Democrats Have Contempt For Those Who Engage In Honest Work For A Living

Actually it's republicans that have contempt for people who work for a living. Republicans respect money, not work. Republicans don't care whether the rich earned their money or stole it... they are rich and that's all that matters to republicans.

Zip and this authoritative knowledge is according to whom?

The title of this seed is crazily false, but when I saw that it was from Mann Coulter, the hateful, bellicose bitch who makes a living by spreading right wing venom, I knew this had to be outrageously wrong.

So Coulter thinks Romney earned his wealth??? That's an interesting spin considering he is the namesake of hotel magnate J. Willard Marriott, who was his Mitt's father's best friend. Mitt's father was the CEO of Amberican Motors before serving in Nixon's cabinet. That should tell you something about his family background. Granted, Mitt made a ton of money working for Bain, but he did not come from humble beginnings.

And Dems hate Mitt??? Rather, it seems his own party hates him, evidenced by the ABM (anyone but Mitt) movement trending in the most recent primaries.

Coulter...crazy, hateful, duplicitous, bitch...and the right loves her!

Zip and this authoritative knowledge is according to whom?

Just look around. That's all you have to do.

So.... only Republicans work? Do Democrats disrespect themselves for working?

This talking point is an unbelievable stretch of the imagination in order to come up with yet another "wedge" issue.

Cornhusker4Palin, ROFLMAO, you crack me up! Coulter recently stood before ,a bunch of Repubs, and nearly in tears, said "We must nominate Christie, if we nominate Romeny we will lose." Now she defends his wealth? LOL, you must think us libbies have no memory. For once in her life, Ann was correct, Mitt will lose big time to Pres. Obama, and we will remember all your foolish posts to the contrary.

Ann was correct, Mitt will lose big time to Pres. Obama, and we will remember all your foolish posts to the contrary.

And the funnier part is that Romney is the Repubs only viable candidate! Imagine the Obama landslide victory if they put up Rick Sanctimonious or Pig Newton! If Ron Paul is the nominee, it would result in Obama winning all the electoral votes--every state! Talk about a mandate...

Actually it's republicans that have contempt for people who work for a living.

Indeed. I cannot count how many times I have read right-wingers on this site say, "ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS WORK HARD AND YOU CAN BE WEALTHY, TOO!"

Yeah, right...time to wake up and join reality. Upward mobility is a proven myth. People who are born into poverty have little chance of escaping poverty.

Why? Because more and more of the nation's wealth is concentrated in fewer hands, and gee, guess what? Those wealthy elites are NOT spending that money in local "Mom and Pop Shops", and thereby supporting the middle-class...nope, they're investing it in overseas accounts, spending it overseas, and using every domestic loophole they can find to avoid paying taxes as much as possible.

Derp.

How sad that the lessons of history are being completely ignored.

@1.3

You call Ann Coulter a hateful, bellicose bitch, along with crazy and duplicitous. How are you any different from your description of Ann? You were even hateful enough to insult her by referring to her as "Mann", thereby attacking her for her looks. How hateful and crazy is that?

Now if you can dispute her article, please, by all means do so. But I didn't notice one iota of a response to the content of her editorial, just a mean spirited attack aimed at the person. MLK would be so proud of you.

@1.9

CPO that is a very abusive thing to say. Your comment should be deleted. Whether you agree or disagree with the article or who seeded it, you have no right to insult anyone in that manner. If you truly don't think this seed is worth reading or commenting on, then DON'T read it and DON't comment on it.

Your comment shows what type of person you truly are.

Now if you can dispute her article, please, by all means do so. But I didn't notice one iota of a response to the content of her editorial

Well, newtricks, it seems you need to read more carefully. The second paragraph of #1.3 does address the duplicitous remarks she made. But do keep in mind that her remarks are not factual, but merely her opinion, and she offers no facts to dispute/disprove. I merely chose to mention where her opinions are weak or incomplete in appraisal.

