More on Politics?

[Michael Martin]

Gheezsh! I stirred up a hornets nest with the Obama Bin Laden New Yorker magazine cover.



How about this?



There are two Versions - Read Both



TRADITIONAL VERSION:



The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.



The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.



Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed. The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.



MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!





MODERN VERSION:



The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.



The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.



Com e winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving.



CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food.



America is stunned by the sharp contrast.



How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?



Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, 'It's Not Easy Being Green'.



Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, 'We shall overcome".



Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.



Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, John Kerry & Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.



Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer! The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his h ome is confiscated by the government.



Hillary Clinton gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.



The ant loses the case.



The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.



The ant has disappeared in the snow.



The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.



MORAL OF THE STORY: Be very careful how you vote in 2008!

 

[TrainTrac]

The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

You forgot to mention that while the ant was hard at work building his house and laboring to gather winter supplies, the grasshopper also contacted the local building trades and laboror's union halls, who promptly sent members out to walk a picket line in front of the construction site because the ant didn't use a union force to build his home and gather supplies!:lol:

 

[Frank screwyourednecks]

Here is a better story>>>>>>>



Have your political views, your religious beliefs or your behaviors been targeted by verbal abuse? Have you found yourself defending your choices against individuals so bent on their own agenda that nothing you say makes a difference? Chances are you are being attacked by a Fundamentalist Christian.



Often called the "Religious Right," these people come from an extreme wing of the Christian Faith. Because of their growing number, many of them - as well as many non-Christians - believe they represent all of Christianity. Not true. These people represent a far-right position which is beyond rational thought. They are Fundamentalists. And by that definition, which they use, they have set themselves up as defenders of the "fundamentals" of the faith, as the guardians of righteousness, as soldiers of the truth. They are most likely part of the current administrations base which include an all-time low approval rating.



Fundamentalists are nothing new however. They can be abrasive, angry, judgmental and downright mean, but they are not true representatives of any of the faiths for which they claim to speak. I say that because EVERY major religion has had its share. Fundamentalist Muslims have made many non-Muslims fear that religion, and yet the Muslim faith, at its core, remains a peace-loving faith. Fundamentalist Jews have made many non-Jews fear that religion, and yet the Jewish faith, at its core, remains a peace-loving faith. And Fundamentalist Christians have made many non-Christians fear that religion, and yet the Christian faith, at its core, remains a peace-loving faith. It's only when Fundamentalists are allowed to gain political power that their existence is a threat to mankind.



The real issue with these people is not their specific faiths. It's their addiction to thinking they are right. It's an addiction to believing they have a corner on the market of truth. In other words, it's an addiction to a "made-truth," that is, to a belief that the truths they've created in their minds are indeed absolute truths and that everyone else must be made to believe in the same truths lest they perish. Also noteworthy: They are wrong and complete hypocritical. They are a loathesome, out of touch group.



They are supported by a VAST majority of the media. They promulgate a "liberal" media bias, when the complete opposite exists. The priests, pundits, and network corporate suckies have not the courage to even serve thier country. Heres a list:



Sean Hannity: did not serve.

Rush Limbaugh: did not serve

Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.

Michael Savage: did not serve.

George Will: did not serve.

Chris Matthews: did not serve. RIP

Paul Gigot: did not serve.

Bill Bennett: did not serve.

Pat Buchanan: did not serve.

Bill Kristol: did not serve.

Kenneth Starr: did not serve.

Michael Medved: did not serve



So when you watch the news and see a big politician who can never admit that he has made a mistake, even though most of the world thinks he did>> He thinks God has spoken to him. He cannot be wrong. THE EGO!



Theres a story for ya. No ants or grasshoppers though. I guess when you tell a story based in reality, you have to exclude the insects.

 

[TrainTrac]

Frank,



Did you come up with this on your own, or cut and paste it from some other source? I'm not even sure what is the point of your response.

have not the courage to even serve thier country

By this, I'm assuming you mean military service? If so, is it fair to pass judgment on a person based on whether or not they've served in the military? I don't think so. I served 20 years in the U.S. Navy, but don't look down upon those who haven't served. As far as folks in the public area like those listed above, I look at them based upon their accomplishments as a whole (writings, spoken word, character, personal accomplishments, etc.)

They are supported by a VAST majority of the media.

Once again, you're factually inaccurate. No, you're just plain wrong. If not, then show me proof that supports that statement. How often do you see those you listed on the major networks, in the NY Times, Washington Post, or other major media outlets in a positive light? With the exception of Chris Matthews (who works for NBC) not that many of them. So I don't think you can accurately say that "they are supported by a VAST majority of the media".



And you're also wrong about attempting to infer that Chris Matthews is a conservative by including him in your list of "priests, pundits, and network corporate suckies". He's a dyed-in-the-wool liberal Democrat.

