In response to:

Obama in 2011: We Can Achieve $1.2 Trillion in New Revenues Without Raising Tax Rates

Jeff60 Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 1:37 PM

Evidently, Obama is a socialist dictator who follows the dreams of his father about taxing the rich 100% and giving them back living expenses in return. Obama brought to America from his father land of Africa the culture of beggars and scroungers that live like parasites on the back of the hard working American mostly conservative Whites. Nevertheless, the scroungers aim at controlling the rich White donors that are feeding them as they demand more and more money for their vote for Obama. In nature, parasite plants usually kill the host tree that they are sucking if they suck too much. Will the GOP continue to bow to the socialist dictator Obama who demands more trillions for his liberal base that do not pay taxes and to the liberal...

Join the Debate!

All comments and users are subject to Townhall's new comments policy.

AmericanObserver Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 1:56 PM

Are you as ignorant as your post suggests? Or, do you realize how stupid your comments are but you have so much irrational hate you want to say it anyway? As to the use of the term, 'Socialist,' do you know what it means? If you do, which programs - specifically - are you referring to as 'Socialist?'

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

byeBarry Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 2:00 PM

socialist |'soSH??list|
noun
a person who advocates or practices socialism.

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All

byeBarry Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 2:00 PM

socialism |'soSH??liz?m|
noun
a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
• policy or practice based on this theory.
• (in Marxist theory) a transitional social state between the overthrow of capitalism and the realization of communism.

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

Duke Nuk'em Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 2:01 PM

1. Obamaphone.
2. ObamaScare.
3. Welfare.
4. Medicare.
5. Medicaid.
6. Social Security.

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

byeBarry Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 2:01 PM

husseincare, hussein motors, "stimulus", need more?

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

AmericanObserver Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 2:18 PM

So, if you really think "Welfare" (which you didn't identify), Medicare, Medicaid, and SS are "socialist," does that mean you want to get rid of them? As to Obamacare, it is not socialist: it is 100% private sector provided, adjudicated, and insured; there is NO gov't option. So, it is not 'Socialist.'

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

AmericanObserver Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 2:19 PM

Don't insult my intelligence. I didn't ask if you could cut and paste definitions. I asked if you understood what it is.

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

Duke Nuk'em Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 2:56 PM

Welfare as in Johnson's Great Society failure.

And, yes. Get rid of them all as none of them are the responsibility of the federal gov't.

ObamaScare is not 100% private sector provided! If it was, then there would be no need for the federal "exchanges"!

Nice try, dud!

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

Duke Nuk'em Wrote: Dec 05, 2012 2:57 PM

AO,

You insult your own "intelligence"!

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

Read Full Story

Obama in 2011: We Can Achieve $1.2 Trillion in New Revenues Without Raising Tax Rates

Three quotes to whet your appetite, followed by the punch line from the president. House Republicans' latest "fiscal cliff" resolution package -- originally proposed by Democrat Erskine Bowles -- includes $800 Billion in new federal revenues, while lowering tax rates across the board. Democrats instantly rejected the idea, making a heavy play about "the math" not adding up. They've repeatedly contended that Republicans' plan to expand the tax base by closing loopholes, eliminating or capping deductions, and limiting credits cannot hit their projected revenue target. (1) White House Spokesman Jay Carney: "