Previous 1 3 4
Topic: New Right Wing Rhetoric
no photo
Fri 05/27/11 05:12 PM
I heard on the radio today what Roger Ayles' new mandate at Faux News is. From this point forward, anybody who receives a Government check (Social Security beneficiaries, Medicare clients, Welfare beneficiaries, food stamps beneficiaries, unemployment insurance beneficiaries) will be known as "Takers", while business owners will be known as "Makers". This is the new rhetoric that I suspect we will be seeing on these political message boards. Conservatives seem to take their rhetorical marching orders from Faux News . I may be wrong, but it would certainly be true to form.

UtahSusan2955's photo
Fri 05/27/11 05:26 PM
I agree to the true to form part but can't quite believe the ignorance of the statement. Nobody I know asks to be disabled. Furthermore, there are people on assistance that would give their eye teeth to be able to get off but the big business owners keep getting all the breaks while the little guy keeps getting shut out. The gap beween the rich and poor keeps getting bigger and bigger.

boredinaz06's photo
Fri 05/27/11 09:19 PM

I heard on the radio today what Roger Ayles' new mandate at Faux News is. From this point forward, anybody who receives a Government check (Social Security beneficiaries, Medicare clients, Welfare beneficiaries, food stamps beneficiaries, unemployment insurance beneficiaries) will be known as "Takers", while business owners will be known as "Makers". This is the new rhetoric that I suspect we will be seeing on these political message boards. Conservatives seem to take their rhetorical marching orders from Faux News . I may be wrong, but it would certainly be true to form.


What liberal blog is this from? Can you post a link?

InvictusV's photo
Sun 05/29/11 05:43 AM

I heard on the radio today what Roger Ayles' new mandate at Faux News is. From this point forward, anybody who receives a Government check (Social Security beneficiaries, Medicare clients, Welfare beneficiaries, food stamps beneficiaries, unemployment insurance beneficiaries) will be known as "Takers", while business owners will be known as "Makers". This is the new rhetoric that I suspect we will be seeing on these political message boards. Conservatives seem to take their rhetorical marching orders from Faux News . I may be wrong, but it would certainly be true to form.



The shows on fox get a couple of million people that watch them. You realize that there are far more than a couple of million conservatives in this country.

This exaggeration of the influence fox has on the right reminds me of how the government keeps telling us we need the patriot act and how we have to keep spending billions every year on homeland security.

Lets create a threat, exaggerate its ability to produce results and the useful idiots will drink our propaganda like cheap wine.

I realize the number of useful idiots grows daily, but there certainly are enough informed people in this country that don't watch fox news or listen to some half a$$ed left wing radio show to understand what is going on in the world.




no photo
Sun 05/29/11 06:05 PM
Can you post a link?


Yes I can. The information is out there. You can, too.

Chazster's photo
Sun 05/29/11 06:34 PM

I heard on the radio today what Roger Ayles' new mandate at Faux News is. From this point forward, anybody who receives a Government check (Social Security beneficiaries, Medicare clients, Welfare beneficiaries, food stamps beneficiaries, unemployment insurance beneficiaries) will be known as "Takers", while business owners will be known as "Makers". This is the new rhetoric that I suspect we will be seeing on these political message boards. Conservatives seem to take their rhetorical marching orders from Faux News . I may be wrong, but it would certainly be true to form.


Just thought you should know that trying to sound intelligent and using insults is counter productive. People wont take you seriously if you can't make a point without insulting.

mightymoe's photo
Sun 05/29/11 06:58 PM


I heard on the radio today what Roger Ayles' new mandate at Faux News is. From this point forward, anybody who receives a Government check (Social Security beneficiaries, Medicare clients, Welfare beneficiaries, food stamps beneficiaries, unemployment insurance beneficiaries) will be known as "Takers", while business owners will be known as "Makers". This is the new rhetoric that I suspect we will be seeing on these political message boards. Conservatives seem to take their rhetorical marching orders from Faux News . I may be wrong, but it would certainly be true to form.


