Ultra-rich old troll Harvey Golub threw his diamond-encrusted Depends around in a fit on the Wall Street Journal opinion pages after he read Warren Buffett's recent NYTimes op-ed asking the government to raise taxes on the super wealthy, which sounds like "napalm on ur testicles" to an arch-conservative like Golub. Why pay more taxes when you can eliminate giant swaths of the government completely? "Do we really need an energy department or an education department at all?" writes Golub. No! We do not need heating or spelling! What else should we eliminate? So many things! Here's another: Golub in 2010
And they certainly don't need small town airports. Except, of course, for the one convenient to his Hamptons estate -- that's a vital national resource that taxpaying peons shoud be happy to underwrite.
Because he (allegedly) exhales carbon dioxide, which plants need. The obvious solution-- plant him heads up in a public garden somewhere, let him breathe but do cut his vocal chords so he can't talk or dictate Important Statements.
Memo to self: Never co-author a book with Ole Newt.
Now to meander over to Amazon and stir things up in the "reviews." Call out the right wing nutz who liked this book. More than one of its authors, apparently.
I can't keep up with these asshole's duplicity (is that the right word). They are counting on the general stupidity of the body politic.
I just read there are some 46,000,000 Americans on "food stamps." A large number, of course, are dependent children who can not exactly be expected to provide for themselves.
One astonishing figure is that approximately 40% of people who receive this benefit live in households were at least one person is working, earning wages.
For many employers food stamps have become a government subsidy. The firm hires part-time minimum-wage employees who must receive assistance to eat and pay at least some of their bills.
So - here's the question. Who actually gets this "welfare?" The people working part-time and struggling to scrape by when there's a whole lot of month left at the end of the money? Or the corporations making a fortune on the backs of under-paid, part-time employees?
Everybody is pro-welfare. The difference is progressives favor government benefits paid to individuals. Reactionaries favor government benefits for companies. And T-Baggers favor government handouts for themselves.
Exactly! I salute you, Dummy'sDungarees.
I was expecting Brian Wilson from the link, singing Little Serfer Girl.
And they certainly don't need small town airports. Except, of course, for the one convenient to his Hamptons estate -- that's a vital national resource that taxpaying peons shoud be happy to underwrite.
I think his nitrogen and phosphorus are worth more ... let's bury him deeper.
It's called the "Texas Miracle", and don't you fergit it!
"Hearty Hobo Bean" is looking like a winner.
Yeah .... I totally didn't see that coming.
Pull yourself up by your loopholes, people!
It's Obama's fault.
Because he (allegedly) exhales carbon dioxide, which plants need. The obvious solution-- plant him heads up in a public garden somewhere, let him breathe but do cut his vocal chords so he can't talk or dictate Important Statements.
Do they make jeans with the "forbidden stitch?" I bet the Kardashians would wear them.
Or is Kim the one without a stitch? I forgets...
In fact, why am I forced to put warning labels on dangerous machines if my workforce is illiterate?
M2: Thanks for this! Most interesting.
Memo to self: Never co-author a book with Ole Newt.
Now to meander over to Amazon and stir things up in the "reviews." Call out the right wing nutz who liked this book. More than one of its authors, apparently.
I can't keep up with these asshole's duplicity (is that the right word). They are counting on the general stupidity of the body politic.
I just read there are some 46,000,000 Americans on "food stamps." A large number, of course, are dependent children who can not exactly be expected to provide for themselves.
One astonishing figure is that approximately 40% of people who receive this benefit live in households were at least one person is working, earning wages.
For many employers food stamps have become a government subsidy. The firm hires part-time minimum-wage employees who must receive assistance to eat and pay at least some of their bills.
So - here's the question. Who actually gets this "welfare?" The people working part-time and struggling to scrape by when there's a whole lot of month left at the end of the money? Or the corporations making a fortune on the backs of under-paid, part-time employees?
Everybody is pro-welfare. The difference is progressives favor government benefits paid to individuals. Reactionaries favor government benefits for companies. And T-Baggers favor government handouts for themselves.
I'd like to take a brick from that wall and smack Gollum upside the head with it.