Rand Paul Gives David Letterman an Economics Lesson
- Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:12pm by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
Tea Party Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) appeared on “The Late Show” with David Letterman last night to promote his new book,”The Tea Party Goes to Washington.” But what started as a book discussion quickly became a debate over policy, and eventually ended in Paul giving Letterman an economics lesson.
Colby Hall at Mediaite explains the exchange this way:
The discussion was entirely civil, though it was not without some significant disagreement and passion over tax cuts for the wealthy, public and private sector jobs and the labor dispute in Wisconsin. Paul appeared to score on points, though Letterman’s disagreements were severely undercut by a lack of facts.
He concludes the segment is “entertaining,” but notes that when Paul regularly used facts and figures to back up his arguments, Letterman relied more on feelings, saying things like, “that doesn’t sound right.” Another site points out Letterman went as far as to say, “I think he’s wrong about some of these things, I just can’t tell you why.” Shame.
Watch the exchange below:
Popular Stories
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 578 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 404 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 403 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 372 Comments
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 354 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 403 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 404 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 354 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 150 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 403 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (405)
theLarry
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:42pmwhat a blatant moron…in the face of undeniable facts and reason he still can’t get his mind around it, but “something” tells him its wrong. he can’t explain it, he doesn’t know why, he thinks Rand is lying about his facts, but doesn’t know his own facts, but he’s just wrong! Rand Paul was perfect in his analysis & descriptions.
lets just pay teacher $200k/yr. that should work. why can’t a sensible person see that!?! then the teachers can save our country by educating all the idiots like Dave. But then the educated will see that a teacher is not worth $200k…awww its a vicious circle!
Report Post »NC1
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:42pmI bet if Letterman had to bargain with unions and really understand what their motives are and what‘s involved he’d probably change his tune real quick. Anything‘s easy for the man who doesn’t have to do it.
Report Post »SND97
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:42pmBeing from kentucky, Rand is my hero :-)
Report Post »weeblewacker1
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:14pmooohh! so your one of those o’le ken-tuk “welfare-state” people. it don’t take a genus to get us out of this budget mess,all we have to do is quit sending money to these welfare states.just on kentucky we would save a bundle! i mean they get $1.51 for every dollar that they send to washington! i am sick and tired of MY STATE(NEW-YORK) paying for these welfare queens(.79 cents back for every dollar sent) i mean come-on! washington had to pay 80% of ken.medicaid bill,1 in 5 in that state gets a S.S.check for a total of 8.5 billion,plus, over 2 billion for there flood insurance,667 million for crop insurance,877million in mortgage insurance. need i say more? why can’t these states pay there own way? all these states that get more than they pay in should be defunded NOW!! give them what they want! a Defy Shields’ Law!! damn parasites.
Report Post »I CHOOSE THE RED PILL MR PRESIDENT
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:45pmWow. Careful there Wanker. Had you been a little more coherent about your ramblings and their sources, someone might have mistaken you for a conservative. It sounds an awful lot to me like you were bashing government spending on subsidies and being forced to pay for people who won’t carry their own weight. Since the majority of the burden for medicare/medicaid/education/welfare is carried by the state, you can see why a) they are all under water, particularly in Democrat ran states like New York and California b) they are so pissed about Federal legislation, such as Obamacare which mandates they provide even more entitlements to the clueless, are expected to pay for it and are suppose to just lie there and take it. Consider what the cost will do to your state tax rates.
Now, take your argument and apply it to the “rich” who already pay 70% of the Federal tax revenue while 47% of the population pay nothing. Democrats are now demonizing them to pay more…
Report Post »I CHOOSE THE RED PILL MR PRESIDENT
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 6:11pmFor the record Wacky. According to the most recent data available on state welfare statistics, the percentage of welfare recipients in New York is 6.9% and ranks #2 in welfare caseloads only second to, can anybody guess? You got it, California. The percentage of Kentucky citizens on welfare is around 1.5%. So one could claim that the rest of us are supporting your state…
Report Post »woodydad
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:41pmWhy is it that the Pauls can make so much sense and so many people are still afraid of them? I fear that most of us in this country, left and right, have lost the ability to perform critical thought.
Report Post »Showtime
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:10pm–Thanks to the teachers and their unions.
Report Post »florida123
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:40pmHey Letterman you want to spread the wealth around some more, how come you havent devoted all your millions to those making less than you are ie teachers, police, fireman,etc. Put your money where your mouth is or shut up!
Report Post »Rowgue
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:40pmIf I were Letterman I’d have to swear off ever having politicians on the show again after that. He was made to look dumber than a Michael Moore movie.
Report Post »heavyduty
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:39pmI don’t care who you are. I just can’t see how anyone would want to be on his show. He is just about a big a loser as Obama.
Report Post »NC1
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:39pmI USED to like David Letterman. He started really getting on my nerves back in the Bush days (and I wasn’t really a big fan of Bush). Can’t stand to watch him now. When a person lives in an ivory tower and has a microphone and a late night talk show for their bully pulpit they become so detatched from the normal, everyday people it’s pathetic. He doesn’t have to worry about the union workers at CBS, CBS does. Not his problem. I bet if he was having to bargain with unions he’d change his tune.
Report Post »Goodgriefgeezlouise
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:58pmI agree!..Seems like the sixties comedians have gotten old and crotchety…letterman, as well as many from that era, remind me of the smartass kid in seventh grade..Not much creativity when it comes to humor but a lot of ragging on people..That stuff really gets stale when the guy who is doing is is old enough to be someones great grand father..he just reenforces the idea that the generation of the sixties, (I was about 3 year behind them) are the loser generation..Born of the greatest generation, the loser generation had everything..Our parents wanted to give their kids the best..and they turned out to be the most selfish, I‘m right and you’re always wrong generation of all time..Mostly driven by fear (the draft and daily news videos of Vietnam) they became the exact opposite of the strong parents that brought them into the world..and saved the world from Hitler and Japan and the rest..We are certainly at a crossroads..The loser generation is running almost everything in the Obama white house..and although they are a small minority of the whole, they have the loudest voices..as they always have had..I continue to hope for more Glen Beck like individuals to show up and take some of the spotlight away from the “look at me” crowd..They are truely disfunctional and need to be exposed on a broad scale..I just hope WW3 doesn‘t happen before the US can get back to it’s principles..God help us and God help Israel.
