User Profile: Balthazor

Balthazor

Member Since: March 04, 2011

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [1] April 24, 2015 at 5:09pm

    “Because the amounts from corporate interests dwarf those from unions. Another swing and a miss…”

    You may think so, but for those who aren’t reality-impaired, the top political donors are and have long been the labor unions.

    https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php

    “OpenSecrets.org tallied the top donors in federal elections between 1989 and 2014. Koch Industries — privately owned by the Evil Koch Bros — is on the list, to be sure, but doesn’t appear until the 59th slot, with $18 million in donations, 90 percent of which went to Republicans.

    So who occupies the 58 spots ahead of the Evil Koch Bros? Six of the top 10 are … wait for it … unions. They gave more than $278 million, with most of it going to Democrats.

    These are familiar names: AFSCME ($60.6 million), NEA ($53.5 million), IBEW ($44.4 million), UAW ($41.6 million), Carpenters & Joiners ($39.2 million) and SEIU ($38.3 million).

    In other words, the six biggest union donors in American politics gave 15 times more to mostly Democrats than the Evil Koch Bros.”

    But that aside, if indeed your concern is over the influence of corporate interests, how come I never hear any liberals whining about the millions that companies like Apple or Time Warner contribute to Democrats? Are those “good” companies, as opposed to the “evil” companies that donate to Republicans?

  • [13] April 24, 2015 at 4:26pm

    “In 60% of the households in this country, women are the major breadwinners. That means they are either the sole provider or the better provider.” – DesertRose1960

    If this is true, then it sure sounds to me like if we wanted everything to be equal and fair we’d need employers to either start firing women or paying them less.

  • [1] April 24, 2015 at 4:08pm

    Wow, to use “girls” as a derogatory term sure seems awfully sexist of you.

  • [2] April 24, 2015 at 4:07pm

    Ok ok, here’s another one. You liberals shriek about how the millions of dollars contributed to Republican candidates by the Koch brothers will poison the political process and destroy our democracy, but are oddly silent about the hundreds of millions of dollars contributed to Democratic candidates by the labor unions.

    Responses (2) +
  • [12] April 24, 2015 at 3:45pm

    Where’s the love for True Lies? That movie was awesome!

    Responses (2) +
  • [2] April 24, 2015 at 3:29pm

    Here, I’ll quote you directly:

    “In 60% of the households in this country, women are the major breadwinners. That means they are either the sole provider or the better provider.” – DesertRose1960

    If this is true, then it sure sounds to me like if we wanted everything to be equal and fair we’d need employers to either start firing women or paying them less.

  • [4] April 24, 2015 at 3:20pm

    “It was the nature of those orders, not the fact of them.”

    Oh that’s funny! Thanks, I’ve been having a rough day so far and really needed that laugh.

  • [13] April 24, 2015 at 3:06pm

    Barack Obma was nominally qualified to be President, but he was personally unfit for the office, not because of his qualifications but because he had NO UNDERSTANDING of his duties to the office or the country. If Barack Obama had been white, he would never have been considered for a nano-second. Barack Obama embarrassed himself repeatedly with his lack of understanding of the Constitution or the American Government.

    I bet you think I’m a racist now.

  • [10] April 24, 2015 at 3:00pm

    Are you suggesting that 100% of women are unhappy? And could you please point out exactly where Dougral Supports Israel said or even implied that women should go back to the kitchen and keep quiet?

  • [2] April 24, 2015 at 2:58pm

    Oh, and as to this wage gap, didn’t you just say below that 60% of households have the woman as the major breadwinner? How can you toss out a number like that and yet still be whining about a wage gap?

  • [3] April 24, 2015 at 2:53pm

    Well, you did make an ad hominem attack, and while I did indeed call Hillary a feminist hag, I also responded to the substance of her argument, which isn’t really the point of an ad hominem attack. I called her a feminist hag because I think she is a feminist hag. Simple as that.