Just thought you should know that trying to sound intelligent and using insults is counter productive. People wont take you seriously if you can't make a point without insulting.


that's the liberal way... they can't achieve anything through intelligence, so they always resort to insults... to bad they are not smart enough to figure this out...

willing2's photo
Sun 05/29/11 07:38 PM


that's the liberal way... they can't achieve anything through intelligence, so they always resort to insults... to bad they are not smart enough to figure this out...

Is that a racisisticular statement?:wink: :wink: :wink: laugh smokin

mightymoe's photo
Sun 05/29/11 07:52 PM



that's the liberal way... they can't achieve anything through intelligence, so they always resort to insults... to bad they are not smart enough to figure this out...

Is that a racisisticular statement?:wink: :wink: :wink: laugh smokin


it has always been the mark of a weak minded person to belittle others to make themselves look better... but it only works with people that are "less intelligent" then the person doing the insulting...

Simonedemidova's photo
Sun 05/29/11 11:23 PM
For the most part many abusers of the system are takers, and as with anything in life there are those who abuse a system and those who use what is theirs to begin with. Social Security, medical, disability, a lot of these services were built on the very people who use them. I know I have worked since I was 13 years old. I have been contributing to these funds over half my life, and when i went on maternity leave I merely used some of the funds the govt banked on me while i was on active employment. I worked a lot and contributed a lot, the more you make the more they take....so why not use when the time is right.

I may never be eligible for Social security by the time my retirement rolls around, thank god for Pers...

There are mormans and illegal immigrants in which case this OP statement may apply to, but what does it have to do with right/left wings....

msharmony's photo
Sun 05/29/11 11:31 PM
everybody takes, some just have accountants to make it look better,,lol

but everybody must give at some point too,, it all comes out in the wash,,,

mightymoe's photo
Mon 05/30/11 12:21 AM
the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps.

msharmony's photo
Mon 05/30/11 12:32 AM
Edited by msharmony on Mon 05/30/11 12:34 AM

the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps.


that doesnt pan out when you look at the unemployment rate since 'welfare' began, it hasnt really changed so much based upon people who receive it so much as it has changed with businesses hiring practices(sending jobs oversees, hiring illegal immigrants, computerizing)

its hard to live off of welfare, whats given in most cases is a pittance and most people would probably rather have more if they could find EMPLOYMENT that would offer it


mightymoe's photo
Mon 05/30/11 01:08 AM


the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps.


that doesnt pan out when you look at the unemployment rate since 'welfare' began, it hasnt really changed so much based upon people who receive it so much as it has changed with businesses hiring practices(sending jobs oversees, hiring illegal immigrants, computerizing)

its hard to live off of welfare, whats given in most cases is a pittance and most people would probably rather have more if they could find EMPLOYMENT that would offer it




i don't think any knows since it hasn't really been tried... all dems think the same way, just give them more...if people are getting a free ride, why should they stop the taxi?

msharmony's photo
Mon 05/30/11 01:34 AM



the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps.


that doesnt pan out when you look at the unemployment rate since 'welfare' began, it hasnt really changed so much based upon people who receive it so much as it has changed with businesses hiring practices(sending jobs oversees, hiring illegal immigrants, computerizing)

its hard to live off of welfare, whats given in most cases is a pittance and most people would probably rather have more if they could find EMPLOYMENT that would offer it




i don't think any knows since it hasn't really been tried... all dems think the same way, just give them more...if people are getting a free ride, why should they stop the taxi?



trust me , it aint free..lol

the average american pays into the tax system(works) forty to fifty years out of their adult life,,,

most companies had a RETIREMENT so people who devoted their life to working there would be ok when their fifty years of service were done

,,thats been largely decreasing

most 'welfare' programs only allow participation for three to five years out of a LIFETIME since welfare reform

so, paying in for fifty years, and borrowing for three, is barely even getting back your interest,,,,


and hardly LIVING off of anyone else

mightymoe's photo
Mon 05/30/11 01:40 AM




the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps.