Report Post »florida123
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:38pmJust another ignorant progressive so whats new? We The People…….
Report Post »eatpork.theotherwhitemeat
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:38pmLibs/Dems don’t operate through fact but always practicing ABC.(Always Be Closing). In their attempt to always push or “nudge” towards the close they use emotion not logic. They are cheap tricks in a suit that use proven sales method to achieve the goal. That is….sales are made by 90% emotion and10% logic/product knowledge.
Report Post »tinlizy
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:37pmThe problem with Letterman as with other liberals is that they can’t seem to use logic in their reasoning. They leap from one idea to the other and make assumptions based on these leaps. For example. Rich people made their money at the expense of the poor people so we muc take money from the rich to give to the poor. This is illogical because when money is taken by force from the wealthy who have previous used that money for capital stock to grow companies and promtoe jobs that money is taken and given to a body of the government that uses most of that money to employ government workers. That money is ususally over spent and there is usually very little left to give to poor, therefore leaving poor very poor. So now there are less jobs and not money to move them out of poverty.
Report Post »Stokerscore
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:35pmCowboy Quote: Don‘t go in if you don’t know the way out.
Report Post »Patrick Rose
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:35pmDavid Letterman sucks. Old fart your not funny…..
Report Post »weeblewacker1
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 11:27am@easyed598 nice little bit of “cherry-picking” rand said: “the average teacher in wisc.is making $89,000 a year”.(nothing about the bennies) a out-right lie? or intentionality miss-leading the people? and same goes toBlackhawk1,”cherry-picking” to mislead people. and $24,000 for health insurance?? well,that just Proves that we need a universal health-care,I.E. a single payer system besides,the majority of Real Americans oppose what “one-term-walker” is trying to do by 61%to 33%.-from the gallup poll 2/21/11.
Report Post »BothPartiesAreCorrupt
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:34pmWhat’s amazing to me is how so many can just not get it. Rand Paul makes clear and concise points about how we already spend a ton of money per student and things get worse. That maybe competition will allow for a better system and people clap Letterman’s response of “why don’t we just spend more money on education, that should help”. Are you kidding me? Paul JUST explained that was not the answer!
If the public doesn’t get it soon, this country is doomed to economic disaster. Then what will all the comfortable people who don’t want to give up their free stuff do? Work harder for less, that’s what.
Report Post »weeblewacker1
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:45pmand..rand seems to just like fox and just pulls what-ever numbers outta thin air!!! o.k,fact checks: average teach in Wisc.makes $48,743!!!!! not $89,000!!! average spent per student in Wisc:$11,418,of which $772. comes from the feds.$6,043 from state.oh-well,nice try randy! maybe you need glass’s! let me just go check some stuff he said..
Report Post »I CHOOSE THE RED PILL MR PRESIDENT
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:05pmI agree. Brings to mind some other questions. If liberals think money is sooo bad, why are they always trying so hard to get their hands on everybody else’s? I read a study where Conservatives outgive Liberals four to one to charity. So let me get this straight… You don’t want to give up a red cent of your money, but you want to carry the water for policies designed to take other people’s money.
I read a local Detroit newspaper article about how the Detroit school system “misplaced” 56 million dollars. Later I heard that the Detroit school system received 500+ million dollars from the Stimulus bill. I never heard about an investigation into where the 56 million went, so we basically threw good money after bad. Just recently, I read an article where the Detroit school system is considering closing 45 schools. Huh??? To me this is a prime example of Democrat policies in action. It’s for those poor children in Detroit, but the children are no better off. Reality sets in when you admit to yourself that you know exactly where that money went and it wasn’t for the “poor children.”
Poor people and other various causes are just the store front Democrats use to launder money taken from us into the pockets of union bosses, cronies and themselves. Democrats have been in the majority for 40 of the last 18 yrs. Has anything improved?? Are poor people less poor?? Are school kids more educated?? Do more graduate?? Has innovation and manufacturing increased?? No. Why?? Common sense tells you that if kids get a better education and it costs half as much at a private school, then we should ENCOURAGE voucher programs and charter schools. But no, that might mean we wouldn‘t need so many UNION teachers and we can’t have that… Less union teachers means less union dues which means less donations to Democratic candidates which means less union kick backs for union teachers and the kids are thrown upon the alter, getting substandard educations that cost twice what they should cost. Sweet deal if you’re a public school teacher, union boss or Democrat politician. It sucks for the tax payer and the students…
Report Post »I CHOOSE THE RED PILL MR PRESIDENT
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:08pmOoops sorry. 40 of the last 58 yrs.
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:10pmNow that we had a lefty hand us another lie (Weeble wacker). This is from teacher-world. com a recruiting site for teachers. These are the salaries for different areas of the state, without benefits included. Let’s add another $24,000 for health care on a family of 4. Doesn’t include pension either. Looks like it’s over $89,000 in most areas. Not bad for a 9 month a year job.
* Green Bay: $55,110
Report Post »* Kenosha: $68,400
* Madison: $50,770
* Milwaukee: $54,620
* Racine: $49,710
easyed598
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:23pmThe blog Media Trackers figured out the average salaries of all the striking teachers in Wisconsin
According to data from the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction, the average teacher’s salaries and average fringe benefits appear to be very generous given the recent economic downturn. Media Trackers has compiled the information below for the school districts that were forced to close on Thursday.
