HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » One has to ask, why is it...

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 06:13 PM

One has to ask, why is it wrong for Romney to be rich while democrats built their modern...

identity on the very wealthy families of Roosevelt and Kennedy.

It's very simple, because they had something that Romney will never have, a deep care for the weakest among us.

Romney is the worst kind of capitalist, he destroys to make his money while the Roosevelt's and Kennedy's built and then established a culture of personal sacrifice and dedicated public service in their progeny.

No one in the US is jealous of success, that is our culture. But we celebrate success to those who give back.

8 replies, 1082 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
Reply One has to ask, why is it wrong for Romney to be rich while democrats built their modern... (Original post)
WCGreen Aug 2012 OP
Rex Aug 2012 #1
corkhead Aug 2012 #2
chowder66 Aug 2012 #3
Ilsa Aug 2012 #4
haele Aug 2012 #5
Roselma Aug 2012 #6
trof Aug 2012 #7
Tarheel_Dem Aug 2012 #8

Response to WCGreen (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 06:15 PM

1. Oh come on now, RMoney has probably donated millions to

bawhahahaha...sorry I cannot finish, that one is too hard to type without LOL.

RMoney is a soulless creature bent on destroying the middle class...oh and he has a lot of money too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rex (Reply #1)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 06:24 PM

2. I don't think that is his objective, to destroy the middle class

I just think he, like many greedy sociopaths like him, feel that the assets of others are theirs for the taking as long as they do it in a way that they don't end up in jail. It's nothing personal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WCGreen (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 07:01 PM

3. This! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WCGreen (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 07:09 PM

4. It's not that I dislike RMoney for his wealth.

I dislike him him for his greed and the damage his greedy policies could cause the planet and the poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WCGreen (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 07:14 PM

5. Not wrong to be rich. Wrong to be a pirate.

Romney's business model was to be a pirate rather than an investor. Corporate raiding under the guise of "Venture Capitalism". Instead of rebuilding or actually being part of saving a business that might have run into trouble, his business told the struggling company to "trust them", then stripped the assets and sold them off for the most profit that could be gotten from them. "Leveraging Bankruptcy", I think he called it.

It sure helps the few people on top, but does very little for the workforce or the community he just had a major hand in destroying. And his company just walked away instead of putting something back in place for those stuck losing everything.

The Kennedys and the Roosevelts understood (for the most part) that they were part of a community instead of just a privileged family or a wealthy corporation. They may have gotten some (heck, most)of their gains by being parasites, but they don't just live in a rarefied atmosphere far above the hard working little people they made money off of.

Haele

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WCGreen (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 07:42 PM

6. Are the Roosevelts and Kennedys complaining about their taxes?

I truly don't know the answer to that. I don't remember hearing ANY elected Democrat complain about taxes. Maybe that is the difference. Maybe wealthy Democrats aren't whining that they might have to pay their fair share.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WCGreen (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 07:52 PM

7. Patricians and noblesse oblige:

The word "patrician" is derived from the Latin word patricius (plural patricii), which comes from patrēs, the plural of the Latin word pater (father). Pater was one of the terms applied to the original members of the Roman Senate. The word comes down in English as "patrician" from the Middle English patricion, from the Old French patrician. In modern English, the word patrician is generally used to denote a member of the upper class, often with connotations of inherited wealth, elitism, and a sense of noblesse oblige.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patrician_%28ancient_Rome%29

"Noblesse oblige" is generally used to imply that with wealth, power and prestige come responsibilities. The phrase is sometimes used derisively, in the sense of condescending or hypocritical social responsibility. In American English especially, the term is sometimes applied more broadly to suggest a general obligation for the more fortunate to help the less fortunate.

In ethical discussion, it is sometimes used to summarize a moral economy wherein privilege must be balanced by duty towards those who lack such privilege or who cannot perform such duty. Finally, it has been used recently primarily to refer to public responsibilities of the rich, famous and powerful, notably to provide good examples of behaviour or to exceed minimal standards of decency.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noblesse_oblige

And that sums up the Roosevelts and Kennedys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WCGreen (Original post)

Thu Aug 2, 2012, 07:53 PM

8. Exactly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread