Pages

Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Save rich people first?

Right-wing yahoo Neal Boortz believes it is a priority to save rich people rather than poor people if faced with another disaster. He says:
who do I want to save first? The rich. Save the poor first. Then, when everything's over, where are you gonna go for a job?

He goes on...
Well, hell, yes, we should save the rich people first. You know, they're the ones that are responsible for this prosperity.

I guess the people who work at jobs aren't important, it's the guys who play golf and pay other people to do work for them who produce the things we need and enjoy in our economy. Where would a boss be without workers? How many cars are built by the shareholders or CEO of Ford? How can someone actually see production this way? It's like saying that if you have a choice between saving the food factory or the food farms, you should choose the factory because it makes all the food.

If the poor could eat pomposity, they'd never go hungry in the good ol' US of A.

At least people can see what the true beliefs of these greedy b*stards really are.

Anyone else notice class is becoming a topic for discussion again?

Thanks to Court Fool for this.

2 comments:

Mr. E said...

I'm w/ you Jenny. I've been nosing about your blog (I found it via a link from your post @ Jack Clark's blog (the Podcast guy). I like what I see. It's nice to know that there are other sane people around. Too bad you can't vote in this country (I see that u r in Canada). We sure could've used you. At least Hawai'i where I live is solidly "blue". ;)

Save rich people first. "...hell, yes" he says. Unbelieveable. Sometimes those righties really, REALLY piss me off!

Larry Gambone said...

All I can say is no rich SOB better try getting in my lifeboat! If the rich are so damned important why do they get so upset when their workers go on strike? After all, they should be able to do everything with ease, being of a "superior" nature.