Columbus School District $72,460
Report Post »De Forest School District $69,201
Eau Claire School District $80,078
Edgarton School District $75,594
La Crosse School District $83,364
Madison Metropolitan School District $75,558
Mosinee School District $80,746
Oregon School District $66,942
Racine School District $88,453
Stoughton School District $72,830
Verona School District $77,214
Watertown School District $82,244
Wausau School District $85,658
Average Salary and Benefits for School Districts Closed On Thursday $77,718.62
Compare that to the average salary of a worker in Milwaukee the largest city in Wisconsin: $53,724That’s in Milwaukee. I guarantee you that the average Wisconsin worker’s salary is under $45,000. The teachers are making double what the taxpayers funding them are making, and they are demanding more. Wisconsin workers don’t get generous pensions and free healthcare for life. They are getting bilked and they now know it. It’s why the unions will lose the battle big time, as there are far more reasonable taxpayers than unreasonable union types
I CHOOSE THE RED PILL MR PRESIDENT
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:27pmActually Wanker, the average teachers SALARY is one thing, but you forgot to add the benefits of which they don’t contribute one red cent, which does raise the average salary to 89K+ per year and lets not forget that teachers only work 150 days per year or 40% less than everybody else who works 250 days per year. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (a government website) the average median salary of a private sector worker is $41K plus change. The average median salary of a WI teacher is, using your number, is $48K plus change. So, not counting benefits or the fact that they work 40% less, they make 15% more.
And thanks for helping to prove the case for the Governor of WI. According to your numbers, it takes 11K to educate one student for one year, of which the Feds only pay just shy of 1K. The states pay the rest and when I say states, I mean that tax payers pay state tax. So now you can see why states are going broke and have huge deficits like Wisconsin who’s looking at 3+ billion in the red. And thanks for pulling the actual figure it takes to educate a student in WI. Rand gave an estimate of 6K to 12K. With WI students being at 12K you‘d think they’d all be graduating with honors and getting scholorships to Harvard. So it basically cost 400% more to educate a student in the WI public schools than it does in private schools and the unions say it’s still not enough. Now why don’t you run off and see how WI compares to others in education performance. Come back and tell us what the tax payers are getting for their 12K per student…
Report Post »alienguns
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:34pmDave gets his a$$ handed to him with a few facts from a guy the Tea Party supports….and the left thinks Tea Party members are stupid…lmao
Report Post »weeblewacker1
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:13pmwow! and i thought letterman was a funny looking dude,but that rand guy….and he is supposed to be a eye dr?.?i wonder how many of his patients have gone blind? say i think it is time to play “fact-check” starring ta-da!!! rand paul! this should not take too long.brb.
Report Post »TeaPartyPatriot
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:30pmAN intellectual GIANT (rand) talking with an idiot.
Does ANYBODY really care what the lunatic-left woman-abuser, reject from the Hair Club for Men and all-around perv letterman has to say about ANYTHING? Who is pathetic enough to actually watch this reprobate – aside from those morons that find “Stupid Pet Tricks” the most intellectually challenging part of their life?
Report Post »J.C. McGlynn
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:30pmHe was easily confused by the facts, wasn’t he? And couldn’t get R. Paul to admit the rich(?) weren’t paying enough.
Report Post »KenInIL
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:03pmI liked Letterman trying to squeeze into the middle class with his multi-million per year contract. Very Funny.
Rand Paul 10 Letterman 0 !
Report Post »glennisright.com
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:30pmThanks Rand, now give that same lesson to Obama.
http://www.glennisright.com
Report Post »Protect us and build roads
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:28pmFacts and logic are evil and racist.
Report Post »IAMMADDOG
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:28pmAnd there you have it folks…..the liberal game plan right out in the open. “Screw facts I wanna feeeeeeeeel gooooooooood”.
Report Post »Raven53
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:25pmDavid Letterman IS a stupid pet trick
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:23pmWhy do conservatives continue to boost that doofus’ raitings? Do you really think that people who watch him buy books?
Report Post »banjarmon
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:33pmwasn’t gonzo a clown??? Well he’s back!!!
Report Post »CatB
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:44pmYou have to go to where the uneducated are … in order to “try” to educate them.
Report Post »zorro
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:45pmExcellent point.
Report Post »Untameable-kate
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:21pmCATB
Report Post »That was very well said. If just a few were able to understand what Paul said then maybe it is worth a try.
saneasylum
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:56pmThe original Gonzo blew his own head off………..
Report Post »Showtime
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:03pmNot unless they can read them between their toes!
Report Post »tinlizy
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:22pmSarah Palin/Rand Paul.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:25pmSarah Palin/Rand Paul = 4 more years of Obama.
Report Post »Untameable-kate
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:31pmAgreed Gonzo.
Report Post »Christie/ ??
J.C. McGlynn
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:37pmI’d rather have a pair of spendthrifts who might get it halfway correct than one who gets nothing correct.
Report Post »Think4yourself
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:37pm@untameable
Christe and Allen West
http://www.unsalvageable.org
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:49pmJ.C. McGlynn
What we have now is a combination , one who is a spendthrift who gets nothing correct. = OBAMA
Report Post »Ben__Franklin
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:37pmand there lies the problem, I believe we are in for another four years of Obozo – not because the majority of Americans love him, but because the GoP does not have anything to offer as a Leader that can win an election as of today. All of the current GoP candidates all carry too much baggage from the establishment to be trusted. The Tea Party itself cannot win an election and the Left is well organized and all their factions are working as one.
Reality is Reality – four more years of Obama as I see it, and a Congress in gridlock. At least no business out of Congress with Obama as President can turn out to be good business with what Obama would love to do to this country and its future.
Report Post »chazman
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:42pmI like Sarah but her time for a run at the presidency is not now. Man, I just don’t know who I can depend on for president right now. It’s too early yet …
Report Post »Veritas vos liberabit
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:09pmI like Sarah, but she quit. Not a great way to go into a prez campaign. She is doing fabulous right where she is! Let her run the GOP. Rand – give him some time to do the job he was elected to do. But who…..don’t know who can take on “the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy” president?????
Report Post »I CHOOSE THE RED PILL MR PRESIDENT
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:17pmI agree about Christi/West. Unfortunatley Christi won‘t run because he’s not sure he’s ready (Washington didn’t want to do it either). I have to admire that. His fear of not being ready to do a good job for our country wins over political power. Wish Obama, who only had 140 days of experience as Senator had been that honorable. We wouldn’t have the Kindergovernment we have now, all hepped up on fairy tales.