that doesnt pan out when you look at the unemployment rate since 'welfare' began, it hasnt really changed so much based upon people who receive it so much as it has changed with businesses hiring practices(sending jobs oversees, hiring illegal immigrants, computerizing)

its hard to live off of welfare, whats given in most cases is a pittance and most people would probably rather have more if they could find EMPLOYMENT that would offer it




i don't think any knows since it hasn't really been tried... all dems think the same way, just give them more...if people are getting a free ride, why should they stop the taxi?



trust me , it aint free..lol

the average american pays into the tax system(works) forty to fifty years out of their adult life,,,

most companies had a RETIREMENT so people who devoted their life to working there would be ok when their fifty years of service were done

,,thats been largely decreasing

most 'welfare' programs only allow participation for three to five years out of a LIFETIME since welfare reform

so, paying in for fifty years, and borrowing for three, is barely even getting back your interest,,,,


and hardly LIVING off of anyone else
with any system, people can abuse it.. anyone ca n work for a year, then get right back on it, for another 3-5 years

mightymoe's photo
Mon 05/30/11 01:40 AM




the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps.


that doesnt pan out when you look at the unemployment rate since 'welfare' began, it hasnt really changed so much based upon people who receive it so much as it has changed with businesses hiring practices(sending jobs oversees, hiring illegal immigrants, computerizing)

its hard to live off of welfare, whats given in most cases is a pittance and most people would probably rather have more if they could find EMPLOYMENT that would offer it




i don't think any knows since it hasn't really been tried... all dems think the same way, just give them more...if people are getting a free ride, why should they stop the taxi?



trust me , it aint free..lol

the average american pays into the tax system(works) forty to fifty years out of their adult life,,,

most companies had a RETIREMENT so people who devoted their life to working there would be ok when their fifty years of service were done

,,thats been largely decreasing

most 'welfare' programs only allow participation for three to five years out of a LIFETIME since welfare reform

so, paying in for fifty years, and borrowing for three, is barely even getting back your interest,,,,


and hardly LIVING off of anyone else
with any system, people can abuse it.. anyone ca n work for a year, then get right back on it, for another 3-5 years

msharmony's photo
Mon 05/30/11 01:41 AM





the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps.


that doesnt pan out when you look at the unemployment rate since 'welfare' began, it hasnt really changed so much based upon people who receive it so much as it has changed with businesses hiring practices(sending jobs oversees, hiring illegal immigrants, computerizing)

its hard to live off of welfare, whats given in most cases is a pittance and most people would probably rather have more if they could find EMPLOYMENT that would offer it




i don't think any knows since it hasn't really been tried... all dems think the same way, just give them more...if people are getting a free ride, why should they stop the taxi?



trust me , it aint free..lol

the average american pays into the tax system(works) forty to fifty years out of their adult life,,,

most companies had a RETIREMENT so people who devoted their life to working there would be ok when their fifty years of service were done

,,thats been largely decreasing

most 'welfare' programs only allow participation for three to five years out of a LIFETIME since welfare reform

so, paying in for fifty years, and borrowing for three, is barely even getting back your interest,,,,


and hardly LIVING off of anyone else
with any system, people can abuse it.. anyone ca n work for a year, then get right back on it, for another 3-5 years



since welfare reform, its 3-5 years PER LIFETIME, TOTAL,,,in most cases

no photo
Mon 05/30/11 01:54 AM
right wing, left wing, middle wing...who gives a xoxoxo.

I want a chicken wing and honesty for once from a government we are suppose to believe is working hard for the people by the people...yeah right!


msharmony's photo
Mon 05/30/11 08:33 AM
when we have a constituency filled with nothing but honest, hardworking, consistent people, we can expect a government which is


so dont go holding our breath,, just continue to do the best we can and continue to vote and contribute where possible

Previous 1 3 4