Annoying repeated political phrases that politicians use

[cinyc]

"Ask" the rich to pay their "fair share" - when there's no asking anything because higher taxes on the so-called rich will be taken under penalty of law and the so-called rich already pay more than their share of the tax burden.

...huh? My "share" of the tax burden is by definition simply the amount of tax I pay divided by what everyone is paying in total. How can I pay more than what I pay? Are you suggesting some people are paying more tax than what they're legally required to pay? Because if that's the case, I don't see how that's anyone's fault but their own.

What I mean is that the top 1% of taxpayers make about 19% of total income but pay about double that percentage - 37% - of total federal income taxes.  The so-called rich are already paying more than their share of income taxes, expressed as a percentage of total income.

[Ban my account ffs!]

"Ask" the rich to pay their "fair share" - when there's no asking anything because higher taxes on the so-called rich will be taken under penalty of law and the so-called rich already pay more than their share of the tax burden.

...huh? My "share" of the tax burden is by definition simply the amount of tax I pay divided by what everyone is paying in total. How can I pay more than what I pay? Are you suggesting some people are paying more tax than what they're legally required to pay? Because if that's the case, I don't see how that's anyone's fault but their own.

What I mean is that the top 1% of taxpayers make about 19% of total income but pay about double that percentage - 37% - of total federal income taxes.  The so-called rich are already paying more than their share of income taxes, expressed as a percentage of total income.

And they're underpaying in consumption taxes and on the majority of their income, which they make by manipulating other peoples' money around the stock market.  And on all fees.

What you are arguing is disingenuous and you should stop.  Prove to me that the rich are paying double the percentage in total taxes against all income sources than your average middle class American.. and you might begin to have a point.

Until then, take your dog and pony show to another town.

[Joe Republic]

"God bless America"

[PJ]

Our ally Israel
This is a bipartisan bill
Liberal Media
War on Christmas
too much big government (when said by politicians that want to ban abortion, gay marriage, marijuana etc.)
Politicians with Southern accents
Politicians that make eye contact
Politicians that don't make eye
Any phrase repeated more than once by the same person in 30 seconds
Obama's a socialist

[Filuwaúrdjan]

'The National Interest'

I don't care who uses it - although, admittedly, it is generally The Enemy that does so - it sets my teeth on edge.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

But, basically, everyone needs to read this:

[Ban my account ffs!]

Another one I can't stand:

Hard working families.


Families don't work.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Anything that has to do with "sending a message."

[courts]

Anything that has to do with "sending a message."

oh god i forgot about that one somehow

[Oakvale]

Fairness.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

"War on.............."

[Peeperkorn]

"It's not you, it's me".

[angus]

I always get annoyed when people say "going forward..."  It's not just politicians that do it, but I have colleagues saying that.  At what point did the phrase "from now on" get replaced with "going forward."  Sometime in the past decade, I think.  Anyway, I really detest that, not only because it's glib, but also because it is invariably followed by an independent clause that causes it to be a grammatically incorrect dangling modifier.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I always get annoyed when people say "going forward..."  It's not just politicians that do it, but I have colleagues saying that.  At what point did the phrase "from now on" get replaced with "going forward."  Sometime in the past decade, I think.  Anyway, I really detest that, not only because it's glib, but also because it is invariably followed by an independent clause that causes it to be a grammatically incorrect dangling modifier.

I always hate when my modifier dangles too much. 

[angus]

ha!  Apparently I'm not the only one who has noticed this phrase cropping up.  I just googled the phrase and find no shortage of grammar nazis noticing it as well...

and here's a whole freaking diatribe about it:  

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7453584.stm

One thousand seven hundred forty-one words, by my count.  nice.