Cyrus said:
I will concede Pelosi as being an elite, she's very wealthy and came from a family of power. But when the OP made the statement 'liberal elite' he lumped in EVERYONE that's democrat must be elite and wealthy. That's a nonsense statement and you know it.
Untrue. I said that the liberal elite are gathering with Nancy Pelosi. I believe the invitation was limited to a group called The Pelosi 100. That's hardly EVERYONE that's Democrat.
Pay attention.
Cyrus said:
Also, could you please justify your comments about 'liberal elites'
Specifically, I'd like to know how a black guy that grew up poor and a VP that has a net worth of under $400k qualifies as 'ELITE'.
Let me clarify my intended connotation of liberal elite. (and don't give me that
poor tripe about Barack Obama)
Liberal elite:
That is a liberal in a paid governmental position that comes with perks unavailable to those governed, or a liberal who contributes so much money to the cause that his/her wishes are administered by those to which the contributions are made. One doesn't have to be rich...just powerful enough by virtue of position or pocketbook to demand that additional monies be spent on their personal interests...such as free meals, free lavish surroundings, free transportation, franking privileges, free travel expenses, free whatever...the only thing bad about this is that nothing is really free; it's just paid for by somebody else. The elite liberals never really pay. The ones that contribute get more than their money's worth back in favors (that somehow translate into wealth or power). The ones that are in paid positions have their entire livelihood financed for them.
Now, I'd like you to explain to me how a GW Bush, from a long line of oil millionaires, and John McCain, the son of a long line of rear admirals, is 'one of you common folk'...
You must have some very very impressive ways of rationalizing in your head non-truths. Because clearly, what you stated was nonsense. You sure the Repubs haven't been feeding you any kool-aid?
You display here the uncanny liberal tendency to read something extra into what is said. This thread was started on the subject of Nancy Pelosi's Posse of liberal elites. I did not posit the non-existence of Republican elites. Certainly, their corral is replete with similar persons. Replace "liberal" with "conservative" in my described intended connotation and you have what is known to me as a Republican elitist. They exist on both sides of the aisle.
You seem to be forwarding the message that it's okay to be bad because the other side does it. What I despise is the fact that gifts are expected by and made to elitists on either side. It has become standard practice in this country to consider one's self above the general public simply because you are a government official or a big contributor to the party's cause. It's the little people that are actually worth their salt and deserve to have their taxes spent on things that benefit the taxed society without favoritism and outright theft of funds given to entertaining and gifting the elite ruling few.
The arrogance and delusions of superiority that are basic to elitists certainly exist without limitation due to political posturing. It is human nature to lean toward being smug, aloof and excessively proud of yourself when you are in a position to control things...and money talks!
The "let them eat cake" syndrome prevails where the ruling few (elite) are quartered.
Look up
elite and you should find that its basic meaning relates to the act of choosing. The choicest part, a socially superior group (by choice of those considered superior), a powerful minority group, <a power elite within the government> &c.
It has little to do with wealth, except that by throwing money around one can easily become a member of the elite crowd that actually runs things.
Oh, to be one of the chosen few...in Pelosi's Posse.
