One of World's Richest Men is a Democrat

[Billary2004]

This guy is the poster child for liberal elitists....the hypocrisy emanating from this guy is unbelievable. *A billionaire Democrat??? *Hey wait, I thought only Republicans were rich???

Some of my favorite snippets........


George Soros, one of the world's richest men, has given away nearly $5 billion to promote democracy in the former Soviet bloc, Africa and Asia. Now he has a new project: defeating President Bush.



Apparently his "kindness" isn't paying off because those countries still SUCK!!! (sorry for the impolite phrasing)

More snippets....

The 2004 presidential race, he said in an interview, is "a matter of life and death."





Then die already!!! *(sorry for impolite phrasing)

Check out this guy's worming around the liberals beloved campaign finance laws....

http://www.washingtonpost.c om/ac2....printer (http://www.washingtonpost.c om/ac2/wp-dyn/A24179-2003Nov10?language=p rinter)

Happy Veterans' Day http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif[B]

[noPEACEwithoutJUSTICE]

This guy is frightening. Eastern bloc--how exactly did they say he got all his money?

When asked if he's forfeit his entire wealth to defeat Bush he paused and said, "If it could be guaranteed."

I wonder how his money is spent to promote "democracy" around the world...

I have a feeling he's more likely going to support secular humanism around the world...

[contrapuntal]

You'd have to have studiously avoided reading the newspapers for the last couple decades to not know about Soros, especially after the media got briefly obsessed with the World Economic Forum.

What's so odd about rich democrats? Why do you hate this guy so much?

[pcyrdad]

I just did the math... Soros giving $15.5 million equates to me giving around $150. And he can live without those few paltry millions much more easily than I can live without that $150. I bet he's not even being taxed as much as he should be, much less as much as he would be if he gets his way.

For too long the Republicans have been tagged as the "party of the rich", while the Dems have taken the "party of the poor" moniker. Looking at people like Soros, Kennedy, the Clintons, Kerry-Heinz, Corzine, and others, one has to wonder if they're trying to break apart the middle classes, so their upper class can effectively "own" the lower class that would result.

Now, I know the Republicans have their share of rich folks, too, especially at the upper levels of power, but Republican policies, in their un-watered-down form, truly give the middle and lower classes the opportunity to succeed. Success for those classes is not guaranteed under either party's plan, but at least with the Republicans it's still an option.

Now, in a (very) brief defense of Sen. McCain, as many problems as that bill has caused the GOP, it has apparently significantly hurt the DNC's fundraising ability, at least until they've found these ways around it. I've heard that was actually part of his plan, but I won't go that far to give him credit...

The bottom line in all this is- well, the bottom line. As long as the Dems' big money folks can find ways to drop large sums to influence elections, they will. And as long as the Dems' claim of being the party of the poor and working folks stands unchallenged, things will go unchanged, and the rich will continue on their path toward owning the rest of us, only they'll use its trade name: socialism.

[Billary2004]

was that a liberal retort? Sorry that I am not educated enough to know who this guy is or remember what he did. Typical liberal condescension. The article says it all. And I have to wonder too, NoPeaceNoJustice, how he got the money in the first place and how exactly democracy is being promoted.

Comparing Bush to Hitler....come on now contrapunctual, Soros is just spouting rhetoric. Hitler was an a self professed socialist and his Nazi party pushed those ideals. Who has Bush killed....I mean Clinton even killed Vince Foster and I have yet to compare Clinton to Hitler......Oh wait, Clinton's police protection while he was governer of Arkansas say that both Clintons traded racial epithets about blacks and ridiculed the jews. Now that sounds like a modern day Hitler to me......

Anyway, you and Soros are free to go off and promote your idea of eugenics. Hell, maybe you can "create" some people that are actually intelligent enough to know who Soros is in the first place.

[Billary2004]

Quote[/b] (pcyrdad @ Nov. 11, 2003 -- 11:57 am)]I just did the math... Soros giving $15.5 million equates to me giving around $150. And he can live without those few paltry millions much more easily than I can live without that $150. I bet he's not even being taxed as much as he should be, much less as much as he would be if he gets his way.

For too long the Republicans have been tagged as the "party of the rich", while the Dems have taken the "party of the porr" moniker. Looking at people like Soros, Kennedy, the Clintons, Kerry-Heinz, Corzine, and others, one has to wonder if they're trying to break apart the middle classes, so their upper class can effectively "own" the lower class that would result.

Now, I know the Republicans have their share of rich folks, too, especially at the upper levels of power, but Republican policies, in their un-watered-down form, truly give the middle and lower classes the opportunity to succeed. Success for those classes is not guaranteed under either party's plan, but at least with the Republicans it's still an option.

Now, in a (very) brief defense of Sen. McCain, as many problems as that bill has caused the GOP, it has apparently significantly hurt the DNC's fundraising ability, at least until they've found these ways around it. I've heard that was actually part of his plan, but I won't go that far to give him credit...

The bottom line in all this is- well, the bottom line. As long as the Dems' big money folks can find ways to drop large sums to influence elections, they will. And as long as the Dems' claim of being the party of the poor and working folks stands unchallenged, things will go unchanged, and the rich will continue on their path toward owning the rest of us, only they'll use its trade name: socialism.
I agree....well said. It is in the Democrats/Communists best interest to control the masses by creating strife i.e. class warfare and racial conflicts.

The Dems slogan should be, "The beatings will continue until moral improves!"

Tidbits of info that come to mind-

Corzine was investigated by the SEC for his involvment in laddering investments while at Goldman Sachs. Corzine won't even talk about this.

The DNC was given large sums of money by the Chinese in exchange for military technology secrets and trips to the Lincoln Bedroom

[rfurtkamp]

Quote[/b] (contrapuntal @ Nov. 11, 2003 -- 11:38 am)]Why do you hate this guy so much?
Anyone associated with Moveon.org deserves my contempt, that's why.

[markinthedark]

pcyrdad is on the right trail. The Dems we have to put up with today were sixties Ivy Leuge Radicals back when. They literally grew up on Marx, Lenin, Moa, and Che' Guiverra. They do consider themsevles best qualified to regulate the every-day lives of us oafish peasants. Why they never even got into Harvard! So it is no surprise that anything that threatens their power is held in antithema. Free speech, privately owned fire-arms, property rights, and god help us, educated voters, will always be on their hit list.
Does anyone wonder at the new drive to tax the internet. This medium is where they fair the wost. They would, if they could, declare us a hate group and shut us down. Establishing a tax is the entree into that outcome, because as sure as god made little green apples with every penny of tax will follow a thousand regulations. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif