PDA

View Full Version : Hannity: Eat Rice and Beans



DiabloViejo
05-01-2012, 01:16 AM
Sean Hannity: Americans aren't going to bed hungry, just eat rice and beans
Robert Sobel
Orlando Liberal Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/article/sean-hannity-americans-aren-t-going-to-bed-hungry-just-eat-rice-and-beans-1)

Fox News and their on air employees often say things that make Americans want to smash their head against a wall. While what they say on television is alarming, what they say outside of Fox News is sometimes even worse.

Fox News mainstay and staunch Republican. Sean Hannity, took to his radio show to field some phone calls from listeners. A listener called and noted that it was hard for average Americans to relate to Mitt Romney because of his mass amount of wealth and how he went about receiving it. Hannity went on the immediate defensive and stood by Romney until the listener asked a simple question: "When was the last time he went to bed, or woke up, hungry?." As New York Magazine reports, Hannity apparently took offense to the questions and his response was shocking.

"I don't believe people are going to bed hungry. ... For, instance I have friends of mine who eat rice and beans all the time. Beans protein, rice. Inexpensive. You can make a big pot of this for a week for negligible amounts of money and you can feed your whole family. Look, you should have vegetables and fruit in there as well, but if you need to survive you can survive off it. It's not ideal but you could get some cheap meat and throw in there as well for protein. There are ways to live really, really cheaply."

It's hard to imagine that a man who makes $10 million a year has friends who rely on rice and beans. The reason Hannity can relate to Romney is because they are in the same boat, a boat that they don't share with average, everyday working Americans. The majority of the wealth that Mitt Romney has is because if his time at Bain Capital, laying off workers and pocketing the net income. Mitt Romney and Sean Hannity have a lot in common, and it has nothing to do with working class Americans.

LWW
05-01-2012, 03:23 AM
You take great pride in licking the state spoon don't you.

DiabloViejo
05-01-2012, 03:31 AM
LOL! Not as much as you do in kissing elephant rump! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

LWW
05-01-2012, 03:44 AM
You can't wrap you head around the concept that someone can dislike the demokrooks with loving the republichickens can you?

I can lead your mind to knowledge, I can't make you think.

Qtec
05-01-2012, 03:49 AM
...but you only ever criticize the Demokrooks!


Q

DiabloViejo
05-01-2012, 03:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You can't wrap you head around the concept that someone can dislike the demokrooks with loving the republichickens can you?

I can lead your mind to knowledge, I can't make you think. </div></div>

Oh that's rich! You suck up to everything and anything the Repugnicants throw out and then you say I can't understand how fair minded you are! Please don't BS me! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

LWW
05-01-2012, 04:04 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...but you only ever criticize the Demokrooks!


Q </div></div>Untrue, what you are witnessing is that this forum is flooded with Obamatrons which I speak truth to ... and their collectivist heads explode.

I don't know of a single republichicken regular poster.

But, thanks for proving my statement.

DiabloViejo
05-01-2012, 05:30 AM
LOL!

Since you like to throw out Orwellian references:

"To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself -- that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word 'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink."

“The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth."

WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

Orwell, "1984"

Gayle in MD
05-01-2012, 05:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth."

</div></div>
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

That has got to be the best definition of Republicans and their supporters, that I have ever come across!

Thanks! I know I have read that, but I had forgotten where.

LWW
05-01-2012, 05:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DiabloViejo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL!

Since you like to throw out Orwellian references:

"To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget, whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself -- that was the ultimate subtlety; consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word 'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink."

“The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them....To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies - all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth."

WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.

Orwell, "1984" </div></div>

You have studied your orders well I see ... and are again miming me.

I had suspected you were incapable of independent thought ... But getting confirmation is always nice.

LWW
05-01-2012, 05:54 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...but you only ever criticize the Demokrooks!


Q </div></div>

You finally admit they are crooks.

BRAVO!

llotter
05-01-2012, 06:08 AM
Hannity makes more sense the The Moron and his wife living such a conspicuously lavish lifestyle while offering cake to the poor from the public teet.

LWW
05-01-2012, 06:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: llotter</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hannity makes more sense the The Moron and his wife living such a conspicuously lavish lifestyle while offering cake to the poor from the public teet. </div></div>

Don't you realize that they are your betters as our leftist brethren believe?

LWW
05-01-2012, 06:24 AM
What's your opinion of those who sail on personal yachts when the poor don't even usually own a rowboat?

Sev
05-01-2012, 06:26 AM
Talk about being taken out of context.

By the way its hard to imagine that Obama's brother lives in a hut in Africa.

LWW
05-01-2012, 06:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Talk about being taken out of context.

By the way its hard to imagine that Obama's brother lives in a hut in Africa. </div></div>Did he get an upgrade?

Last I heard was that he was living in a box.

