telling it like it isn't - this senior citizen is hateful and misinformed

[hfojvt]

"Hey Alan, let's get a few things straight.."

or not straight

"1. As a career politician, you have been on the public dole for FIFTY YEARS."

I guess that is true of all these other career politicians too - Robert Byrd, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry (39 years in politics), Joe Biden, Russ Feingold (28 years on the public dole), Tom Harkin (37 years in Congress), etc.

"2. I have been paying Social Security taxes for 48 YEARS (since I was 15 years old. I am now 63)."

Yeah, and when you started paying in 1963 the tax rate was 3.625% on the first $4,800 of income and there was no medicare tax. In 1967, the cap was $6,660 and 40% of households made more than $8,303. In 2009 the cap was $106,800 and 80% of households made less than $100,000 and many more households are now two income households.


"3 My Social Security payments, and those of millions of other Americans, were safely tucked away in an interest bearing account for decades until you political pukes decided to raid the account and give OUR money to a bunch of zero ambition losers in return for votes, thus bankrupting the system and turning Social Security into a Ponzi scheme that would have made Bernie Madoff proud."

So social security is now a Ponzi scheme. And this is an argument for NOT ending it? What next, are you gonna tell me it's bankrupt?

"4. Recently, just like Lucy & Charlie Brown , you and your ilk pulled the proverbial football away from millions of American seniors nearing retirement and moved the goalposts for full retirement from age 65 to age 67. NOW, you and your shill commission is proposing to move the goalposts YET AGAIN."

Recently, eh? This happened in 1983 and it happened to people born after 1938, people under age 45 at the time.

"5 I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying into Medicare from Day One, and now you morons propose to change the rules of the game. Why? Because you idiots mismanaged other parts of the economy to such an extent that you need to steal money from Medicare to pay the bills."

Yeah, Congress manages the economy and rising medical costs have nothing to do with increasing costs of medicare.


"6. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying income taxes our entire lives, and now you propose to increase our taxes yet again. Why?
Because you incompetent bastards spent our money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out of money. Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need more to pay off YOUR debt."

If it talks like a Republican, it is a Republican. What do Republicans usually say? "The Government spends too much." "Taxes should never be increased (even for the very rich)." "Big Government never does anything right."

That sounds Republican too me, even if the vitriol is directed at Simpson.


"To add insult to injury, you label us "greedy" for calling "bullshit" on your incompetence. Well, Captain Bullshit, I have a few questions for YOU.

1. How much money have you earned from the American taxpayers during your pathetic 50-year political career?

2. At what age did you retire from your pathetic political career, and how much are you receiving in annual retirement benefits from the American taxpayers?

3. How much do you pay for YOUR government provided health insurance?

4. What cuts in YOUR retirement and healthcare benefits are you proposing in your disgusting deficit reduction proposal, or, as usual,have you exempted yourself and your political cronies?

It is you, Captain Bullshit, and your political co-conspirators called Congress who are the "greedy" ones. It is you and your fellow nutcases who have bankrupted America and stolen the American dream from millions of loyal, patriotic taxpayers. And for what? Votes. That's right, sir. You and yours have bankrupted America for the sole purpose of advancing your pathetic political careers. You know it, we know it, and you know that we know it.

And you can take that to the bank, you miserable son of a bitch."


Yeah, there's a great example. If you cannot make a factual argument, then lead with personal attacks and hateful rhetoric. Anyone who disagrees with me MUST be evil. A "miserable son of a bitch" with a "pathetic career"


"If you like the way things are in America , delete this. If you agree with what a fellow Montana citizen says, PASS IT ON!!!!"


Sure, those are the only alternatives. If you don't agree with hateful rightwing rhetoric, then you must be supporting Alan Simpson and/or the status quo.


There's already enough hate and misinformation in the world. Screeds like that one only add to it.

[nonperson]

1. "There's already enough hate and misinformation in the world. Screeds like that one only add to it."

You're referring to your screed, right?

[hfojvt]

5. well I am like a broken clock

I am wrong twice a day.

[nonperson]

15. The saying is:

"Even a broken clock is RIGHT twice a day."

[hfojvt]

32. damn. Well, that is one today

One more to go.

[CreekDog]

44. Was the OP #1?

Kinda read like it was #2.

:evilgrin:

[Drale]

2. This might be a popcorn thread but

I play Bingo with my grand-parents every week and I've found many many Seniors who are ill informed and hateful and these folks don't even watch Fox and don't have cable. I don't know where its coming from except maybe they have the "our generation is the best, the rest of you are just screwing everything up" syndrome.