Matthews spent 15 years in politics and government, working in the White House for four years under President Jimmy Carter as a Presidential speechwriter and on the President’s Reorganization Project, in the U.S. Senate for five years on the staffs of Senator Frank Moss (Utah) and Senator Edmund Muskie (Maine), and as the top aide to Speaker of the House Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill, Jr. for six years.

Ya can't get much more liberal Democrat than working for the likes of Jimmy Carter, Ed Muskie, and Tip O'Neill!

 

[Ron Dacher]

Here's another take.



Father-Daughter Talk



A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, in other words redistribution of wealth.



She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Republican, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.



One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.



Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying



Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"



She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."



Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."



The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That's a crazy idea, how would that be fair! I've worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"



The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, "Welcome to the Republican party."

 

[Frank screwyourednecks]

The amount of people who inherit thier fortunes instead of what you say "working thier tails off" is extremely high. Your party wants to KEEP thier wealth. By enacting, and keeping unfair tax rates. Get a grip. People on the left just want a living wage, and some benefits. Not wealth re distribution. Out of touch again?

 

[user 62394]

I find it bleeping hilarious that FRANK posted something disparaging a group of people for heaping nothing but verbal abuse on others. Hypocrite much.



Frank -- you are a fundamentalist too. Your religion is liberalism.



Rocks

 

[Tom Schindler]

What gets me is the Republican party plays the "Jesus Card". Bush played that up. "God talks to me, God tells me his problems, etc."



The Democrats, historically, are more charity minded. Even though the Democrats are more liberal with things like Gays.



Unfortunatly, those same ones that preach you must go to church also say "Screw the poor, they are lazy" instead of lets help the poor find a better way of life.



Not all poor people got that way because they were lazy or made bad decisions.



The majority of the rich are that way because Daddy gave it to them. Very few work thier way to the top without any assistance.





Tom

 

[Frank screwyourednecks]

Hey rocks. I gotta be loyal to my own values dude!



Check out my new post. Top Ten Pet Peeves:

 

[EddieS'04]

Frank and Tom, JMO you are looking at conservative christians from what the media displays. Iam a conservative christian and a union member and I vote for the person always have always will. I dont choose a party, even in local elections. You cant roll every body in the same pan. Maybe someday you wont judge a book by its cover.

 

[buzz worth]

I WORKED hard for what I have earned. I was GIVEN opportunity, took it and made MY fortune. All I want to do is be sure that ROBIN HOOD doesn't come riding in and decide for me that the poor ol slobbering fool down on the corner deserves better and I should be the one that he gets it from.

When I feel the need to help my fellow human/animal/whatever.....then I will make that decision....not some blabbering self appointed liberal that thinks they know better.



Ever notice that all of these elections come down to who we don't want to elect? The presidential election is a real smokescreen to cover up all the senate and congressmen that should be replaced. That's where the real snag is. Too many lobbyists with too much $$$ to hand out.



ss

 

[Ron Dacher]

What is wrong with someone wanting to keep their wealth especially if they have worked hard for it? Our country was founded to fight off oppressive taxes. My wife and I both work hard and are far from being rich, but based on the Democrats defintion, we are considered rich. I put in more than 40 hours a week and often take work home with me. She went back to work three years ago after being a stay at home mom for 7 years. She only works part time but this was more than enough to push us into a higher tax bracket where the end result was that most of her salary went to paying our taxes. Thanks to the Democrats efforts in Congress, our deductions and exemptions have been limited, we are subject to the alternative minimun tax, , which was only suppossed to impact the very wealthly, we do not get to deduct college tuition expense for our daugher, and get no financial assistance from the school, and our combined taxes for federal and state income taxes, social security and property taxes run in excess of 40% of our income. We didn't receive a dime under the economic stimulas rebate. Once I retire I doubt that I will ever be able to receive as much money from social secutiry as I have put ito it. Meanwhile, people who pay little or no income tax are able to receive money back from the IRS, in excess of what they paid in, under the earned income tax credit, which is a generous income redistribution plan. We also alow senior citizens from foreign countries enter our country and receive social security even though they never paid a dime into the system.



Democrats are more charitable, especially when it comes to other people's money, like us taxpayers. They can't wait to spend it and redistribute it. I beleive it is more of an effort to curry favor with their support base rather than a compassionate view of those who make less money. Just look at the tax returns that have been released for those candidates that have run for the presidency over the past several elections. In every case the Republican candidate gave more to charity, in both dollars and percentage of income, and it wasn't because they made more than the Democratic candidates. Clinton, Gore and Kerry were embarassed once their returns were releasesd and it revealed how litte they did give to charity, even counting Clinton's dedcuting $5 for each of his used underwear that he donated (and this was pre-Monica so it couldn't worth much). I don't even what to get into the families who have been on welfare for generations and have no plans to get off it in the future, which makes less available for those who turely need and deserve it.



