Taxes and Candidates?

[DSTCHAOS]

This is like watching the original The Wicker Man.

If you haven't seen it, you missed an interesting 1970s acid trip.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by DGTess

Well, then you didn't read the part that said I'd probably be helped by some of these "leveling" policies. They feel dishonest to me. I prefer to know I earned my way - and if I have to work harder than the next guy to do so, so be it.

This is a very simplistic and individualistic way of looking at the social world. Like you're an example of who introductory-level textbooks are made for.

It's as if you think that you have complete control over everything. As if people will always announce "hey, we're about to discriminate against you right now" or "hey, we're about to level the playing field right now" and you'll be able to check "accept" or "decline." You don't really know whether your hard work is being rewarded solely based on your qualifications and your hard work. You can only assume based on your limited ability to gauge your input: outcome ratio.

Women and racial and ethnic minorities have always wanted to earn our way and we've always known that meant we would have to work harder to get on the same level or above. You're not introducing a new concept there.

However, the fact of the matter is that these leveling policies are necessary because there are millions of people who will work their butts off and still be told (or know without having been told) "women can't do this" or "blacks can't do that" or "you're poor, have worked hard all of your life, and tried to save money but there is no hope for getting out of poverty."

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Haha, trying to say I went a little overboard in my response...

Oh no. You were spot on . . . and polite at the same time.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

Hell, I grew up much poorer than some of you!

So, I do not agree with a candidate then I am racist?

I do have not have the spelling ajendas or typing skills then I am wrong and some decide they want to make fun of me in their snarky comments as they do to new members.

So DSTCHOAS, does this make you and Sunsuert feel and be a better person?

Your belittleing of people on G C show the type of people you really are!

Oh, prove me wrong and show me how much you and others are so much better?

I feel that some of you have ruined G C with your snarky and small mined comments! How may people have you run off?

Oh, I am sure I will catch hell about this post, but you know what I do not care!

You do it to yourselves.

Oh, did I spell everything to everyones expectations?

I'll have what he's drinking.

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I would just like to ask people to not hold Tom's posts against John McCain. Thank you.

Do you really think this little of the average voter?

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Oh no. You were spot on . . . and polite at the same time.

Totally agree, great post, KSigkid.

And this:

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Your outrage is misplaced, even in C-Land.

is FTW.

(the KSigs are on FIRE!)

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

Totally agree, great post, KSigkid.

And this:

is FTW.

(the KSigs are on FIRE!)

Haha - that's because we're pledge brothers. We just happen to think on the save wavelength on a lot of things...

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

Do you really think this little of the average voter?

It was primarily a joke in this thread, but . . .

I think sometimes people are willing to assume that the people who support the other person are idiots.

And, yeah, I'm sometimes afraid that it runs backwards too and that a perception that idiots support a candidate affects the perception of the candidate.

I'm not sure how much the average voter really considers issues as opposed to voting on self-perception and perception of candidates. If this weren't the case, why do we get crappy news stories about the music candidates listen to? There's an attempt to show superficially what kind of person the candidate is, and apparently we're supposed to care.

Not that the average voter is incapable of weighing issues, but just that sometimes people don't bother.

ETA: I realize there's a distinction between elements that a candidate chooses for himself or herself and the idiots who latch on, but I'm not sure that candidates aren't kind of held responsible for their supporters, even when the supporters aren't serving in an officially endorsed view.

EATA: If you were "branding" a candidate, would you want Earp in the picture? Just saying.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Haha - that's because we're pledge brothers. We just happen to think on the save wavelength on a lot of things...

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Ummm...yes.

I also would have accepted Dogfish Head IPA, Old Burnside Brewing Company, Rogue Ale, and Chimay...

[kddani]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

But to belittle others is supposedly correct.?
...

If You A--w----s....

Well we know your opinion on it...

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

It was primarily a joke in this thread, but . . .

I think sometimes people are willing to assume that the people who support the other person are idiots.

And, yeah, I'm sometimes afraid that it runs backwards too and that a perception that idiots support a candidate affects the perception of the candidate.

I'm not sure how much the average voter really considers issues as opposed to voting on self-perception and perception of candidates. If this weren't the case, why do we get crappy news stories about the music candidates listen to? There's an attempt to show superficially what kind of person the candidate is, and apparently we're supposed to care.

Not that the average voter is incapable of weighing issues, but just that sometimes people don't bother.

ETA: I realize there's a distinction between elements that a candidate chooses for himself or herself and the idiots who latch on, but I'm not sure that candidates aren't kind of held responsible for their supporters, even when the supporters aren't serving in an officially endorsed view.

EATA: If you were "branding" a candidate, would you want Earp in the picture? Just saying.

I like to think of Tom Earp is the Ann Coulter for bitter older men. Just a lot of babble in the background from someone who doesn't even know what they are saying.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

I like to think of Tom Earp is the Ann Coulter for bitter older men. Just a lot of babble in the background from someone who doesn't even know what they are saying.

Well played.

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by GeekyPenguin

I like to think of Tom Earp is the Ann Coulter for bitter older men. Just a lot of babble in the background from someone who doesn't even know what they are saying.

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Well played.

Yes, but now I picture Earp in an inappropriately slinky dress and bad makeup. Thanks for the visual.

[Tom Earp]

LOL, while you are making fun of me, then maybe you will leave other people alone!

Old, yes, having my own thoughts, yes.

So, does that make any others better or worse?

Funny, I see others attacking and not getting banned, why is this?

I just guess I don't kiss enough swell people.