Skip to main content

Tom Perkins becomes the front-runner for Douche of the Year

It's only February, and already, billionaire Tom Perkins is trying to stake claim to Douche of the Year honors. Not long ago, he compared progressives' desire to increase taxes on the top 1% to Nazis going after Jews during the Holocaust. He then decided to increase his odds of winning the before-mentioned award by saying the following during a speech at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco last night:

"The Tom Perkins system is: You don't get to vote unless you pay a dollar of taxes. But what I really think is, it should be like a corporation. You pay a million dollars in taxes, you get a million votes. How's that?"

While it's debatable that Perkins was joking around, it doesn't seem to be debatable that he's a major league jerk. He also seems to be clueless about the real world. Unfortunately, due to the Citizens United ruling, corporations can spend countless dollars on ads to influence people's vote. In other words, if you pay a million dollars in taxes, chances are you'll get to influence millions of votes. Also, while I assume Mr. Prickins (a more fitting name, I believe) was talking about federal income taxes, just about everyone pays some form of taxes - whether that be federal, property, sales, etc. What he and his like seem to bypass when talking about the issue is that, while yes, most of them do spend more in taxes than anyone else, they have the money to hire someone to find any and every possible loophole to reduce the percentage in taxes they have to pay.

It's becoming painfully obvious that Tom Perkins and those with similar mindsets don't believe in democracy, or even a republic. What they seek is an oligarchy. They don't believe people from different classes should have an equal say in where this country goes. They try to minimize the middle- and lower-classes' rights, try to maximize the rights of corporations and the upper-class, and use their power and wealth to influence the public's perception - so that the middle- and lower-class butt heads, all the while he and those like him are destroying the very essence of this country and enjoying every minute of it in their yachts, on their private jets, and in their mansions. It's one thing to succeed in this country to the point where he or she can say, "I'm truly living the American dream!," and it's quite another to use that wealth and success to trample on the rights and opportunities of those with less money all in the name of greed.

As it says in the book of Proverbs, chapter 22, verses 16-17, "Whoever oppresses the poor to increase his own wealth, or gives to the rich, will only come to poverty. Incline your ear, and hear the words of the wise, and apply your heart to my knowledge."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/tom_perkins_wealthy_taxpayers_should_get_more_votes

http://www.openbible.info/topics/greed

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"