Sev
05-01-2012, 06:31 AM
I believe your thinking of his uncle that scatted on the DWI charges.

DiabloViejo
05-01-2012, 06:33 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What's your opinion of those who sail on personal yachts when the poor don't even usually own a rowboat? </div></div>

As long as they made their money in a legal and ethical manner, pay their fair share of taxes, and are not trying to buy my government with bribes and "donations", I have no problem with the rich. So what is the point of your question?

eg8r
05-01-2012, 08:00 AM
Sounds like you are a fan of Romney.

eg8r

LWW
05-01-2012, 08:04 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sounds like you are a fan of Romney.

eg8r </div></div>

The doublethink is strong in him.

DiabloViejo
05-01-2012, 08:07 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sounds like you are a fan of Romney.

eg8r </div></div>

Not at all. There's those pesky Cayman Islands and Swiss accounts to avoid paying US taxes, and there's also the lack of ethics in his business dealings.

eg8r
05-01-2012, 08:14 AM
Those pesky accounts are legal and ethical. You just hate it when reality rains on your parade.

eg8r

DiabloViejo
05-01-2012, 09:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Those pesky accounts are legal and ethical. You just hate it when reality rains on your parade.

eg8r </div></div>

Legal? Perhaps. Ethical? No. Those accounts were set up for purposes of tax evasion. What does that say about someone who aspires to be President? Oh, yes I know you'll give him a pass cause he's not Obama and gosh darn it those rich folks deserve their foreign tax shelter scams ain't that right pardner?

Gayle in MD
05-01-2012, 09:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DiabloViejo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Those pesky accounts are legal and ethical. You just hate it when reality rains on your parade.

eg8r </div></div>

Legal? Perhaps. Ethical? No. Those accounts were set up for purposes of tax evasion. What does that say about someone who aspires to be President? Oh, yes I know you'll give him a pass cause he's not Obama and gosh darn it those rich folks deserve their foreign tax shelter scams ain't that right pardner? </div></div>

Ethical! BWA HA HA HA HA.

Without Conscience!


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

LWW
05-01-2012, 11:31 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: DiabloViejo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Those pesky accounts are legal and ethical. You just hate it when reality rains on your parade.

eg8r </div></div>

Legal? Perhaps. Ethical? No. Those accounts were set up for purposes of tax evasion. What does that say about someone who aspires to be President? Oh, yes I know you'll give him a pass cause he's not Obama and gosh darn it those rich folks deserve their foreign tax shelter scams ain't that right pardner? </div></div>

Where is your anger at Google and Apple and GE and GM?

What's that?

They support the regime so they get a pass?

What about Obama hiding billions overseas that he stole?

According to what sofa claims is a credible source, that is what happened.

What's that?

You would never question your god king?

Imagine that.

eg8r
05-01-2012, 11:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Legal? Perhaps. Ethical? No. </div></div>What is so unethical about making the most money possible for the shareholders in a completely legal way? People who take tax deductions are doing it for the purposes of tax evasion also.

As far as what that says about the person aspiring to be President, Obama has already proven he does not consider tax evasion to be that big of a deal so why would you all of a sudden think it is? OH yeah, because the guy that is legally evading taxes has an (R) after his name.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-01-2012, 01:29 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Legal? Perhaps. Ethical? No. </div></div>What is so unethical about making the most money possible for the shareholders in a completely legal way? People who take tax deductions are doing it for the purposes of tax evasion also.

As far as what that says about the person aspiring to be President, Obama has already proven he does not consider tax evasion to be that big of a deal so why would you all of a sudden think it is? OH yeah, because the guy that is legally evading taxes has an (R) after his name.

eg8r </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Obama has already proven he does not consider tax evasion to be that big of a deal </div></div>

I have not seen any evidence of that. How do you arrive at that conclusion?

G.

Soflasnapper
05-01-2012, 05:07 PM
SecTreasury Geithner did not pay some self-employment tax prior to his nomination to that post (although during a time he was President of the NY Federal Reserve Bank).

Geithner claimed it was an oversight, since he'd used TurboTax software to personally do his own taxes in the time period in question. However, TurboTax knows all about self-employment tax, and his failure to pay was widely perceived as willful evasion, instead of an oversight.

As is usually the case, the matter was handled as a civil, not a criminal, matter, Geithner paid the back due and owing taxes, the penalties and interest, got himself back in the IRS's good graces, and it didn't impede his nomination to his post.

The Clintons had a similar matter arise when they were in the Oval Office. A previous smallish under- or non-payment of taxes was discovered, although beyond the statute of limitations for collection (unless fraud is alleged, then there is no SOL). They paid the nominal tax anyway, and the triple-the-figure by then penalty and interest due.

In neither case was fraud or tax evasion charged by the government, and all these parties were treated in the customary way, which is to allow them to just make the payments and the extra payments due.