I’d bet my bottom dollar, and if Obama stays it might come to that, that both Christi and West could handle it though. They do have some life experiences under their belt instead of living in the insulated fairy tale world of higher education, where everything’s based on theory not reality
Report Post »tifosa
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 9:17amPlease!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! \(^.^)/
Report Post »TheBMT
Posted on February 27, 2011 at 2:37amwe could just ignore ron paul, who has been right about the economic collapse and the factors contributing to it, a true free market believe who stands for the constitution even when alone.
AND the only republican to know that a movement like the tea party existed in 2007. There was a revolution brewing in this country for Liberty and smaller government and he knew it.
Report Post »aLinedog
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:17pmThis week, Dave’s ALL NEW! With.. STUPID PET TRICKS!
Report Post »Man I miss Johnny.
-line
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:21pmStupid Pet Tricks? Are they having Gore and Biden on board? Doing Performances?
Report Post »justanamerican
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:23pmSnow,…YOU ARE RIGHT ON! You took the words right out of my keyboard
Report Post »CatB
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:40pm@Snow … LOL … Pelosi? She can give herself the “prize” .
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:44pm@CatB
I was thinking in the case of Pelosi of the award for ‘Chief Spider’ or “Deadliest Critters of the world”
Report Post »Untameable-kate
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:56pmShouldn‘t Pelosi be on ’Worlds dumbest criminals’?
Report Post »Ben__Franklin
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:30pmAfter watching Nancy Pelosi bob up and down behind President Obama during his first State Of The Union speech, I would think she would be up for a Porn Star nomination. I am sure she is a MILF to Joe Biden and Harry Reid……
Report Post »saneasylum
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:52pmNow you can understand why NBC replaced Carson with Leno…………….
Report Post »Showtime
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:55pmI miss Johnny, too.
Hahaha– at least Johnny was FUNNY!
Report Post »Lucy Larue
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 6:07pmALINEDOG,
Report Post »I commiserate! Carson had CLASS!
Sad to say I was a loyal watcher of Dave way back when his biggest get was the little “Potato Chip Lady”.
I can no longer abide his simpering ignorance. He has no excuse. He knows how to read. He has access to books.
He chooses to be a male Joy Behar.
Yeah…,it has been said that “Ignorance is Bliss”. Nah….,sometimes it’s just IGNORANCE.
Dave’s ignorance is on air nightly. I just do not watch.
THENEWMCCARTHY
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 9:35pmHitler was a union-buster.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:14pmFacts v feelings, common sense v rhetoric, logic v emotion; the perfect demonstration of conservative versus nutty progressive showmen.
Report Post »Untameable-kate
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:26pmUnfortunately there are more than a few people of voting age who vote their “feelings” rather than vote for responsibility. We are raising too many of these entitlement mentality kids. Hopefully the age of one party government that we have endured for the past two years will get the attention of a few of them and they will see that we can’t give everybody everything. Especially when they have to start paying the bills.
Report Post »Smitty1969
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:27pmHey snow, you have good post’s but do you work at the blaze or stare at the screen all day waiting for a new topic to post? I check at breakfast, lunchtime and poke around in the evening and rarely get in the top 75 posts.
Report Post »Dale
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:31pm“Paul appeared to score on points, though Letterman’s disagreements were severely undercut by a lack of facts.” Pesky little things, like facts, trip up progressives who ‘feel’ the world would be better if we did things their way; and aren‘t even surprised when they don’t work!
Report Post »Ken
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:33pmA clergyman once told me that “sincerety is no guarantee for truth.” Seems to apply here, somehow.
Report Post »Think4yourself
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:35pmEverything the Libs do is based on feelings. They don’t like facts because those are confusing and just get in the way.
http://www.unsalvageable.org
Report Post »CatB
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:38pmI don’t doubt Franken told him not to go on .. .they don’t want the progressives getting “schooled”.
Report Post »Juan Gault
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:40pmRand Paul did a very good job,of defining,explaining,and educating ,Mr Letterman. In addition, the discussion was respectful,a welcome relief from current events.
Wonderfully refreshing!! There is hope, people.
Report Post »CatB
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:42pmPaying teachers more does not help the students. … Letterman is a dope.
Report Post »NeoFan
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:43pmYes David lets double teachers salaries for not doing the job of educating students. People have been laughing at your stupidity for decades.
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:45pmWell folks, Rand Paul just proved that no matter how hard you try to teach basic economics to a liberal, they just cannot grasp it.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:46pm@Smitty
It is a matter of timing, and of there being a topic of interest to me; sometimes I do not bother posting for several topics, or some are of a limited topic as others have the same view expressed as I share.
Report Post »silentwatcher
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:51pmsounds like the debate (that’s a joke) between the repubs and dems. dems going by word of mouth and how the feel about how it should be.
Report Post »Rogue
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:53pmMaybe NBC can steal Letterman away from CBS – he would fit perfectly into the MSNBC evening lineup, although not as funny as thier current set of hosts.
Report Post »NONA
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:54pmWho the hell is David Letternam? I never watch this idiot’s show. Do you? After watching this video for sure I will never watch it. Thanks Glenn for showing us Letterman IDIOT show!
Report Post »PLEASE WATCH THE GLENN BECK SHOW 5 DAYS A WEEK @ 5PM. אמץ וחזק גלן
exdem
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 1:56pmLetterman nailed it on the head. His audience is applauding his stupidity. Typical progressive stuck on rich bashing talking points and cant get past it to absorb or understand anything.
Report Post »pajamash
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:01pmI can‘t tell you exactly why but Letterman jus isn’t funny!
If Letterman wants to pay more to the government all he has to do is take out his checkbook and wright the governent a big fat check year after year. That way his buddies, like Al Franken, can spend more money. There is NOTHING stopping these whiny celebrity types from giving the government more money. Just put up or shut up David. You want the government to have more money then go ahead and give them more money. Just don’t push your views off on everyone else.