[nonperson]

3. I don't know which generation is best

But the rest of you really are screwing everything up.

[Drale]

7. Well I'm 23 so

my generation haven't gotten a chance to try and fix things yet before "we screw everything up". :rofl:

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nonperson]

11. You just don't get it and that's how you're screwing everything up

Generations coming up don't even understand the basics. They're told Social Security is broke so they whine about not getting Social Security when they're old. They call it a "Ponzi scheme" because that's what the people who never wanted Social Security and have worked to kill it since its inception tell them. And many young people believe it. Because they just don't understand the basics.

Relying on the word of people who are only out to screw you out of what is rightfully yours only guarantees you will get screwed.

[Drale]

13. Actually I would say people I know and meet in my generation

are more informed then older folks who only get their information from the TV. People my age don't appreciate being told what to do or how to do it, which is exactly what the GOP likes to do, so they either tend not to care about politics at all or tend to be far more liberal then ever people 7 or 8 years older.

[nonperson]

17. That's funny

Older folks only get their information from TV?

People I meet in your generation have their ear buds in for so long they're deaf. Younger people I talk to don't even want to hear about politics. Bring up current politics and they're eyes glaze over. They don't watch the news on TV, they have no idea what a newspaper is, and they don't even bother to vote.

More informed? :rofl:

[Drale]

18. They do vote you just have to give them a reason to vote

I think 2008 showed that very well. I think we both have misconceptions about each others generations, and thats usually the way it is.

[nonperson]

19. You're confused

A reason to vote???

VOTING IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF EVERY CITIZEN IN A DEMOCRACY. THERE'S YOUR REASON TO VOTE.

Do you really think the Republican maniacs who are trying to dismantle the entire social contract in this nation could have won control of the House if everyone voted? If the reason above isn't enough for you to vote is a group of maniacal Republicans controlling the House enough reason?

Like I said, you're generation just doesn't get it. And there's really not enough time to bring you up to speed. You people better wake up and fast or all the lies you're being told are going to become reality.

[Drale]

20. Well in my experience lots of "older" people vote blindly

for which ever party their parents voted for, so is that any better? We have grown up fully in the bush years. We where in middle school during 9/11 and have watch as Bush destroyed the constitution. Many people in my generation don't see a difference between the parties. Its the responsibility for the Democrats and people like us to show them that there is a huge difference. AGAIN both of us don't truly understand each other's generation and for you to say my generation doesn't understand, just makes you sound like those people who are constantly berating other generations for everything they do, saying "back in my day we didn't do _____".

[nonperson]

23. What you call berating

Is an attempt to educate your generation that brings out bitterness because of the constant futility of that chore.

Republicans are outnumbered. If we vote they lose. IF you call that voting blindly then I'll take voting blindly over losing.

[virgogal]

21. And give them a blank map of North America and a lot of them

couldn't find Canada or Mexico.

[Drale]

25. If you came to work with me,when Hollywood Video was still open,

You would meet plenty of people over 40 who could not locate the United States on a map, that is not "young people" problem. Its an American problem.

[virgogal]

42. Well it sure as heck isn't an old folks problem (which I am).

We attended school in the forties and Geography was a very important subject in all schools---public,private,and parochial.

My kids are all in their forties and could easily find the U.S. on a map,and most other major countries also.Maybe the school systems made the difference.

[CreekDog]

45. so you're blaming the kids for their curriculum?

hmmm. interesting.

[themadstork]

31. Hey that's just some of us

And some of that some of us inevitably were failed by the education system that the older generations have been shredding to bits.

I'm 22 and I study like a freak. I don't have money, fame, or beauty--but I am fairly quick. Knowledge/understanding constitutes my only social and political "asset," and I intend to use it to help win back the resources the effing neolibs have stolen from our poor. Chomsky is sorta my hero in this sense, at least in terms of dedication to activism and sheer prolificacy.

[nonperson]

39. I know it's not all of the younger generation

I know younger people who are as or more politically involved than I was at their age, and I was very politically involved from high school on. But when election outcomes depend on young voters turning out like they did in 2008 and only those very few show up at the polls it does not bode well for the future of our political system.

Please stay as focused as you are and please do your best to get more of your age group to do the same.

[themadstork]

43. I do think my generation shows substantial concern for the environment

even if they aren't always politically engaged.