Take a look at the annual editions of Forbes and Fortune where they list they richest people. Yes there are several on there who inherited their wealth (just because they inherited it why shouldn't they be able to hold on to it since their ancestors worked hard for it), but most of the people on there are self made millionaires.



Sorry for the rant, but in our system of government we should reward success, not punish it. From each according to his ability and to each according to his needs is the Communists manta. Even a die hard liberal like Whoppie Goldberg recently complained it was not fair that she was taxed at a much high rate because she worked hard and was successful. She felt that she should be taxed at a lower rate like those that made significanly less than her. Then it was pointed out that she keeps voting for the same Democrats who keep her rate high!

 

[EddieS'04]

I dont let my church or my union sway my vote..

JMHO, Frank is a jealous zelot, and want what you have redisributed...:lol:

 

[TrainTrac]

This is just too much fun to ignore!:lol:

The amount of people who inherit thier fortunes instead of what you say "working thier tails off" is extremely high.



The majority of the rich are that way because Daddy gave it to them. Very few work thier way to the top without any assistance.

I included those two statements in the same quote because they're basically the same class-warfare talking point. Has it occurred to you that some very prominent Democrats, who were/are supposedly "friends of the 'working class' or 'working families'"" fall into this generalization? How about Franklin Roosevelt, John, Bobby, and Ted Kennedy (not to mention all of their offspring), and all of the Rockefellers (some of which are currently serving in Congress as members of the Democrat party. And let's not forget about Al Gore and John Kerry (who served in Vietnam). Oh, wait, Kerry didn't inherit most of his fortune, he married it!



But the more important point is that even if someone inherits wealth, what's wrong with that? At some point in their family line, someone had to work to earn and build that wealth. Why shouldn't someone who's worked hard and earned wealth (like John D. Rockefeller, Henry Ford, Adolpheus Busch, Andrew Carnegie, or yes, even Joe Kennedy, even though most of his amassed fortune was earned in bootlegging and crookedly playing the stock market) be able to pass that on to their heirs? They can choose to do something else with their earned wealth if they like, such as give most of it away to charity; like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have done. But the bottom line is this: It's wealth that someone in their families, at some point, earned. And that personal wealth is their private property to do whatever they want with it.



Moving on...

By enacting, and keeping unfair tax rates.

For once, Frank, I gotta admit that you're right. The tax rates are unfair. The top income earners in this country pay far more than their "fair" share of the taxes. The most recent stats I could find from the IRS were 2005. I'm not HTML savvy enough to figure out how to post the entire table here, so I'll just give you these two stats with a link to the entire table.



The top 50% of income earners, that's folks who files taxes with an Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) of greater than $30,881 paid a staggering 96% of the income taxes in 2005. And the bottom 50% (with and AGI less than $30, 881 paid just 3.07% of the taxes for 2005. The top 1% (AGI >$364,657) paid 39.38% of taxes. So you're right, that's grossly unfair. Because those who are successful and earn more are being punished for their achievements. There's a one word solution to this: FairTax!

 

[Dingo]

I wonder why I have to pay a huge tax penalty because I own my company... Last year, I took home just over $30k. I paid $11k in taxes.

 

[Doctor CAD]

Quote

" by Dingo,7/16/2008 23:40 ET

I wonder why I have to pay a huge tax penalty because I own my company... Last year, I took home just over $30k. I paid $11k in taxes."



OH, so you are the evil rich that Mike so deeply hates...

 

[Les]

Dingo, may need to find a better accountant or change your legal form...

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

The Democrats, historically, are more charity minded. Even though the Democrats are more liberal with things like Gays.

Right.



They are more charity-minded with "public" money, like taxes.

But the idea that liberals give more is a myth. Of the top 25 states where people give an above-average percentage of their income, all but one (Maryland) were red -- conservative -- states in the last presidential election.

 

[Johnny O]

priests, pundits, and network corporate suckies have not the courage to even serve thier country. Heres a list:



Sean Hannity: did not serve.

Rush Limbaugh: did not serve

Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.

Michael Savage: did not serve.

George Will: did not serve.

Chris Matthews: did not serve. RIP

Paul Gigot: did not serve.

Bill Bennett: did not serve.

Pat Buchanan: did not serve.

Bill Kristol: did not serve.

Kenneth Starr: did not serve.

Michael Medved: did not serve

Frank, so I take it that you're going to vote for McCain then since Obama did not serve?

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

Frank, so I take it that you're going to vote for McCain then since Obama did not serve?

Ouch. That's going to leave a mark.