tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post7261692026022516654..comments2024-03-28T10:19:35.425-05:00Comments on Althouse: "There is a dichotomy of elitism. Republicans' downfall is economic elitism."Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger64125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-47640737315852044892014-06-26T23:06:39.090-05:002014-06-26T23:06:39.090-05:00@rcommal: You seem compelled to "call out&quo...@rcommal: You seem compelled to "call out" people you otherwise like. I appreciate this because it reminds me of good parenting. I, on the other hand, like to call out people with whom I disagree or otherwise dislike. Maybe it's my zodiac sign. chickelithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10773887469972534979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-82702387104599863872014-06-26T23:02:50.921-05:002014-06-26T23:02:50.921-05:00rcommal wrote: The word, the very word, "info...rcommal wrote: <i>The word, the very word, "information" has been utterly corrupted and transformed.</i><br /><br />"To Inform," in the original metaphor, meant "to form + into." I imagine a potter's hands, forming clay (or putty) with bare hands. In that sense -- the older sense -- the word has not lost meaning. chickelithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10773887469972534979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-56624275886083035762014-06-26T22:01:04.544-05:002014-06-26T22:01:04.544-05:00The word, the very word, "information" h...The word, the very word, "information" has been utterly corrupted and transformed.<br /><br />I'm not sure why anyone feels all elated by and respectful of that word anymore, any adjectives--"low" and "high," for example, and also low and high, as part of general categorization--notwithstanding.rcommalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00301180339680504471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-10693876965297950332014-06-26T17:54:35.234-05:002014-06-26T17:54:35.234-05:00phx: "That's fine, I'm much more comf...phx: "That's fine, I'm much more comfortable with Repubs owning it now."<br /><br />LOL<br /><br />Upon what evidence do republicans "own" this now?<br /><br />More "received wisdom" from the left side of the dial.<br /><br />Again, thanks for sharing your premises. All of which constitute assuming facts not in evidence.<br /><br />But hey, I get it. You staked out a position. It was wrong. Now is the time for a little goalpost slidin'....Dragohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04079148433908004715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-85270513280158711352014-06-26T11:19:17.047-05:002014-06-26T11:19:17.047-05:00Did you ever watch "Watters' World" ...<i>Did you ever watch "Watters' World" on "The O'Reilly Show'?<br /><br />And. yes, these people sometimes vote and determine election outcomes.</i><br /><br />No, I haven't seen those shows. But if your point is that there really are "low-information" voters, I completely agree. Probably most voters could be characterized that way. I personally think I probably am, in a relative way.<br /><br />My point is that it's obviously used as a smug insult, even if it's true. Independents and moderates aren't likely to reward those kind of expressions imo. <br /><br />Many people who Republicans need probably find it as annoying as I do. sakredkowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15652250985982301492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-60050013808871304752014-06-26T11:04:36.771-05:002014-06-26T11:04:36.771-05:00The phrase was originally coined by lefties as a p...<i>The phrase was originally coined by lefties as a pejorative to describe people who voted for Republicans.</i><br /><br />That's fine, I'm much more comfortable with Repubs owning it now.<br /><br />sakredkowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15652250985982301492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-18571901872385196382014-06-26T09:43:00.560-05:002014-06-26T09:43:00.560-05:00"You also have to be pretty low information t...<i>"You also have to be pretty low information to believe these days that the government, and, esp. the federal government can solve any real problems facing this country."</i> <br /><br />The government <i>can</i> help solve the real problems facing this country...if the people in government serve their constituents, that is, the people of America. In fact, only the government can do so.<br /><br />The problem is not government, per se, but who serves <i>in</i> government and who <i>they</i> serve, (i.e., Wall Street, the big banks, the financial elites).<br /><br />Both parties now are the parties of the wealthy class, and neither party serves the interests of the American citizenry. If one considers who government really serves, one see the government is not dysfunctional at all, but is quite capable at achieving the ends desired by government's actual constituents.Robert Cookhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06951286299515983901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-30417406444012368872014-06-26T07:12:54.419-05:002014-06-26T07:12:54.419-05:00Hillary and Bill have control of that double-wide ...Hillary and Bill have control of that double-wide down in Little Rock - including the penthouse on top - which when last heard of, when the building was completed, had garnered $495 million in "donations," and I would imagine there has been a few more coming in since. Then they have several "non-profit" "charitable" organizations, which also help pay their bills. <br />Then, folks on Wall St. with nothing better to do, do indeed estimate the Clintons' personal means to be in the neighborhood of Romney's estimated net worth.<br /><br />Note that the one time when Hillary! demonstrably spent their own money, on Chelsea's wedding, she blew an estimated $3 million on that event. This you don't do, especially if you are as tight as Hillary!, if you are "broke and struggling to make ends meet."Hagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05011701168912339784noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-21991384568812374122014-06-25T23:06:36.706-05:002014-06-25T23:06:36.706-05:00jr565 said...