[madinmaryland]

22. Get off my lawn, you damn kids!!

:D

[nonperson]

24. And what do those "damn kids" do?

They confuse "lawn" with "voting booth".

[dana_b]

33. don't take it personally

lots of people like to blame other generations or people in general. I have a 21 y.o. daughter and although she isnt the most informed (politics, events) person, she knows a lot more than I did at her age. I have a lot of hope for younger people. You guys will not be inheriting a better world than your parents/grandparents did but you are more saavy than many of them too.

[tularetom]

4. If I were you

I'd break out the ol' asbestos suit.

[hfojvt]

30. "it's a dog eat dog world

and I am wearing milk-bone underwear." Norm from Cheers

[geckosfeet]

6. This is disingenuous and misrepresents the author. Please see the original post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1057937

[hfojvt]

12. misrepresents how?

Disingenuous? I am trying, for the third time now, to debunk what I see as a rightwing screed.

That may somehow be against the rules, even though I often see multiple threads on the same topic, continuing the same argument.

[geckosfeet]

36. Not against any rule that I know of. Simply taking the authors letter,

which was a screed to Senator Simpson, (a RW nut ball) and turning into a screed against the original author. As with most screeds, they can be pointed in either direction with equal effect.

The author was railing against a statement that vilified the SS and the poor. You are turning that on it's head and vilifying his intent.

SS/medicare is a needed and effective programs when administered responsibly. Our government has badly squandered SS money on things it was never supposed to pay for. They (our government) are at fault. That is the point of the screed and that much is true.

Honestly, your message is garbled and unclear.

[leftstreet]

8. I'm so fucking confused. So we're SUPPORTING Alan Simpson now?

You need a scorecard

[hfojvt]

10. I don't know why it is so hard to figure out

That it's not about Simpson.

Just because I oppose Alan Simpson does not mean I agree with every attack on him.

Like this

"Alan Simpson is a fucking freeloader because he was in Congress a long time"

Okay, just like Byrd, Kennedy, Biden, Harkin, Kerry, and Feingold.

"Alan Simpson wants to raise taxes, that a$$hat."

Uh, I want to raise taxes, and so does Obama.

"Listen Simpson, you dickwad, just because Congress spent all our social security money on foreign aid, doesn't mean you can fix this Ponzi scheme at our expense."

Uh, the deficit came from tax cuts to the rich, but Mr. Angry Senior is all angry at the idea of increasing taxes.

Finally, should ad hominem arguments laced with profantiy take the place of facts and reason? I feel sorta all alone in this, but I don't think so.

[nonperson]

14. You are so wrong on so many counts it's not even worth responding to you

The politicians you mention didn't try to kill Social Security and every other social program that benefits anyone other than the rich.

Alan Simpson wants to raise taxes on the people who can least afford to pay higher taxes while giving tax breaks to himself and his rich friends.

Increasing taxes on the rich will solve the deficit. Think not? Go back to the tax rates of the Clinton era.

Finally, a response to an ad hominem attack on the entire middle class and poor is not an ad hominem attack. You're confusing cause and effect.

There is strength in numbers. If everyone sticks together on this there is no way scumbags like Alan Simpson can defeat us.

Exactly which side are you on?

[hfojvt]

27. wrong on so many counts, eh?

"The politicians you mention didn't try to kill Social Security and every other social program that benefits anyone other than the rich."

Did I say that they did? The Montanan attacks Simpson for being in Congress a long time. Not for anything he did in Congress. Just for being in Congress. As such, it is an attack on everybody who has a long political career and also on everybody who works for the Government.


"Alan Simpson wants to raise taxes on the people who can least afford to pay higher taxes while giving tax breaks to himself and his rich friends."

Yeah, the Montanan says that Congress wants to raise taxes. He does not complain about any specific proposal, just the very idea of raising taxes YET AGAIN. Apparently there have been lots of tax increases besides the Reagan tax cuts, the Bush tax cuts, the Obama tax cuts and the Obama extension of the Bush tax cuts. Congress increases taxes all the time.


"Increasing taxes on the rich will solve the deficit. Think not? Go back to the tax rates of the Clinton era."


Did I disagree with that? The Montanan is the one who claims that the deficit came from "over spending". The same claim that every Republican makes. The Montanan said this "Because you incompetent bastards spent our money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out of money. Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need more to pay off YOUR debt." You seem to disagree with him/her and agree with me.


"Finally, a response to an ad hominem attack on the entire middle class and poor is not an ad hominem attack. You're confusing cause and effect."

