Democrats always clueless on taxes...
Newsmax is reporting John Kerry's words at a recent speech:
"I went back and reread the whole New Testament the other day. Nowhere in the three-year ministry of Jesus Christ did I find a suggestion at all, ever, anywhere, in any way whatsover, that you ought to take the money from the poor, the opportunities from the poor and give them to the rich people," Kerry said.
Why do Democrats try to use religion at all, let alone try to use the bible to pain Republicans in a bad light? He's obviously trying to reach more religious Americans, but this is just plain offensive to use the bible as an attack on anyone, let alone Republicans, who garner most of the "religious vote" in most elections.
Jesus would have said to Kerry and his liberal friends in Congress- pull yourself up and make your own living...don't live off of others. If you need, you'll get it, but don't expect larger and larger sums of money to be taken from people who do for themselves and given to those who won't do for themselves. I'm fairly sure Christ would have said that people not to make it on their own and not blame others for their downfall and shortcomings. This goes against what Kerry is saying, which is absurd to begin with...Democrats aren't truly the party of the little guy, they're the party of the snobby elite.
In terms of campaign contributions, Democrats almost always take in a fewer number of donations- usually large sums from VERY rich Americans, while Republicans take in many more donations overall- usually smaller donations from more Americans.
The Democratic party in the 2004 election was the party of Soros and other very wealthy donors. The 527's that claimed to abhor rich donors, yet took in tens of millions from very very rich donors.
This nonsense that the Democrats are the party of the average American, and of the poor doesn't fit even with the population centers and how they vote. You'll find that a smaller part of the US, large population centers, comprised of more wealthy Americans (who are usually elitist and snobby) usually go Democrat, and flyover country usually goes for Republicans. Doesn't that say a lot? If the majority of Americans in the heartland, who are really considered the "average Americans" go Republican, doesn't that alone show that the right is really the party of the average American? Doesn't the fact that nearly all of Hollywood- comprised of some of the most elitist snobs in the nation goes Democratic prove this point as well?
Democrats should stop claiming to be for the little guy and the poor. The policies they espouse of higher taxes, given over to more welfare has spelled disaster for America's poor, and that alone should have driven most poorer Americans away from the party. Do the stats show that that's the case, or that it's trending that way? I've no idea...but I do know that elitist Democrats always claiming to be for the downtrodden is really a ridiculous claim, and tactics to attack Republicans with religion, like Kerry is doing, are surely doomed to fail.
I have read the New testament several times and you something? Jesus healed the lame, he made the blind see and he raised the dead but never once did he make the poor rich or take from hard workers and gave to beggers. I think it is doubly insulting when Kerry tries to use the Bible to promote a line of thinking when he has already said his religious beliefs do not affect his political judgement.
There's a lot here, but firstly, who are any Republicans to mock the "wealthy elite" Democrats? Last I checked, the CEO's of most all corporations graciously supported Republicans. These CEO's have twenty times the money of your esteemed "Hollywood elite." Cities like New York, where I live, are strongly Democrat not because of the 5% of the population who earn millions and vote liberal, but because the lower class strongly votes Democrat. That's also why unions vote Democrat: because actual working people see that policies forwarded by Republicans hurt them.
"Do the stats show that that's the case, or that it's trending that way? I've no idea...but I do know that elitist Democrats always claiming to be for the downtrodden is really a ridiculous claim,"
Well, since I have a college education, I do know how to read stats. Maybe that's why I'm a liberal, I can process things like numbers. Because during the Clitnon administration, during which the United States had the best economy in the world, poverty fell every single year! Every year! This after Clinton raised taxes on the top 1 percent in 1993, a move Republicans voted against because it would "cause a recession," which obviously never happened.
No, the next real recession didn't happen until Bush sliced taxes for the wealthy. Also, although thanks to Clinton the national poverty rate is still low, it has actually gone up every year since Bush has been in office. Yeah, this really sounds like the party of the "working man." I'm sure all those lost jobs, which we've only recently managed to replace with lower-paying jobs, are a real boon to the middle class.
Did you know that after 1993 Clinton had a net job gain EVERY YEAR of his presidency? Bush has yet to have a year end in which there's been MORE jobs than he started office. And he's been there for four years!
Finally, the Book of Acts is nearly a socialist tract, filled with admonishments for the rich to give to the poor. "From each according to his ability to each according to his necessity" is something like the exact quote. To say the Bible doesn't advocate helping the poor is...strange.
And also, when Ronald Reagan cut taxes on the wealthy, he said what he was doing. He said, "This is supply side economics." He never claimed it was a tax cut aimed at the middle class. If Ronald Reagan could be honest, why can't President Bush?
"You'll find that a smaller part of the US, large population centers, comprised of more wealthy Americans (who are usually elitist and snobby) usually go Democrat, and flyover country usually goes for Republicans"
I love it. You with these ignorant generalizations. Have you been to New York? LA? Do you know about the very large middle and lower classes in these cities? The ones who vote Democrat? The streets aren't paved with gold, Josh. Also, it's awkward to use "usually" twice so close together, especially in a run-on sentence.