On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:35:09 -0700 (PDT), Frogwatch
wrote:

On Jul 23, 6:32*pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Jul 23, 5:50*pm, jps wrote:



On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 15:47:11 -0400, wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 12:13:19 -0700, jps wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:18:26 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:06:50 -0700, jps wrote:

You think there are more rich Ds than Rs?

Just the ones with power, like Senators and presidents.
I am sure a lot more poor people believe Democrats are helping them
but if you can believe the chart Bob is selling this week, the "middle
class" got screwed as badly in the 90s as they did in the 2000s.

Oh, come on. *Those are the second and third tier sock puppets who do
the bidding of the truly powerful.

They write and pass laws to protect wealth and put systems in place to
ensure that the wealthy aren't disturbed.

My bet is that wealthy Ds are far more likely to accept a raise in
taxes than their Republican counterparts.

It certainly wouldn't be Kerry would it?

Singling out one example is silly and you know it.

Who (in this group especially) wouldn't want to avoid paying excise
tax on a boat purchase if they could do so by mooring the vessel in a
nearby state? *That's a ****load of moorage prepaid.

Being a Democrat doesn't obligate you to run towards paying taxes.

Being *a Republican does obligate you to tilt the tax structure
towards favoring the wealthy.

It is a simple case of hypocrisy, wanting other people to pay taxes he
is not willing to pay. *This is the way of liberalism.

It is just like Gore lecturing on our "carbon footprint" while his is
64X that of the average person.

You are rife with dishonesty. Gore isn't an average person. Is he
any greater or less than a person in similar circumstances?

Relevant analysis wouldn't occur to a dishonest person looking only to
make illusory points. Only the mentally challenged Republican base
would fail to detect the odor of your thinking.