya kill each other with sawed-off shotguns, how long will it be before the gummint won’t let ya kill each other ATALL?”
May 7th, 2008 at 2:08 amMax-1 Says:
_____
Karla Rove. Not mine; I saw it elsewhere.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:10 amThe pig twins: Kondracke and Barnes.
May 7th, 2008 at 3:10 amI’m shocked, SHOCKED that there would be elitist pigs on Fox News Channel thumbing their noses at the ‘common folk’.
Have the viewers of Fox finally realized they’ve been had?
May 7th, 2008 at 3:27 amI would rather be lower class than bear any resemblence to these walking stacks of cow flop. They are not worthy to tie my shoes.
May 7th, 2008 at 7:23 amZooey Says:
Any bets on whether or not Hil is hugging the porcelain throne right about now?
We used to call it driving the porcelain bus :)~
May 7th, 2008 at 8:32 amTalk about ELITISM, these guys and Fix news are just showing their lack of class and intelligence.These people forget that it was and still is the middle and working class that keeps this country going and it`s their greed and corruption and cronyism that is trying to drive us into oblivion and WAR.
May 7th, 2008 at 11:19 amI bet it never occurred to these phony Fox “patriots” while they’re yukking it up about “downscale” and “working class” Americans that those Americans dying in Iraq are by a large percentage those very same “working class” and “downscale” Americans.
Hey, but Fox Noise hides behind the flag while they laugh at the American “working class” , so their guys must be all right.
May 7th, 2008 at 12:52 pmJeremy you are correct in assuming I am ashamed of Bush, I didn’t vote for him either time, I think “compassionate conservatism” is another way of saying soft socialism. He and the Republicans had a great opportunity to instill some fiscal restraint and reform when they were in power, namely in the form of fundamental tax reform and entitlement reform (like it or not, something must be done to make SS and Medicare more solvent). And he chickened out. Which leads me to my next point: I think that when we have a split government, the people benefit. For instance, in the 1990s, we had a moderate liberal in the WH and a moderate conservative majority in Congress, so government was only able to pass the most important legislation. We got welfare reform and a budget that wasn’t particularly driven by special interests. When the Republicans took control of both the WH and Congress, we saw special interests take center stage in DC and government spending and intrusion into our lives spiral out of control. It is hearsay, but I would be willing to bet if the same were true only replace Republican with Democrat, we’d have many of the same problems. A split government with its hands tied governs better than one that thinks it has a mandate to tell us how to live our lives.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:07 pmSvedberg, Clinton’s first budget passed the Democratic Congress without a single Republican vote and cut GHWB’s record budget deficit in half. From $250 billion to $125 billion. It would have been a balanced budget except for the interest payment on the debt piled up the previous twelve years of Reagan/Bush, which equaled about $125 billion. Only those with income over $150,000 ($300,000 for couples) had their taxes raised.
The economy was good with a Democratic Congress under JFK and LBJ—until the tremendous costs of the Vietnam War started having an effect.
May 7th, 2008 at 3:53 pmKeith,
The economy was good with a Democratic Congress under JFK and LBJ—until the tremendous costs of the Vietnam War started having an effect.
Not that I’m defending GWB, but you could most certainly insert Republican for Democratic, GWB for JFK/LBJ and September 11,2001 for Vietnam War and your argument will still ring true.
Starting in 1995, Clinton and Gingrich had to agree on a budget in order to get it passed. Then we had the boom of the 1990s. Not saying they’re correlated, that would be a stretch, but it’s no more of a stretch than linking jobs added with presidents.
Can’t we all agree that whatever happens, we should avoid reliving the late 1970s? I wasn’t alive back then, but the overwhelming majority of conversations I’ve had with folks who were, that was not a time to be proud to be an American.
May 7th, 2008 at 8:01 pmSvedberg, you are ignoring what I said about Clinton’s first bidget that did not get a single Republican vote, You spin a lot.
You are ignoring the evidence YOU GAVE That the job growth rate always improves going from Repub to Dem and worsens going from Dem to Repub!!!!!!!
May 8th, 2008 at 4:50 am