But you want to DEFEND someone who makes a living by purveying hatred????? Your choice, but I've noticed that the right is awfully pissy these days since they know they don't have a viable candidate, a real platform or plan, much less those JOBS, JOBS, JOBS they promised. Waaa waaaa...

newwtricks - you don't like what I post, don't read it, move on. When someone posts something that is thoughtful, factual and invites honest debate then I am more than happy to oblige. When someone posts something that is nothing but hate and lies spewed out by someone who's only real interest is her own self promotion and, they post it for no other reason then to promote themselves, I respond in kind. C4P does not post anything in my experience that promotes thoughtful discussion and I really don't think she cares if she does, just wants to stick something out there that she knows will reap plenty of comments because it IS so inflammatory. I will call her out on it everytime!

Did Coulters article promote anything other than hatred, trying to pit one side against the other? Reread it and give an honest answer, does she in anyway back up her assertions in regards the Times article?

THIS:

Vomit by Coulter, seeded by C4P, get about as much brain stimulation from these two as I would scratching my balls!

is what you call thoughtful and factual?

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!! Just what I needed on a Friday morning, a good ole fashioned belly laugh, thanks for that.

Not only that, but this:

seeded by C4P, get about as much brain stimulation from these two as I would scratching my balls!

is a blatant personal attack against another viner and has been reported.

You do have a good point. How many born into or married into wealth folks are their poster heros? If you don't have to work hard and make sacrifices to attain wealth I can see how you might feel it can happen for everyone. Perhaps they have the guilt associated from not earning their wealth so they try to atone for it by putting down the wealthy and "feeling the pain" of those that are not. How many priviledged ones have everything handed to them? The best of everything, un-rushed and unending education in arts and abstract studies without worrying about real life? They end up considering themselves cerebrally exceptional but in reality they are insulated from the real world. It was just handed to them so why can't it be handed to everyone? They live in their utopia and don't have to face the realities of having to work for wealth, so why wouldn't they have an idealistic view of the world unshaped by stark realities? Why wouldn't they think money grows on trees and can be doled out to everyone; after all it happened for them. Their world view is skewed. They are the ones out of touch with reality. Bankrupt these types and see just how fast they change their tone; their compassion and understanding.

Silvaria

Yeah, right...time to wake up and join reality. Upward mobility is a proven myth. People who are born into poverty have little chance of escaping poverty.

http://www.house.gov/jec/middle/mobility/mobility.htm

According to the tax data, 85.8 percent of filers in the bottom quintile in 1979 had exited this quintile by 1988. The corresponding mobility rates were 71 percent for the second lowest quintile, 67 percent for the middle quintile, 62.5 percent for the fourth quintile, and 35.3 percent for the top quintile. Of those in the much discussed top 1 percent, over half, or 52.7 percent, were gone by 1988

There is a lot more income movement than the left wants to admit to. Even 52.7% of the top income level fall out of that bracket over time.

drummer - cherry picking what you like again huh? Not what I said and you know it as you choose to take it out of context, but then again who would expect anything else from you, you learn well from your repub masters.

Lol, I love it when the headline itself is a Strawman.

oulter...crazy, hateful, duplicitous, bitch...and the right loves her!

It doesn't matter how outright false, twisted, and deceitful she is; so long as it makes the other guys look bad, she's great!

drummer - cherry picking what you like again huh? Not what I said and you know it as you choose to take it out of context, but then again who would expect anything else from you, you learn well from your repub masters.

Yeah he apparently didn't make it past that first line or failed to comprehend what you said - pretty typical of him to be honest.

I'm used to it.

Flipfloppers like Mann Coulter and viners that claim to be one gender when they're actually the other, disgust me.

Flipfloppers like Mann Coulter and viners that claim to be one gender when they're actually the other, disgust me.

what a homophobic statement...and from the left, no less!! LMBO. Ok, let's see you lefties attack this one.

It wasn't. And anyone that believes any of the RWNJ BS posted on seeds like these couldn't comprehend the explanation. Considering what comes out of Coulter's mouth, can you imagine what she puts into it? C'ya Teabags!

it wasn't??