That is similar to all the domestics who were paid by various politicians or nominees in cash or check, but without payroll taxes withheld and matched. That is far more willful evasion in my view, but Clinton's two first women nominees for AG, Kimba Woods and Zoe Baird, both just simply filed the paperwork for the past due payroll taxes and paid the money, and no charges were brought. (Although their tax trouble prevented their nominations for AG from proceeding any further.)

Qtec
05-02-2012, 01:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">because the guy that is legally evading taxes </div></div>

You cannot legally <u>evade</u> taxes.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">1. To escape or avoid by cleverness or deceit </div></div>

Taking the deductions that everyone is entitled to is not tax evasion. That's normal.

What isn't normal, and could be called tax evasion [ although legal], is setting up 20 shell companies and who knows how many bank accounts overseas, JUST to take advantage of loopholes in the tax code so that you pay as little tax as possible.

There is a difference.
One is actively trying <u>by any means possible</u> to evade taxes, the other isn't.

Q

Gayle in MD
05-02-2012, 03:06 AM
Thank you very much.

G.

eg8r
05-02-2012, 09:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You cannot legally evade taxes.
</div></div>Sure you can, you are just stupid.<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
e·vade

[ i váyd ]


1.cleverly escape somebody or something: to escape or avoid somebody or something, usually by ingenuity or guile
2.avoid something unpleasant: to avoid doing something unpleasant, especially something that is a moral or legal obligation
3.give indirect response: to avoid dealing with or responding directly to something
</div></div>Now I know that common sense is not even in your vocabulary and as it appears you do not comprehend evade either. However, let's see if we can clear this up for you. By "legally" I mean they are following the law and using it to avoid paying the tax. Comprende? I doubt it. It is impossible to fix stupid and you have your picture next to the definition.

eg8r

eg8r
05-02-2012, 09:27 AM
I arrived at the conclusion when he hired a tax cheat to run the IRS. Sure he fixed the problems but only because he was in the spotlight. Obama's appointees did not stop there though.

eg8r

eg8r
05-02-2012, 09:29 AM
Yep Geithner was the tax evader. Just because the government let him off hook doesn't mean he did not do the crime. This is the same as OJ where the government let him off the hook in his criminal case but we all know he still killed them.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-02-2012, 10:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I arrived at the conclusion when he hired a tax cheat to run the IRS. Sure he fixed the problems but only because he was in the spotlight. Obama's appointees did not stop there though.

eg8r </div></div>

More BS spin, I see.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Exposed brick, working fireplaces and an illicit tax break.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The Baltimore Sun reports that former first daughter Jenna Bush Hager and her husband Henry Hager are getting a small owner-occupant property tax credit for their Baltimore home, even though the couple lives in New York and rents out their 2,000 square foot, 1880s townhouse near Federal Hill. </span>
As illicit tax credits go, this one is small: $296.40 on "a tax bill approaching $9,000," according to the Sun.

The Sun reports that Henry Hager acknowledges the couple should not be getting the credit:

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>"That is an honest mistake on my part," said Hager, adding that he called the state assessments agency Monday trying to set things right. "I wasn't familiar enough, quite frankly, with the tax credit and its existence. I'll repay whatever I owe."
Hager was familiar enough with the credit to get it reinstated after the city took it away in December 2010 when the couple moved to New York. </span>The house on S. Charles Street is "within a few blocks of Baltimore’s best frat-party-style nightlife, including such notable bars as Ropewalk, MaGerk’s, Muggsy’s, Ryleigh’s, and the 8×10" according to The Daily Record.
</div></div>

I suppose it's a mistake when it a rightie, but proof of corruption is it is a Dem.

Did you think the president knew everything about every tax form that anyone he appointed had sent into the IRS?

This is no comparison anyway, to a person like Mit Romney, who threw people out of work left and right, while he was hiding his money all over the world, millions upon millions!

He's a total JOKE! She's as bad as he is.

Sick dog freezing on the roof of the car for six hours, and she thinks it's funny?

Disgusting.

G.

eg8r
05-02-2012, 11:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">More BS spin, I see.
</div></div>I did not spin any BS and sofla said the same thing. Get your head out of your rear.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
05-02-2012, 12:03 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">More BS spin, I see.
</div></div>I did not spin any BS and sofla said the same thing. Get your head out of your rear.

eg8r </div></div>

First of all, no, Sofla did not say the same thing, at all.

For someone who is always telling others that they don't understand the subject, you're reading skills are wanting, to say the least. You either don't get the subject, inject completely irrational analogies into the discussion, add information not linked in any way, or twist what has been written beyond recognition.

Additionally, don't bother answering. You're juvenile trash language is offensive.

G.

eg8r
05-02-2012, 02:57 PM
Sure he did. He said the guy was cheating his taxes till it came to light and he had to fix the problem or not take the position Obama was offering him. What is it about common sense that is giving you such a hard time?

eg8r