The Top 20 Political “Heavy Hitters” Lean Democrat
17th August 2011
I guess that’s why the Republicans are The Party of the Rich … people like AlGore – 0h, wait – well, then, the Rockefellers – oh, wait – then maybe Warren Buffett or Bill Gates – oh, wait….
Rich people don’t get rich by wasting their money. So what are these ‘heavy hitters’ getting for their money? Hmmm?
And … oh, look … more than half are labor unions. But, but, but … labor unions claim that labor is getting hammered; where does all that money come from? Hmmmm?
August 17th, 2011 at 10:03
Just a small point, but at least six of those listed actually lean Republican.
And I’m surprised the AMA leans Republican rather than Democrat. After all, they’re just a doctor’s union. Maybe they didn’t get the memo…
August 17th, 2011 at 10:04
Mybad. I misread the data. These are the heavy hitters, not just the Democratic heavy hitters. Got it.
August 17th, 2011 at 10:09
“Rich people don’t get rich by wasting their money.” But I see no individuals listed, just organizations.
So you’re saying that rich organizations don’t get rich by wasting their money?
Yet you’ve been preaching for years that unions ARE a waste of money.
I’m confused. Either you’re for people getting rich (as in the Warren Buffett tirade) or you’re against people getting rich (as in this thread).
Which is it, really?
August 17th, 2011 at 10:39
Dennis, please cite the quote in this thread where anybody said they were against people getting rich. I can’t find it.
August 17th, 2011 at 11:01
The facts in the story don’t matter, Jay. The only thing that matters is how Dennis feels it.
Another victim of the education system….
August 17th, 2011 at 12:29
It’s not a direct quote, it’s rather the implication in the statement: “Rich people don’t become rich by wasting their money.”
It seems to be saying that rich people–or rich organizations, in this case–only become and stay rich by virtue of buying influence, chicanery, and hypocrisy.
That seems a rather negative and cynical viewpoint from someone assumes the mantle of championing any who seek to become rich, including himself.
So I just wanted clarification: Is being a rich person a good thing, or a bad thing? Are rich people to be admired and emulated, or villified and excoriated?
If the former, it’s difficult to understand the vituperation being heaped in other threads upon the heads of Buffett, Gates, Gore, and their fellow members in the Rich Club. If the latter, it seems to be a view taken entire from the “progressive” platform who allegedly champion the poor at the expense of the rich.
(And pay no attention to RealRick; he never lets facts interfere with his preconceptions.)
August 17th, 2011 at 13:06
“It’s not a direct quote, it’s rather the implication in the statement: ‘Rich people don’t become rich by wasting their money.’
It seems to be saying that rich people–or rich organizations, in this case–only become and stay rich by virtue of buying influence, chicanery, and hypocrisy.”
Beware of passive constructions: “It seems to be saying…” It does not say this, and cannot be fairly interpreted this way.
Since they don’t tend to waste money, it means that they must think the donations they are making are valuable to them.
August 17th, 2011 at 13:09
“So I just wanted clarification: Is being a rich person a good thing, or a bad thing? Are rich people to be admired and emulated, or villified and excoriated?”
Neither of course. It’s better to be rich than to be poor; nonetheless, there are admirable rich people and rich people who deserve to be excoriated.
Stop trying to make our statements more general than they actually are, and claim we have said all people in a single class must be good, or bad. We are conservatives; we don’t do class warfare.
August 17th, 2011 at 13:18
“We are conservatives; we don’t do class warfare.” If you’ll pardon the expression, that’s horseshit.
The Poor are your enemy; they are invariably lazy, stupid, or both, and want to take your money so they don’t have to work for anything.
“Liberals” and “Progressives” are your enemy; they cynically pander to the Poor in the hopes of enriching themselves with either money or power or both, at the expense of the hard-working, frugal conservatives.
Gays are your enemy because…well…I can’t see why. But they are pilloried on a regular basis by the conservative pundits, so I have to think they’ve pissed you off somehow.
Those are three “classes” of people I can think of off the top of my head, and they are your enemies–or at least one can safely conclude that from reading what is written about them here.
And I make no claims concerning what you’ve said or haven’t said, I was asking a question. Thanks for your thoughts on the matter. I’d ask a few follow-ups, but your obvious defensiveness tells me that it’s a sore point, so I won’t pursue it.
August 17th, 2011 at 13:53
“The Poor” are not the enemies of conservatives. In fact, many conservatives are poor. The “enemy”, as such, is the Entitlement Class; those who have been brought up to believe that the world owes them a living. There are motivated people to immigrate to this country and within a generation or two are doing well. Yet we have parts of the country where large segments never get out of poverty. The Democratic Party encourages this as these people become their vote puppets.
Gays are not “pilloried… by conservative pundits” for being gay. The objection is to any group that decides the rules should be re-written in order to cater to their whims. Conservatives also object to the vicious attacks launched against anyone who dares to disagree with any special interest group.
“Progressives” are, legitimately, an enemy of conservatives. This country was founded by people who looked back through history at what systems were both fair and worked. Progressives seek to impose socialism (which doesn’t work) and they assume that any objection is raised by those less intelligent or educated than themselves.
August 17th, 2011 at 14:28
But do you, RealRick, think that being rich is a good thing, or a bad thing?
I’ve already heard what Jay has to say on the matter. Now I’m curious how your thinking runs.
August 18th, 2011 at 11:55
I don’t think you’ll find many people who think that having less money is a good thing. I would certainly welcome a surplus.
Money is only one measure of a person’s life. It does not necessarily mean that one is happier or has a fulfilled life.
There are certainly those who inherit money (Hey, if you could choose your parents, my Daddy’s name would be Bill Gates!), but most wealthy people I’ve met worked their asses off to get to that point. Unlike the Left, I’m not jealous of their wealth, nor do I think they should be punished for having it. The Left sees a rich person buying a yacht and rages at the extravagance. I see that yacht as providing paychecks to the guys who made and transported it.
Being poor sucks – pretty much universally. Yet I know people who don’t have a pot to piss in that live happy lives outside the rat race. I actually am a bit jealous of them. Mind you, the folks I’m talking about are not part of the Entitlement Class; they just live honestly and simply. Nobody in the Entitlement Class is ever happy. They have no self-satisfaction for what they contribute to the world and they can never get enough from the world to feel sated.