Comments by "Orwellian Horseman of the Apocalypse" (@DennisMoore664) on "David Pakman Show" channel.

  1. 103
  2. 96
  3. 86
  4. 48
  5. 41
  6. 29
  7. 23
  8. 19
  9. 19
  10. 17
  11. 16
  12. 13
  13. 12
  14. 11
  15. 9
  16. 9
  17. 8
  18. 8
  19. 8
  20. 8
  21. 8
  22. 8
  23. 7
  24. 7
  25. 7
  26. 6
  27. 6
  28. 5
  29. 5
  30. 5
  31. 4
  32. 4
  33. 4
  34. 4
  35. 4
  36. 4
  37. 4
  38. 4
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41.  @MegaJared2  What kind of store are you running in a town of only 200 people? Why do you have three people only working part-time? I'm guessing so you can avoid being responsible for or paying for any of the benefits being a full-time employee brings, but that's because I'm a cynical asshole. I guess this hypothetical business owner doesn't have to worry about how people making around 600 to 900 dollars a month (after 25% is taken out for taxes - you're not paying them off the books are you?) will pay for health insurance or any of the other expenses of life and they should all be grateful for the scraps you can thrown them. Or are these just supposed to be supplementary forms of income to some other job in your town of 200 people? You see, you're basically justifying the minor exploitation of three people in order to avoid doing right by any of them. That's shit thing to do people and is the kind of business that decimates communities and leaves them with a population base of 200 people. And another town bites the dust as the kids move away as quickly as they can to better jobs and more exciting lives in the cities. Drug dealers and meth cooks and criminals move into the abandoned homes of dead people with no relatives to take care of the mostly worthless property in a largely abandoned town, all armed to the teeth. No worries though, big ag corps will eventually be given the fallow land to grow GMO crops to feed the big cities and exploding world population once all you rural folk die off and get murdered to death by roving bands of marauding Mobile Homeless. ("The Mobile Homeless" might be a new term - if so DIBS! We're going to see a hell of a lot more of it as rent keeps going up)
    3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. 3
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 2
  50. 2
  51. 2
  52. 2
  53. 2
  54. 2
  55. 2
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 1
  61. 1
  62. 1
  63. 1
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1
  69. 1
  70. 1
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. It's easy to pigeon-hole the Right as people who can't see past the label of Democrat or Liberal to any message because after decades of having religious and political leaders and media influencers very effectively paint anyone not with them as against them and their words and ideas might as well be from the Devil himself. Anyone not with them, but especially the self-identified Left, are an enemy and not just wrong but often bad or wicked as well. They treat the ideas of any Democrat the way most of us treat proselytizing Mormons, Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses - politely close the door as quickly as you can and be amazed that anyone could believe something so silly. There are plenty of people on the Left who are guilty of being equally closed minded, but the Right has been more successful at unifying this attitude probably due in some part to the more cohesive conservative members natures where as trying to get the Left unified is like herding cats. It's part of the reason having a viable third AND fourth party would be so useful, but the status quo does not want that. We can have 31 flavors of ice cream but gotta keep the "choice" about the way we're governed and the group we'll be governed by limited to a simple binary that just goes back and forth and accomplishes very little. My side, your side, my side, your side. Anything more and people might start using their frelling brains for important things like addressing social inequality in general and specifically wealth inequality, and limiting the influence of monied individuals and corporations in government and society. Can't have that. It might lead to people getting along and actually solving problems.
    1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117. 1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1