Hillary is probably as rich as Mitt ...<i>jr565 said...<br />Hillary is probably as rich as Mitt Romney.</i><br /><br />Uh, no. <br /><br />Romney invested money and created wealth for himself and many other by helping to create productive enterprises. Hillary and Bill give speeches and get included in the occasional sweetheart investment deal.<br />Romney has worked his vein longer and more effectively than the Clintons, whose wealth is in the tens of millions. Romney is in the hundreds of millions. Which is fair, because from an economic perspective he has created more.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17424384180201600935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-28090895897173865062014-06-25T22:50:35.036-05:002014-06-25T22:50:35.036-05:00I think it important to define what economic eliti...I think it important to define what economic elitism means to different sectors and demographics of people. I also think it important to define what "means to" means.rcommalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00301180339680504471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-56708463042916812942014-06-25T21:14:31.916-05:002014-06-25T21:14:31.916-05:00The meme of GOP as the tycoons comes straight out ...The meme of GOP as the tycoons comes straight out of the winner The War that ended in 1865.<br /><br />The Democrat Party of the agrarian south woke up dead broke with NO legal money at all, but with a 70 year status as a Northern owned Colony imposed on it.<br /><br />The GOP Party of the Industrial north woke up with all the existent capital wealth in America, half of a rich North American Continent left to develop, no income taxes, no foreign enemies, and a huge manifest destiny.<br /><br />So the GOP guys actually once owned the great wealth and the Democrats endured the grinding poverty. That all shifted after WWII, but the cultural memory is with us to this day. traditionalguyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05706120413005530014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-1164823251196670112014-06-25T20:55:35.795-05:002014-06-25T20:55:35.795-05:00It has come to be applied to Democrats because the...<i>It has come to be applied to Democrats because they demonstrate with regularity that it is a better fit. Soon, with the continued assistance of the lefty mediaswine Democrats will move on to "no information voters."</i><br /><br />It is hard to fathom how the bulk of the Dem voters could be anything but "low information". If they weren't low information voters, they wouldn't vote for progressive solutions for essentially anything. Esp. not fixing the economy, esp. mired in the longest downturn/lack of recovery in most of our lifetimes. We are in the 6th year of Obamanomics, and 1Q GDP just got adjusted into negative territory. Last election, we were already 4 years into the Obama Recession, and yet, more people ignored that and voted for 4 more years of the same, or worse, than voted for sane economics. <br /><br />You also have to be pretty low information to believe these days that the government, and, esp. the federal government can solve any real problems facing this country. You have to ignore all the government failures, including shipping guns to the Mexican cartels, throwing millions out of their health insurance (who liked their plans and doctors, and lost both), VA administrators getting millions in bonuses for essentially killing thousands of veterans, Benghazi, trading our top 5 terrorists at Gitmo for a guy who walked off his post, and is likely a deserter, an out of control, above the law, IRS, etc. The government is run for the benefit of the government employees, politicians, and for the fat cats who can get either sweetheart deals, or can get protection from competition. The last people the government looks out for are the taxpayers (esp. with illegals apparently getting better health care than our veterans). <br /><br />Please explain to me how a high to moderate information voter could vote for any of that. Bruce Haydenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10815293023158025662noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-17654773083230314182014-06-25T20:26:37.529-05:002014-06-25T20:26:37.529-05:00>The historical basis for the Republicans are f...>The historical basis for the Republicans are for the wealthy meme<<br /><br />it works because demonrats are the party of the "zero sum economic game". ask the slaves?D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/17060639162688328166noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-81215920512609712192014-06-25T20:22:26.366-05:002014-06-25T20:22:26.366-05:00"Vilifying Clinton (or Kennedy or . . . ) for..."Vilifying Clinton (or Kennedy or . . . ) for being rich would hurt the cause and is therefore bad."<br /><br />No, Clinton got his money from government and giving speeches. Kennedy inherited his.<br /><br />Romney worked for his and built industries that employed, and currently employ, thousands if not millions. <br /><br />Look at WalMart. The Waltons built that company in one generation.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_T._Walton" rel="nofollow"> John Walton </a>, the son, was a sergeant in Vietnam. Clinton and Kennedy would never stoop to such a role.<br />Michael Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18127450762129879267noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-53907519937736394852014-06-25T20:13:20.251-05:002014-06-25T20:13:20.251-05:00Jeez, anyone with a three-digit IQ does that. I...<i>Jeez, anyone with a three-digit IQ does that. I'd hardly call it elitism.</i><br /><br />We can call you a narrow minded douche bag instead, since you're not rich.SGT Tedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00184808889760136366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-29623910302886755882014-06-25T20:08:47.440-05:002014-06-25T20:08:47.440-05:00Why is anyone taking Paul Begala's partisan bu...Why is anyone taking Paul Begala's partisan bullshit seriously, as if he were offering any sort of factual analysis? He's a hack for the Clintons, knee pads and all.<br /><br />The Democrats are for Big Business as any Republican. SGT Tedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00184808889760136366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-52345965299997316032014-06-25T19:57:00.213-05:002014-06-25T19:57:00.213-05:00Hillary is probably as rich as Mitt Romney. And sh...Hillary is probably as rich as Mitt Romney. And she and the dems pretend like she's not one of the 1%.<br />Only the true fools will fall for it.<br /><br />And for all the talk of wage gaps, its always in the blue states where you actually see the wage gap at its worst.<br /><br />jr565https://www.blogger.com/profile/06250384040393259866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-49151847785808751852014-06-25T19:56:19.968-05:002014-06-25T19:56:19.968-05:00Alex said...