Report Post »kcash
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:04pmNot surprised! The university systems in this country do not turn out well rounded citizens. Take a look at the core requirements at Arizona State University…not a single class on business or on government.
Hey, I had to read “A Catcher in the Rye” (a story about a rich East Coast kid challenging the status quo) and I learned how to site sources in a term paper, but there is nothing real world about either of those topics. I took those classes and I am glad I did, but I would like to see the some practical studies as well. At least two classes on business. Course 1; Practical Business 101: Basic Business and Economics and Course 2; Practical Business 102: Basic Finance and Accounting. Unless your major is business you will never see business classes in the core, so don’t expect the Profs to let any practical items into the liberal arts area of school!
Think I am wrong check out these core requirements below, then call, fax, email and harass your state regent boards to stand up to the Liberal professors and get some real world subjects into their curriculum if they are really trying to turn out “critical Thinkers. All of these classes qualify you to be a barista at Starbucks….ASU has 60,000 minds of mush enrolled campus wide!!!
ASU Core requirements:
FIVE CORE AREAS
L: Literacy and Critical Inquiry (Six Credit Hours)
MA and CS: Mathematical Studies (Combined Six Credit Hours)
HU: Humanities, Fine Arts, and Design and
SB: Social and Behavioral Sciences (Combined 15 Credit Hours)
SQ and SG: Natural Sciences (Combined Eight Credit Hours)
THREE AWARENESS AREAS
Report Post »1. Cultural Diversity in the United States (C)
2. Global Awareness (G)
3. Historical Awareness (H)
GBMBulletsSKNRD
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:06pmRand made you look the fool that we all know you are David.
Report Post »sweet37
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:19pmOn the Mark snowleopard! That sums it right up!
Report Post »GONESURFING
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:31pmYes, Letterman, like most liberals is completely clueless.
Report Post »A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:46pmWhat David Letterman doesn’t realize is that it is not the role of government to be just another place to work. The role of government is to make it safe for the private sector to enjoy their unalienable rights.
While we respect those who do government work well, government jobs are completely expendable, per the consent of the governed.
Report Post »C. Schwehr
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:46pmWell, at least he didn’t infer that Rand Paul had a daughter who was a slut (yet)!
Showtime
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:53pmThat is the reason Rand Paul is a U.S. Senator and David Letterman is a comedian.
(I stopped watching him when he jumped all over Sarah Palin’s daughter. It just rubbed me the wrong way when he criticized her for being pregnant and not married. I mean, how old was Letterman‘s son before he married the child’s mother? And, how long was he married before his haren room was discovered?)
Report Post »I.Swear.By.My.Life.and.My.Love.of.it
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 2:56pmExactly snowleopard. It was too much logic for him. Simple, rational, explanations seem to be no more than a stretch of the imagination to the dems or progressives. Letterman’s repeating announcements of his own ignorance to such simplicity is evident.
Report Post »Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:13pmIn my personal opinion, having met and talked to Letterman before a concert in the 80′s, I think he was born with the word “Jackass” stamped on his butt.
Report Post »independentvoteril
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:23pmAs someone who spent many years being a DEMOCRAT it can be explained actually quite simply .. when your young you tend to see the world through your heart.. if you go to a Catholic school or church ADD GUILT..you hear know or are told about those that don‘t have anything and THINK it’s because they are trying but for some reason can’t catch a break.. THAN as you get older you see these SAME people bypass you as they work the system and YOU are working your butt off to survive..you see those you felt sorry for think YOUR the dumb one for bothering to work when you can just as easily sit on your behind and rake in the cash, party and do nothing.. and the GOVERNMENT seems to side with them not the worker.. The Democrats beleive the ones who WHINE the most.. Not surprising LETTERMAN a devout PROGRESSIVE..has NO CLUE.. Notice he waited till Paul LEFT the stage to try to convince his audience that Paul was WRONG.. he KNEW Paul could show him and them they were wrong.. Letterman is the product of the FAILED school system and has never reached the point of GROWING UP.. which is why I don’t watch him.. Actually I see MORE of the shows I CHOOSE NOT to watch here on the Blaze.. hummmmm
Report Post »abc
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:26pmIf Letterman is the proxy for a liberal, then it’s no wonder conservatives think them uniformly stupid. He should know more, but his business is showbusiness, not economics.
Rand Paul was very good at explaining much in the interview, and much of that is uncontroversial. The problem with his arguments, of course, were with what he left out:
1. what segments of the economy should be handled by government and why? he simply says that “most people” think fire protection and armies should be in the public sector, but he doesn’t say why. He assumes that medicine should be a for-profit endeavor, glossing over the very large market failures and conflicts of interest associated with that particular economic good.
2. what tax rates are being paid by the rich versus the middle class or poor? Rand talks about dollars of taxes paid by different groups of people (classes), and he talks about the percentages of those dollars paid. However, he fails to note that many wealthy pay 15% tax rates. As Warren Buffett has pointed out, his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does.
These are issues that should be discussed, but you cannot expect it will happen on late night comedy television. Too bad Rand doesn’t go on the proper venue where these ideas can be handled.
Star Spangled
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:31pmAgreed , the facts don’t matter to these nuts . Even after hearing the facts Letterman fell back on his feelings . Too bad it was after Paul had left the stage and couldn’t answer to his remarks . I thought that was a dirty way of getting the last word in .
Report Post »watchtheotherhand
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:38pmU have a feeling that liberals who like to try and deal with facts found that a bit embarrassing !!!!!
Report Post »rosecityken
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 3:45pmalright mr.“wealthy fat guy” letterman why dont you voluntarily pay more…there is no one stopping from giving ALL your money let alone, more than you are being taxed already …write a bigger check, add some zeros Dave. p.s. you were alot funnier when you werent a spokesperson for the DNC.
Report Post »ltb
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:00pmLetterman: “Thank you, you’re applauding my stupidity.”
Isn’t that what Liberals always do? It is frightening just how clueless these people are.