There is no cause and effect. Martin Luther King said "returning hate for hate only increases the power of hate" (paraphrase). We can choose to respond with facts and reason, or we can take the low road and thus validate that kind of rhetoric. Watch any sporting contest where player A hits player B and player B hits back. Other than Boxing type events, Player B is called for a foul 100% of the time. An ad hominem is an ad hominem regardless of the supposed cause.

"There is strength in numbers. If everyone sticks together on this there is no way scumbags like Alan Simpson can defeat us.

Exactly which side are you on?"

Who is sticking together? The Montanan is arguing against Government spending - meaning cuts to social programs other than the ones that benefit him. The Montanan is arguing against tax increases. The Montanan is promoting many rightwing talking points under the guise of attacking Alan Simpson. (Alan Simpson fucking sucks!! (and Government is bad, Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, the deficit was caused by too much spending, and tax increases are bad)).

I am against the rightwing talking points regardless of how much I am supposed to giggle about the first statement.

[sabrina 1]

41. He was not attacked for being in Congress for a long time.

He was attacked for accusing seniors and veterans of being 'greedy, old geezers and 'unpatriotic' for taking THEIR benefits and not donating them to Wall St. while Simpson continues to take his.

You are completely misreading the rant for some reason. The point is an excellent one. If Simpson believes what he is saying to seniors and veterans, he should be willing to do what he is asking them to do, stop taking HIS benefits.

I hope Simpson gets to read this, because on this point alone, he needs to be challenged as in this rant.

And, for the comments he has made about working Americans, he should have been removed from that Commission, as was called for many times, long ago.

[leftstreet]

16. Most people DO think our elected reps are freeloaders

Lots of people ARE angry about wealthy people exploiting the working classes

:shrug:

The person's entitled to his/her opinion

[hfojvt]

28. I don't think they do, and I don't think they should

Where in that rant do you see anything about the wealthy exploiting the working classes? Unless you think Congress has done so by over-taxing the working classes and by spending too much money on welfare and foreign aid.

Every hateful rightwinger is entitled to their opinion, that doesn't mean I am not entitled to disagree.

[Enthusiast]

38. It is a bit confusing.

Considering the 24/7 media wide anti-social safety net misinformation campaign I'm confused as to why someone would quibble over a little criticism of Alan Simpson.

The Simpson guy is the very face of the tax evading rich boy born on third base while believing they hit a triple. He has no problem raising the retirement age because he hasn't been subjected to a lifetime of hard work.

[ErikJ]

26. He must mean REPUBLICAN governments.

Reagan TRIPLED the national debt from $1 to $3 trillion, and the 2 Bushes added another $9 trillion on taxcuts and fat govt contracts for their corporate buddies.

[hfojvt]

29. Reagan tripled the National Debt, but

he did not do so by "spending too much".

I consider that to be a key point

"The deficit resulted from Reagan tax cuts

In 1980 the National Debt was $907.7 billion. By 1985, it had doubled to $1,823.3 billion and by 1989 had tripled to $2,857 billion and by 1991 it had quadrupled to $3,665 billion. Was that because of spending? Spending did grow by 112% in the 1980s, but it also grew by 112% in the 1960s and by 202% in the 1970s when the debt did not grow by $2.7 trillion in those decades. Taking inflation into account, spending grew by 57% in the 1960s, by 41.9% in the 1970s and by only 35.3% in the 1980s. And it was in the 1980s that the deficit exploded."

http://www.koch2congress.com/11.html

hence my umbrage when the Montanan says this:

"6. I, and millions of other Americans, have been paying income taxes our entire lives, and now you propose to increase our taxes yet again. Why?
Because you incompetent bastards spent our money so profligately that you just kept on spending even after you ran out of money. Now, you come to the American taxpayers and say you need more to pay off YOUR debt."

[ErikJ]

35. yes!, Reagan cut top tax rate 70-28%.

But I believe he also vastly increased defense spending especially for his Star Wars program. I heard $1 trillion. But Reagan also increased taxes on the middle class 11 times but still not nearly enough to compensate for his tax cuts on the rich and defense spending. He doubled the payroll tax also.

[tabasco]

40. Bullshit.

Ever heard of Star Wars?

[ellenfl]

34. it seems to me that you totally missed the point of the post. I don't even

know where to begin . . .

ellen fl

[Obamanaut]

37. Even Snopes does not agree with some of the "facts" in the original But

accuracy is not always that important when someone agrees with us being anti-someone or -something.

A 'rec' from me was futile, but you got it anyway.