Mann Coulter and viners that claim to be one gender when they're actually the other, disgust me.

What disgusts you again, exactly? Hmm. Or is that you are okay with it but only if they come "out of the closet"? And how would you know what gender a viner "claims to be when actually they are the other"?

Yeah, and the sky is not blue...LMBO. Backpeddle.....

Zip and this authoritative knowledge is according to whom?

Just look around. That's all you have to do.

Oh, so it's just your opinion...opinions are like bellybuttons; everyone has one...

@1.13

So Coulter thinks Romney earned his wealth?

Granted, Mitt made a ton of money working for Bain

Got to ask, which statement are you going with? First you are giving the illusion that you think Romney didn't earn his wealth, and then later you admit that Romney made a ton of money working. Newsflash: If people make a ton of money working for it, it constitutes earning your wealth.

Oh, so it's just your opinion

Know what else is just my opinion? Shooting yourself in the head is stupid and will kill you. You don't HAVE to take me at my opinion... but it'd be pretty stupid not to when all the evidence points to that.

Oh, I see, zip...you are right and everybody else is wrong.../sarc/. You lefties sure do have a high opinion of yourselves...LOL.

@1.29

Zip, you gave an opinion that Republicans don't care about anything but money and that they have contempt for those who work. Most Republicans work for a living. Not every Republican is like Warren Buffet. The reason it was pointed out as being just your opinion was that you could not offer any proof that it was anything else. To claim, " Just look around" doesn't provide any evidence to support your original comment. What else are we supposed to think? Now if you have proof that Republicans only think of money and have proof that Republicans only think of money and have contempt for those who work, I, for one, would like to see it. I network with many businesses in my area, and I know that most of the owners are hard working people, and are generally Republican. In MY opinion, people like you, who paint all Republicans with a broad stroke as being selfish and only thinking of money, are the one's who are full of contempt. I make that claim because you want to have people give up more and more of their wealth, simply because they have it, and you don't. Would you still feel that way if it was YOUR hard earned wealth that was being asked for? Remember, the bar for the haves and the have nots will only go lower with the socialist view of continually taking from the haves and giving to the have nots. And that means that one day, you will be asked to give more than your fair share. At that point, your opinion wil change, but it shouldn't.

Oh, I see, zip...you are right and everybody else is wrong.../sarc/. You lefties sure do have a high opinion of yourselves...LOL.

I'm not a lefty, I'm a libertarian, that gives me a perspective that allows me to call them as I see them without the left/right bull@!$%# bias that you have.

I make that claim because you want to have people give up more and more of their wealth, simply because they have it, and you don't.

I love it when people who have no idea who I am or what I believe or want try to tell me what I believe and want all from extrapolation from one or two sentences that are often completely unrelated. For some reason every time that happens it brings to mind images of the special olympics. Know what the only thing better than winning the special olympics is? Answer: Not competing in the special olympics.

So Coulter thinks Romney earned his wealth?

Granted, Mitt made a ton of money working for Bain

Got to ask, which statement are you going with?

The first two statements are not mutually exclusive. One can come from wealth and make additional money. That's not unusual. To characterize Mitt as coming from humble beginnings is disingenuous. His father was the CEO of American Motors, Mitt went to a private, elitist academy, and he started from a comfortable vantage point that the vast majority of Americans will never see.

Hey you want proof though? Let's just take a walk over in one of cornhusker's other colums... http://cornhusker4palin.newsvine.com/_news/2012/02/11/10379615-ceo-goes-nuclear-on-obama?last=1328948266&threadId=3343330&sp=0&pc=25#last_1

Please direct your attention to post #3.2... notice how NYPeach uses the phrase "he made something of himself"? That implies that other people who work hard but don't earn lots of money are nothings. That is contempt for those who engage in honest work for a living right there, all you have to do is open your eyes and look vol fan. It's right there in front of you.