    Secondly, where exactly did I imply that women deserved to be treated as second class citizens? Show me where I even came close to saying that? See, you’re just tossing out liberal talking points and bumper sticker slogans. Nowhere did I say that ONLY women should stay home with the kids, I said that women have been told a big lie that they can have a career and a family and not see either suffer.

    And you can have whatever pipe dreams you want about a better work-home life balance, but we live in the real world, and in the real world the person who’s willing to work 40 hours a week instead of 30 or 20 is going to be the one who succeeds in the work force. That’s not sexist, that’s just reality. We’d also all be better off if the sky rained gold, but it doesn’t.

  • [16] April 24, 2015 at 2:30pm

    First of all, if your numbers are right and 60% of households have women as the major breadwinners, then WHAT THE HELL IS ARE ALL THESE FEMINIST HAGS WHINING ABOUT!!!

    Second of all, I have absolutely no problem with men staying at home to take care of the kids. Hell, I’d LOVE to be a stay at home dad. But I’m not so stupid as to think that I can be constantly leaving work to deal with sick kids or school functions and yet still get the same raises and promotions as someone who’s always at work and devotes 100% of themselves to their jobs. If that person gets a better raise than me, I can understand why. I don’t run around crying about how unfair it is or blaming some convenient “ism” for the consequences of my own choices.

  • [9] April 24, 2015 at 2:24pm

    Ironically, this post of yours is itself an ad hominem attack. I’ll just insist that everyone who disagrees with me is a racist sexist bigot who can be summarily dismissed, leaving me the winner of the argument! Yay me!

    And ageist? Really? That’s grasping at straws, even for you.

    Responses (4) +
  • [6] April 24, 2015 at 2:19pm

    You know, if you liberals just quit pouting and stomping your feet about everything Bush says or doesn’t say, does or doesn’t do, and declaring everything “unconstitutional” there really wouldn’t be any division. But if you stamp your feet and insist it’s all his fault, you make it happen.

  • [11] April 24, 2015 at 2:11pm

    I just got a mental image of Hillary in the midst of a landslide. One with big rolling, grinding boulders. That’s a prediction I could really get behind.

  • [3] April 24, 2015 at 2:01pm

    You’re right, selective outrage is the height of hypocrisy. Kinda like when the liberals would go absolutely apeshit any time Bush issued an executive order, but now suddenly executive orders are the greatest thing since sliced bread.

    Responses (3) +
  • [3] April 24, 2015 at 1:59pm

    I’m sure the judge is probably correct, however with all the unconstitutional things this president has done, there’s little chance of me losing even a nanosecond of sleep over this one.

  • [28] April 24, 2015 at 1:53pm

    But when liberals trash Sarah Palin and insist she lacks qualifications for the vice presidency, that’s not sexist, that’s not a War on Women, is it? That’s DIFFERENT.

  • [25] April 24, 2015 at 1:50pm

    “Unfair work schedules”.

    Translation: women want to be able to come and go as they please without it negatively impacting their career in any way.

    Women have been told a big lie, which is that they can have it all. They can have both a career and have a family and neither of them will suffer. Unfortunately reality says otherwise. One cannot split their time, attention, and energy between work and family without one or the other, or both, receiving less. You just can’t divide 100% by 2 and have it still equal 100%. If your attention is focused on your career, your family will suffer. If your attention is focused on your family, your career will suffer. That’s just how the world works.

    But to feminist hags like Shrillary, this is deemed “unfair.” It’s unfair that 100% divided by 2 doesn’t equal 100%. It’s unfair that women can’t be in two places at once. It’s unfair that women can’t spend half the work week at home with the kids but still get paid for a full work week, or get the same raises and promotions as people who work a full week and focus 100% of their attention on their careers.

    And naturally, the cause of all this horrible unfairness is evil sexist men.

    If women really want respect and equality in the workplace, they need to stop being the whining victims. Nobody will ever respect a whining victim.

    Responses (3) +
  • [3] April 24, 2015 at 10:17am

    Well so is @sshole, but the easiest way to not be called an @sshole is to not be an @sshole. Easy peasy.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love