Report Post »I CHOOSE THE RED PILL MR PRESIDENT
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:03pmI went to watch a debate once between Carl Rove and Howard Dean at UNLV (yes, the belly of the beast..). Rove wiped the floor with him on facts. Howard did what every other liberal progressive does, he ignored those facts and kept on with the “Republicans Did It” diatribe (Don’t look at that man behind the curtain!!). Seriously, he was a laughing stock. Other than the idiots who buy the stuff, who was he trying to convince? I have a hard time believing that all liberal politicians and media personalities are that dense and actually believe their rhetoric (well, maybe Dean) which leads me to believe they are purposely misleading the useful idiots. “No silly, the sky is orange and 2 + 2 = 23 (instead of 5, I used Obamanomics for the 23)”. This is the same thing.
“It‘s just wrong somehow that everybody’s life isn‘t a fairy tale so I’ll just make up a fairy tale truth and some fairy tale policies” and screw the consequences for the rest of us who realize that we are at the circus and know exactly who the clowns are…
Report Post »excelizen (a goal, not a title!)
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:04pmSen. Paul did a great job. Even though I agree with him I don’t think I have really given him his due. As this progressed the audience became quiet (I only wish we had a camera facing them) and less enthusiastic with Letterman’s oh so lame responses. We (each one of us) must have (whether on late night TV, in line at the grocery store or at the barber shop) the ability to expound on the sound principals of fiscal responsibility and the conservative mindset whenever the opportunity presents. For the first time in a long time (if not ever) folks are starting to pay attention. We will never turn the far left but we can engage the greater number of folks who just haven’t… well…thought! It truly is painting the picture is such a way that it is a A-B choice.
Report Post »ltb
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:07pmIf you don’t believe that rewarding mediocrity is a bad idea, try this little experiment: Next time you tell your kid to mow the yard and he ignores you, go ahead and give him his allowance anyway, then see what happens next week when you tell him to mow the yard.
When teachers in America volunteered to teach and when they were paid very little, we had the best education system in the world. Why? Because those teachers weren’t in it for the money, they were in it to bring up the next generation. On average, Christian schools cost about $3,000 per student per year to operate while public schools cost anywhere from $6,000 to $12,000, yet students graduating from Christian schools score an average of 10% higher on the SAT. It’s not the money. The more we reward mediocre public school teachers who are already failing America’s children, the worse public schools will become.
Report Post »Progessives=Fail
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:07pmRand Paul is awesome! We need more like him!
Report Post »mcpbob
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:11pmyou nailed it
Report Post »keaton
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:13pmMy son just returned from Conakry , Guinea. As a very poor nation the electricity only works about 3 hours a day, and at important locations in the country. They do keep lights on at the airport. The students crowd around the lights to study at night. Money is not the answer, motivation is.
Report Post »docvet
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:14pmWhen there is a battle of wits, Letterman comes unarmed. I haven‘t watched him since he was rude to O’Riley. what an imbezzle, what a maroon!
Report Post »watchtheotherhand
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 4:42pm@ ABC…..here we go again my friend (lol)…..I know you know that I am a physician and I know your wife is a physician. When you speak of “market failures”. I’m not sure exactly what your referring to, but I will assume and proceed. You may obviously retort if I misstate something. Market failures in medicine have occurred as the result of insurance and government payers entering into the mix. If true free market competition was allowed to take place market failures would be turned into huge successes. Of course some medical conditions could be financially disastrous. So if insurance could be limited to higher deductibles and for hospitalizations and other high cost procedures. Premiums would and do bottom out ( I should know I have one of these types of policies and pay very little for a family of 6). Then have each person simply pay cash for office visits and minor health care costs. This would lower primary care delivery significantly and increase competition thus passing on huge savings to the real consumers ……patients. This would then decrease abuses of some patients that run into the doctor for sniffles and increase the quality and courtesy of your physicians. Tons of administrative costs and inefficiencies could be completely eliminated and people could still be protected from financial ruin. Physicians could then have more freedoms in treating their patients and regain some of the control that has been lost to third party payers. Of course we would still have the problem with MEDICARE and MEDICAID but these can most definitely be reformed relatively simply (that is another topic and won’t bore you with my thoughts on that though). However, I know none of the many common sense solutions will ever occur because too many groups hand’s are in the cookie jar and politics has never been necessarily an area for common sense solutions when re-elections need to be funded.
Report Post »techengineer11
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:02pmRand Paul for President 2012?
Report Post »easyed598
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:17pmLetterman can`t comprehend facts,,logic and reasoning.
Report Post »abc
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:28pmWatch,
There are very well-known market failures that make delivering health care different than delivering Coke or Pepsi to the supermarket. They make it difficult to expect that a purely free market solution works, contrary to what you say. Econ 101 teaches that free markets requires diffuse sharing of information, atomized buyers and sellers and no duress. None of those conditions hold in health care. I can walk into a c-store with the intention buying a can of Coke but leave with a gallon of purified water and there is no problem. But the decision to spend $200K for a drug that may extend my father’s life by 2 months is a harder call to make. I am under duress, the doctor knows more than I do and yet his intentions may not be pure, the drug companies are pushing doctors to deploy drugs to maximize profits rather than quality of life, etc. Atul Gawande, a Harvard trained surgeon and Rhodes scholar has written extensively on the problems with the health care system, including how there is NO correlation between cost and outcomes, how doctors who bill the most often heal the least, how insurance companies seek to avoid paying at all cost or at least drag their feet on payment since they can win the waiting game, and many other problems. The only part of the health care market that is conducive to purely private market solutions is in non-ethical care (e.g., rhinoplasty, et. al.), but many misguided conservatives and libertarians cite those very areas as proof that free market solutions work everywhere in healthcare. They do not.
To address you specific claims,
“Market failures in medicine have occurred as the result of insurance and government payers entering into the mix.”
Government and insurance companies need to be in the mix, so you cannot view this as optional. Risk sharing and regulation, which insurance and government fulfill, are absolutely necessary to the industry.
“If true free market competition was allowed to take place market failures would be turned into huge successes.”
Given what I wrote before, it should be clear that this is not correct. No country on earth offers a purely private market for ethical healthcare delivery. And there is a reason for this. Just like no society delivers electric and gas utility services that way either.
