Just Like A Libtard. Chant Pay Your Fair Share but Just Don't Tax Me Anymore!

Serena Williams: I Don't Live in Paris Because of the New 75% Income Tax Rate

By Noel Sheppard | August 23, 2013 | 11:48

As NewsBusters reported in June, tennis star Serena Williams thinks France's top 75 percent income tax rate "doesn't seem legal."

On the CBS Late Show Thursday, Williams took her criticism further telling host David Letterman that although she loves the city and spends a great deal of her time there, "I don't live in Paris. You know, they have that new tax rule which is like 75" (video follows with commentary):

So Williams won't live in Paris because of the taxes, but she would have voted for the tax-hiking Barack Obama in 2008 if her religious beliefs didn't prevent her from participating in elections.

As I've said for years, it takes a lot of rationalizations to be a liberal these days.

As I've said for years, it takes a lot of rationalizations to be a liberal these days. Originally Posted by therock18

Didn't know you've been talking that long, but I'll take your word for it because I'm such a nice and civil guy. It probably does take some rationalizations to be a liberal/progressive these days because in politics and the social sciences we never have all the data to take totally logical positions. Fortunately for us we are always willing to look at new facts and data and listen to others in order to improve those positions. BTW, no video and "75"" what's that all about? Oh, she does look fine though.

At least it doesn't take the complete and utter rank hypocrisy that it takes to be a ConTard or a TeaTard these days, Mr RockForBrains. Apologies to all my fellow proud and honorable LibTards for ignoring the cardinal rule of, "Don't poke the trolls". Sigh.

How do YOU rationalize being against pretty much everything you were for a mere decade ago (like voting rights, civil rights, spying on Americans, universal healthcare, stimulus funding, education, contraception, gun control, separation of church and state and, yes, I'd even dare to say democracy)?

I can show you well respected and even revered Republicans, presidents in many cases who publicly were for all of these positions ten, twenty and even 150 years ago while the party that bears the same name, "Republicans" now takes the contrary position.

My favorite was Richard Nixon's (a known Kenyan Muslim socialist) message to Congress calling for universal healthcare for all Americans - http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stor...-proposal.aspx

Nixon, Eisenhower, Roosevelt (Teddy of course) Lincoln and even Reagan would be called RINOs (probably the least of what they would be called) in today's totally reactionary Republican party for espousing most of their positions and run out on a rail. It's just nuts IMHO to be against almost everything the party stood for over 150 years and still call themselves Republicans!

Your turn! hehehehe

I'm not such a nice or civil guy, like Aus, and I'll come right out and say that you are a fucking idiot. And, you pretty much confirm that with just about everything you post up on the board.

I'm not such a nice or civil guy, like Aus, and I'll come right out and say that you are a fucking idiot. And, you pretty much confirm that with just about everything you post up on the board. Originally Posted by timpage

Awww, shucks, you made me blush. Isn't this week be kind to idiots week? Or was that next week?

You do know that by definition, just about exactly half the population is below average intelligence and someone has to be in that bottom percentage after all. It wasn't Rockhead's fault his mom huffed leaded gasoline and ate tunafish sammich's three times a day when he was in utero

Didn't know you've been talking that long, but I'll take your word for it because I'm such a nice and civil guy. It probably does take some rationalizations to be a liberal/progressive these days because in politics and the social sciences we never have all the data to take totally logical positions. Fortunately for us we are always willing to look at new facts and data and listen to others in order to improve those positions. BTW, no video and "75"" what's that all about? Oh, she does look fine though.

At least it doesn't take the complete and utter rank hypocrisy that it takes to be a ConTard or a TeaTard these days, Mr RockForBrains. Apologies to all my fellow proud and honorable LibTards for ignoring the cardinal rule of, "Don't poke the trolls". Sigh.

How do YOU rationalize being against pretty much everything you were for a mere decade ago (like voting rights, civil rights, spying on Americans, universal healthcare, stimulus funding, education, contraception, gun control, separation of church and state and, yes, I'd even dare to say democracy)?

I can show you well respected and even revered Republicans, presidents in many cases who publicly were for all of these positions ten, twenty and even 150 years ago while the party that bears the same name, "Republicans" now takes the contrary position.

My favorite was Richard Nixon's (a known Kenyan Muslim socialist) message to Congress calling for universal healthcare for all Americans - http://www.kaiserhealthnews.org/stor...-proposal.aspx

Nixon, Eisenhower, Roosevelt (Teddy of course) Lincoln and even Reagan would be called RINOs (probably the least of what they would be called) in today's totally reactionary Republican party for espousing most of their positions and run out on a rail. It's just nuts IMHO to be against almost everything the party stood for over 150 years and still call themselves Republicans!

Your turn! hehehehe
Originally Posted by austxjr

Things change once you get 17 trillion in the hole.

How do YOU rationalize being against pretty much everything you were for a mere decade ago (like voting rights, civil rights, spying on Americans, universal healthcare, stimulus funding, education, contraception, gun control, separation of church and state and, yes, I'd even dare to say democracy)? Originally Posted by austxjr

I consider myself a conservative and I also believe in the core message of fiscal responsibility of the Tea Party. I get frustrated when I see liberals take extreme statements and apply them to all conservatives or tea party members. Of your list above I support voting rights, civil rights, contraception, healthcare, education, very limited gun control, separation of church and state, and democracy. However, requireing an ID to vote does not impact voting rights. The federal government should not be involved in healthcare and Obamacare will massively increase the cost of healthcare until they start rationing. Education should be managed at the local level and school choice would be a big boost to increase the quality of education. Why are liberals so opposed to allowing the poor to send their kids to good schools. Separation of church and state has been taken to an extreme. Contraception is a good thing until you expect the government to pay for it and very few people really support late term abortions that are elective in nature. I am a fan of democracy but am starting to rethink that. It seems that many voters lack the knowledge necessary to make rational decisions. That could be blamed on the public school systems failure.