THAT is your proof? One statement, from one person? That is your evidence that ALL Republicans are like that? And just because he made a statement that he "made something of himself", that does not imply that he looks down on others who work for a living. He also referred to the fact that he had taken the time and effort to set up a program that continues to give back, even after he is gone. Did you ever consider that he MIGHT have been referring to having "made something of himself" in those terms? Again, you find ONE clip from ONE person and paint all Republicans with that. And as long as we are looking at your one and only source of proof that you have decided to use to base your thoughts on EVERY Republican, did you notice that this CEO is giving back? Even after he is dead and gone, he will still continue to give back? If that is the kind of person that describes ALL Republicans, then it is you who has the wrong opinion of Republicans.

@1.34

For every person like Romney who was given the advantages of a private education and a helping hand, or a start out in life, and DID something with those gifts, there are 2 more who were also given those same benefits and now are a burden on society. Not everyone who has come from money continues to be prosperous. Not everyone who comes from humble beginnings remains poor. It is America. You can do whatever you want. You people act like Romney didn't deserve the money he made at Bain. You talk as though Romney is less of a person than you , simply because he came from a family that had more than two nickels to rub together. There is a word that describes people like you, who despise people for things about them that they have no control over. I will let you determine what that word is. If I say it, even though it is the truth, I will end up being suspended for COH.

Here is a hint: unwillingness or refusal to tolerate or respect contrary opinions or beliefs, persons of different races or backgrounds, etc.

For every person like Romney who was given the advantages of a private education and a helping hand, or a start out in life, and DID something with those gifts, there are 2 more who were also given those same benefits and now are a burden on society

Provide evidence of that statement...unless you are referring to those who live off corporate welfare or pay a lower rate of taxes than you do.

The opposite is more likely true ... and George Bush is a prime example. His history is a record of failures from which he was bailed out by his father. And yet he was elected. On second thought, he was more than a burden on society, though I doubt that was what you had in mind.

So go ahead and provide evidence of how those who grew up wealthy become burdens on society.

Any person who takes even $1.00 more than they contribute is a burden. And with that, all you have to do is look at the amount of those who pay nothing and take.

Any person who takes even $1.00 more than they contribute is a burden.

newwtricks

That would be the Founding Fathers eh? They created their wealth with Slaves. The Founding Fathers are the last remaining barrier and burden to eradicating rascism and cultural bigotry.

The Founding Fathers are the last remaining barrier and burden to eradicating rascism and cultural bigotry.

Really? You mean the progressive left could achieve thir ultimate utopian vision for the world if only America, it's constitution, declaration of independence, flag, and memory of our foding fathers could all be eradicated? I am reminded of the old far left statement to the effect that "the world would be a great place to live if only America did not exist." Well we do exist and we're not giving any of the above up.

I specifically said the Founding Fathers and not the constitution, declaration of independence, flag.

Really? You mean the progressive left

Cornhusker4Palin

You can call me the progressive left, You can call me the left, you can call me an independent, you can call me a democrat, you can call me a Liberal, you can call me names, and, when you call me, you are talking to: John Franklin Mason.

The founders created all those things and we all wouldn't be here as we are without them and what they did.

Cornhusker4Palin

The founders created the Articles of Confederation not the constitution, nor did they live up to the tenets of the declaration of independence or incorporate the concepts of the declaration into law.

The Articles of Confederation are the United States founding document and doctrine and we were here as colonies before becoming states and the United States. The United States failed under the Founders doctrine and in adopting the Constitution We the People bailed out the United States.

Article 6 of the Constitution states in part:

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this
Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this
Constitution, as under the Confederation.

Americans need to take the time and read the Articles.

THAT is your proof? One statement, from one person?

Well I could pull 1000 posts from 1000 different people on the vine but I'm not going to waste that kind of time on people who are so partisan and closed minded that they would never admit anything's wrong with their party even if it meant saving their own life. That's why I said that all you have to do is look around. Those who don't have their eyes shut as tight as they can like you do will, but they already see that crap and as a result already weren't buying the crap in this article.