“Of course some medical conditions could be financially disastrous. So if insurance could be limited to higher deductibles and for hospitalizations and other high cost procedures.”
80% of healthcare spending is consumed at the end of life, so the high deductible offerings to younger folks is a good solution addressing a small part of the problem.
“Then have each person simply pay cash for office visits and minor health care costs. This would lower primary care delivery significantly and increase competition thus passing on huge savings to the real consumers ……patients. This would then decrease abuses of some patients that run into the doctor for sniffles and increase the quality and courtesy of your physicians.”
You forget about the abuses of the doctors that are incented by fee-for-service to overprescribe and do other things to overbill their patients.
“Tons of administrative costs and inefficiencies could be completely eliminated and people could still be protected from financial ruin.”
The administrative costs remain there regardless, since you need insurance coverage regardless.
“Physicians could then have more freedoms in treating their patients and regain some of the control that has been lost to third party payers.”
Most of health care is beyond sniffles and involves large enough costs that insurance would be involved. But to the extent that you are talking about the part of medicine that is fee for service, then that wouuld be true.
“Of course we would still have the problem with MEDICARE and MEDICAID but these can most definitely be reformed relatively simply (that is another topic and won’t bore you with my thoughts on that though).”
You have to state which problem with those programs you are referring to. The commonly attributed problem is that they are not adequately funded, which is true. But the commonly held belief is that this lack of solvency comes from higher costs or inefficiency than is seen in the private payor market, which is not true. In fact, health care costs are rising much faster (I have ready nearly 50%) on the private payor side than on the Medicare side. So if you believe, as I do, that too much of our wallet is going toward health care (which is true versus all other developed countries in this world), then Medicare is actually doing a better job of combatting this problem than the private payor side. And your claim that privatizing all of it will be good for Americans is thrown into serious doubt.
“However, I know none of the many common sense solutions will ever occur because too many groups hand’s are in the cookie jar and politics has never been necessarily an area for common sense solutions when re-elections need to be funded.”
There are plenty of hands in the cookie jar on all sides. The drug companies, afterall, have the best financed lobbies in D.C. And the health insurance companies are no slouches either.
I do not think that the issues are well understood even by doctors. This is really as much a province of economics and health care economics, as it is about medicine. But at the end of the day, Japan, Korea, Germany, France and the UK all have about the same quality of outcomes as the US, but they pay about half as much. There is a lot of waste in the system, but muich more of it exists on the private payor side, given the inflation figures on that side, and no one on the right is willing to acknowledge this as a problem, much less solve it. And a good start would be to stop stating (falsely) that delivery of ethical healthcare can be solved in the same was as getting a can of Coke to the supermarket. Once that insight is accepted, the solutions to the problems look a lot more like those created outside the US, and we could then expect to have the kind of costs experienced there with little impact on outcomes. Check out Gawande’s stuff. He really has done tremendous work in this area. A lot of it has been published in the New Yorker.
lylee
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 5:59pmI stopped watching David Letterman in 2000 after he coerced George W Bush to come on his show. Now I remember why I stopped.
Report Post »CultureWarriors
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 6:06pmIntelligence vs ignorance. Look, Dave is just too stupid to ever understand. We all know that for normal people the IQ bell peaks at 100. For liberals it peaks at maybe 60. Most conservatives, just by the fact that they are conservative are above the bell curve. Most liberals are below. How else could you explain someone believing in something that fails every time it is tried. Stupidity. Dave is probably average for liberal. That puts him squarely at ignoramus. Just look at the commie-libs that post here, that’s all one needs to know. Liberal posters: we’re not laughing with you, we’re laughing at you.
LIBERALISM = EPIC FAILURE!
Report Post »kindling
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 6:42pmI was on a jury one time and only 2 of us were conservative. Ten of us based our thoughts on feelings and 2 of us based it on the facts. In the end the other conservative and I managed to make 9 of the toddlers understand that a police officer that is being crushed by a car driven by an out of control teen is legally and morally right to shoot and kill that teen in order to stop him from not only killing that officer, but perhaps other civilians that get in the out of control teen’s way. The one hold out said he understood that the officer did what he had to do to save his life but because that juror felt it was just wrong to kill a teen he hung the jury.
Report Post »Jayk Signal
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 7:05pmLetterman got one thing right:
“They’re applauding my stupidity.”
I used to think Letterman was just a bad character. Now I realize he truly is not an intelligent man.
I wish we could think of a way to tax only the stupid.
Report Post »Bill Wallace
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 7:09pmAmen, Snowleopard. Amen.
Report Post »Glenn in Virginia
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 7:52pmIt’s been long established that Letterman is an obnoxious fool when it comes to politics.
Report Post »riseandshine
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 7:52pmlibs drive me nuts
Report Post »riseandshine
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 7:56pmdemagogging liberal letterman misrepresenting conservative ideals. DRIVES ME NUTS!!!!
Report Post »Ruler4You
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 8:33pmLetterman is a professional CLOWN. He is a paid idiot. And he is a self righteous ego maniacal ass. He can‘t learn economics because he can’t be taught. He doesn’t have to learn. People lick his feet just to make him feel good and they feel good about doing it.
Report Post »WhatTheHuh
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 9:19pmThis is typical of Letterman’s “debating” style. He always prefaces his arguments by saying, “First let me say that I don’t know anything.” He gets the laugh and then proceeds to talk about something as if he does know something! Then, when confronted with facts, he reverts to saying things like, “that doesn’t sound right“ or ”oh, you’re just making that up!” Being a comedian(?) he can get away with it but he obviously wants to walk the line between stating his opinion (which is usually not fact-based) and then falling back to the “I’m just a comedian” response when he looks foolish for his lack of knowledge. Typical Letterman. Typical liberal.
Report Post »My Sacred Honor
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 9:25pmMy Grampa always told me “if your mouth is moving, your ears don’t work”.
Report Post »Maybe the reason letterman is so stupid on this is that he won’t shut his pie hole long enough to allow Sen. Paul complete an answer. Instead, letterman chooses to try and lecture someone…”above his pay-grade”.