Everyone knows the Republicans are th...Alex said...<br /><i>Everyone knows the Republicans are the party of the rich and the Democrats the party of the middle class and poor. That is conventional wisdom.</i><br /><br />Just as everybody know that the Dems are the party of the cultural elite. I count many here among the self-described cultural elite, including you. No one is willing to introspect. chickelithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10773887469972534979noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-60211378606452821772014-06-25T18:30:44.900-05:002014-06-25T18:30:44.900-05:00Willie Stark and his fancy white suitsWillie Stark and his fancy white suitsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-79898389882263036482014-06-25T17:56:11.778-05:002014-06-25T17:56:11.778-05:00Hillary! combines in one person a huge fortune, a ...Hillary! combines in one person a huge fortune, a highfalutin' Ivy League degree, and a lack of practical experience. She's bipartisan!<br /><br />Zachhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02284350648793830503noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-16485132073714395792014-06-25T17:08:52.200-05:002014-06-25T17:08:52.200-05:00http://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economi...http://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-democrats/<br />"An individual’s likelihood of being a Democrat decreases with every additional dollar he or she earns. <br /><br />Democrats have a huge advantage (63 percent) with voters earning less than $15,000 per year. <br /><br />This advantage carries forward for individuals earning up to $50,000 per year, and then turns in the Republicans’ favor — with just 36 percent of individuals earning more than $200,000 per year supporting Democrats.<br /><br />Interestingly, the median household income in the United States is $49,777 — right near the point where the Democratic advantage disappears and the Republicans take over."<br /> +<br /><br />From the Department of Irony Department:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-05-12/income-inequality-is-higher-in-democratic-districts-than-republican-ones" rel="nofollow">Income Inequality Is Higher In Democratic Districts Than Republican Ones</a><br /><br />Fernandinandehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11253225431705407699noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-71495771026992294472014-06-25T16:56:04.553-05:002014-06-25T16:56:04.553-05:00The historical basis for the Republicans are for t...<a href="http://crooksandliars.com/heather/thom-hartmann-explains-when-gop-became-par" rel="nofollow">The historical basis for the Republicans are for the wealthy meme</a><br /><br />It's true.Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11205752419540502278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-88392524141222333592014-06-25T16:54:24.006-05:002014-06-25T16:54:24.006-05:00Everyone knows the Republicans are the party of th...Everyone knows the Republicans are the party of the rich and the Democrats the party of the middle class and poor. That is conventional wisdom.Alexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11205752419540502278noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-41860309572556163922014-06-25T16:28:46.314-05:002014-06-25T16:28:46.314-05:00It's not just ok that she's rich, it's...It's not just ok that she's rich, it's great. Let her be rich.<br /><br />What sucks is her pretending that she was ever poor, or that she's not truly rich now.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17424384180201600935noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-65376633915584131492014-06-25T15:51:28.396-05:002014-06-25T15:51:28.396-05:00jussendavis: "America ... prefers that it can...jussendavis: "America ... prefers that it candidates not acquire their riches as a result of having held public office."<br /><br />Not necessarily so. Acquisition of wealth through graft in public office is a time-honored tradition among Democrats. E.g., LBJ, Harry Reid, Jesse Jackson (the youngest), Richard Daley, Tammany Hall etc., etc.hombrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12670099074010641958noreply@blogger.com