So, after a series of speeches at $100K + up, HRC chirps about

[NTOP]

income inequality at a Center for American Progress gabfest. That's bad enough, but here's an excerpt from her discussion:

Clinton stressed that "a lot of inequality has only gotten worse" in recent year, arguing cities need to address people who are "trapped in generational poverty."


Hint, Hillary: Liberal Dem welfare crap has created that generational poverty. Great Society my ass. Enslavement by the liberal elites.

This post was edited on 3/23 3:50 PM by NTOP

 

[HailtoPitt]

At least you two agree on something!

People are stuck in generational poverty.

 

[NCPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

I would call it progressive poverty.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

Well, at least they are progressing! Better than conservative poverty where you are doomed forever!

 

[NCPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

Originally posted by HailtoPitt:
Well, at least they are progressing! Better than conservative poverty where you are doomed forever!

Yep, they progressing into the hopeless condition of endless poverty that progressivism always takes its victims.

Conservatism, aka capitalism, has led more people out of poverty than all progressive programs combined through human history.

 

[NTOP]

We both hate Bill, too.*

*

 

[HailtoPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

LOL. Conservatism aka capitalism. If that was the case, you guys would have loved Mitt.

 

[NCPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

Originally posted by HailtoPitt:
LOL. Conservatism aka capitalism. If that was the case, you guys would have loved Mitt.

Yeah, Romneycare was all about capitalism. LOL.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

Well, that was a state plan. He was against Obamacare.

 

[NCPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

Originally posted by HailtoPitt:
Well, that was a state plan. He was against Obamacare.

So what? It was Romney's non-capitalist idea.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

Romney was a defender of state's rights.... a huge conservative talking point.

Are you seriously going to suggest that Romney is not a capitalist?

 

[NCPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

Originally posted by HailtoPitt:
Romney was a defender of state's rights.... a huge conservative talking point.

Are you seriously going to suggest that Romney is not a capitalist?

I'm more than suggesting it.

He was a capitalist when it benefited him and he was a statist when it benefited him. That makes his ideology a "Romneyist" - no firm ideology except that which meets his personal needs.

 

[HailtoPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

All politicians are a "Romneyist", but if you are going to argue that Romney is not a capitalist I'm not sure where to take the discussion.

Question for you... if one is in favor of social security or Medicare, does that disqualify them from being a capitalist?

And I'm asking because I would like to fully understand your position.

 

[NCPitt]

Re: At least you two agree on something!

Originally posted by HailtoPitt:
All politicians are a "Romneyist", but if you are going to argue that Romney is not a capitalist I'm not sure where to take the discussion.

Question for you... if one is in favor of social security or Medicare, does that disqualify them from being a capitalist?

And I'm asking because I would like to fully understand your position.

Yes.

Many politicians have never been capitalists.
This post was edited on 3/25 8:15 PM by NCPitt