You fail daily, letterman.
BoiseBaked
Posted on February 25, 2011 at 10:30pmLettterman stick to stupid pet tricks because you’re dumber than a rock.
Report Post »culp4cpa
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 12:16amI have a great idea. If Letterman wants to raise taxes to pay for government employees and benefits, lets tax the 50% of households who pay no taxes. If they had to pay for these programs I’d bet they would think twice before supporting these failing programs.
Report Post »nzkiwi
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 12:18am@My Sacred Honor
I think you are right. If Letterman hadn’t interrupted so early and so frequently, then Paul might have provided some of the detail that ABC was looking for.
I must say I’m impressed with Paul as he is succint and appears to be more for his country than his party. I think that he will go far.
Report Post »RealAmerican2011
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 1:14amI used to laugh at Letterman because he’s a fool…
Report Post »Now I just pity him because he’s a fool
My Sacred Honor
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 1:31amnzkiwi
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 12:18am
@My Sacred Honor
DAMMIT BROTHER WHY DIDN’T YOU RESPOND FASTER IN LETING US KNOW YOU WERE OK????
Report Post »can’t post all-caps so here.
have you heard from your loved-ones in Christchurch? I am sobbing/praying for them, Brother! Let me know they are OK!
One1
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 6:52amIt’s very simple Dave. government jobs do not generate wealth. So goverment workers are paid with tax money, which in turn is taxed. That’s called one step forward and two steps back. Corporation actually produce things. This gives people jobs who then pay taxes. That is why you don’t raise their taxes.
Report Post »We conservatives don’t want to raise anyones taxes. We think the government is too big and fat and need to lose weight.
truthbeknown
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 7:23amLetterman is the perfect posterchild for liberal progressives. In his own words he‘s stupid and Rand Paul doesn’t make sense, but he doesn’t know why. Are you kidding me? Really David? Emotion, and absolutely no information to work with.
Report Post »TheAbbott
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 8:14am“You’re applauding my stupidity.” Mr Letterman, you nailed the crux of the problem without having a clue that you did.
Stop with all the emotional judgments and use a little GD commonsense.
Report Post »JustTheFactsPlease
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 8:34amcouldn’t agree with you more. Everything that wacko said was completely baseless and a lot of it untrue.
Report Post »tifosa
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 8:54amRidiculous to celebrate this pwning. Put Rand Paul on (and for more than a few minutes!) with..maybe…someone like David Leonhardt. Now THAT would be an interesting match-up. :)
Report Post »ROBCW
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 9:43amTax, tax, tax the rich. I get so tired of hearing this. The progressives will never get it on the trickle down economics while they so strongly believe in the trickle up poverty. When has a poor man ever given a person a job? If the hollywood elitist want to pay more i say let them, let’s see how many of them actually practice what they preach once their money begins to vanish out from under them. Wont be able to spend their high salaries on the materialistic things they so much adore. I think these hollywood types are so much like the politicians. Once they begin that life from out of the every day normal worker, they seem to forget what it’s like to have to struggle for everything you have.
Report Post »watchtheotherhand
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 11:04amYou wanna know why some of the wealthiest people in the country want “so called” increase taxes on the rich, which would necessarily include them? Think of it this way. They are already mega-wealthy to an absurd level. Currently others that own businesses and what not can become quite wealthy. No they don’t begin to approach the level of the mega-wealthy, but they wield enough influence that those who are meg-wealthy have there influence and power bases diluted, and this is currently an ongoing assault which historically as been quite an exclusive club. Therefor if they (the mega-wealthy) push for an increased tax on the rich they can decrease others ability to accumulate wealth to a significant degree and therefore gradually erode their degree of influence to shape policy and maintain dominance over others. Look at it this way. I will use extreme numbers to illustrate my point. take a person who is worth 10 million and one worth 10 billion. Lets say both have their “progressive style” tax of 75% (just to illustrate the point, you can pick any percentage). The millionaire ends up with what ………2.5 million left over (nothing to sneeze at but significant loss of over all wealth and therefore influence. The billionaire ends up with 2.5 billion. Even though you may think the ratio dollar to dollar has stayed the same you need to evaluate it in light of other factors. The progressive tax scale favors and helps concentrate wealth (not in dollar value but in influential power by limiting others expendable income that is most certainly maintained by the mega-wealthy). It occurs because those who are trying to accumulate wealth at a significant tax rate will never be able to achieve the influence of expendable income that those who already possess significant wealth. Therefore the mega-wealthy (although I am sure some are true believers in social justice) can actually ensure financial dominance through this type of system. Theirs is a strategy of actually protecting their wealth and survival of their dominance. Of course someone who still has 2,5 million lives well, I think you can see that the billionaire actually increases their influence when taxed more heavily because their expendable income remains significantly higher compared to other more ordinary wealthy individuals. It also creates a more dependent population on the redistribution of those tax increases which then again plays right into their ability to influence and exert dominance over larger groups of people all under the “heart tugging strings” of caring for the poor. Who would oppose that?? This has been some of the discussions that have occurred among the Bilderdergs. Some of the most wealthy influential people on the planet. Don’t believe me do your own research on Bilderberg meeting minutes !!!!!!!! If you think for a second that the mega-wealthy of this country and the world have a truly benevolent heart for the poor and down trodden then you have to ask youself how these people got to be some of the wealthiest in the world? They are not well intentioned. Of course they think they are but as CS Lewis has stated…………Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
Report Post »godreach
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 11:18amWell said. Snow!
Report Post »FormerLib
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 11:42amAt 9:27:
Report Post »Letterman: “you’re applauding my stupidity!”
Precisely.
old white guy
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 11:58amrush has been talking about lib feelings for a very long time now. i don’t care what they feel i want to know what they think or if they even do.
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on February 26, 2011 at 12:13pmletterman is so stupid he does not realize that if the government took evrey dime from the top 20percent of americans it would not pay government costs for six months. another point, corporations are made up of what? people. only people pay taxes and only people use the tax money.
Report Post »