0
dreamdancer

Are Republicans Autistic?

Recommended Posts

Quote

I don't think you really believe that.



I find it ridiculous when people write that. The dictionary defines it as I did:

a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering.

Quote

We could then go to Saudi Arabia, take over their oil fields, and give all the money to whomever needed it.



Being 94th at wealth distribution in the world and trying allocate government funds to ensure all have HC is not the same as robbing a country 1/2 way around the world and redistributing it. Are you that desperate fo an abstract example?

Quote

Say, Africa. Saudi definitely has the ability to pay, and Africa certainly the need. That's compassion on a global scale, no?



And there inlies my point: Saudi has no duty to Africa, this country has a basic duty to its people for basic welfare and you disagree, defining my position that conservatives are incompassionate toward American poor people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So, to sum you your opinion, you feel it is more compassionate to indenture someone on the teat of the government as opposed to empowering someone to be the best they can be by allowing them (and maybe forcing them a bit to over come the inherent laziness) to make their own decisions.



So let's look at your process. Deny them coverage for chronic illnesses, support Republican corporate practices that pre-existing conditions be denied, and generally deny poor people any welfare as way of making them tough; is that your process? I say provide them care and education to better themselves, you say ignire them and see if they can oull a rabbit out of their hat.

Quote

You feel it is better to have a government control and order “charity” instead of allowing the people to take care of others because they know (at least conservatives know) it is the right thing to do.



To wait for the charity to roll in isn't structured, and the collector's of that charity can decide who gets it and for waht. To have gov progs and guidelines set up that are foreeable is the most efficient way.

Quote

You support government controlling the people instead of the people controlling the government.



No, that's communism. Socialism is when the means of production is controilled by teh people. BTW, the VN, IRAQ and other wars ensued long after poularity fell, so don't think this is a new process where teh gov does things that some dislike. What about slavery?

Quote

Oh, and I see a ( I assume this) one of your favorite programs, Social Security, will be running in the red next year. Wasn’t it your compassionate democrats who said the program is solvent for years to come and fought to keep it the same as today?



Didn't they expand it to include Medicare, Medicaid? It will run out as the population ages and they'll have to find a way to refund it.

Quote

Wasn’t it the Democrats who said follow us and vote for us and we will bring the black people up? Hmmm, another success story you think? (oh, I know it was the evil republicans who really kept them “down”.)



Well it was LBJ who signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act that made sounthern hillbillies realize tehy hated blacks more than they hate city slickers so tehy switched parties and became known as the Yellow Dog Dems. Are you saying minorities haven't risen?

Quote

Yep, you have years of success stories upon which to base claims of being the superior of mind



Yep, esp fiscal; the Dems has as of late esp been the saviors.

Quote

It seems you pick a party with a track record to be proud of.



Sure, shall we talk neo-con economics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Abortion, homosexuality, religion, privacy. These are modern subjects in which modern Republicans continuously try to infringe on people's decisions. Democrats are doing it too with some of these issues and others like guns, but I don't deny it like you do.



I'm not denying that the current republicans in congress haven't done it, they have, and it annoys me too. I'm less annoyed about it than other issues (like HC), because those things really don't effect me, but that's the nature of priorities.

There is what I consider a small, but growing group of "true conservatives" that are running for offices in 2010. People like Peter Schiff, Rand Paul, etc.. These are the people I speak of when I say "true conservatives". I'm not referring to the "religious right", or the majority of the current "big government" conservatives that are out there.

The fact is that these few people I speak of have to choose one of the two parties to run under, and they typically choose the republican party. Unfortunately, because of this they get grouped in with the rest of them and it comes out looking like I'm trying to defend the whole party when in reality I despise most of them.


Quote


Abortion and homosexuality are easy. They don't want you to be able to abort, they don't want gays to get married.

Religion: GWB's office of faith based initiatives (still kept alive for whatever reason by Obama :( ). Constant proposals of laws based purely on religion that limit others' rights (see homosexuality next). House Resolutions passing revisionist history that do not differentiate between the concept of a nation started by religious people and a nation started based on their religion.

Privacy: Patriot act... 'nuff said.

I'll grant you this: this list was hard to make without the propositions that don't deal with individual decisions. They still have institutional provisions that are written to benefit their group while essentially shitting on others. However, it is this combination of ideals that seeks to limit the composition of our citizenry as a whole.

The conservatism that drives Republicans today was what created the Jim Crow laws of the past, anti-sodomy laws that still persist today, no-longer enforceable laws banning atheists from public office.

There isn't a political party on this earth that doesn't seek to limit harmless personal choices of various types. It's a matter of choosing the party that doesn't limit the choices that YOU make.

To go back to the original point of this thread, I think the idea that Republicans cannot relate to others is not specific to Republicans. Anyone who is strongly supportive of their party will have trouble relating to those of the opposition. Unlike what many people believe, Political fanatics aren't evil nor are they trying to be. They honestly think their platforms are beneficial to society. It's not autism, it's just misguided.



Thanks for that. It's nice to have an amicable response on here once in a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

So, to sum you your opinion, you feel it is more compassionate to indenture someone on the teat of the government as opposed to empowering someone to be the best they can be by allowing them (and maybe forcing them a bit to over come the inherent laziness) to make their own decisions.



So let's look at your process. Deny them coverage for chronic illnesses, support Republican corporate practices that pre-existing conditions be denied, and generally deny poor people any welfare as way of making them tough; is that your process? I say provide them care and education to better themselves, you say ignire them and see if they can oull a rabbit out of their hat.

Quote

You feel it is better to have a government control and order “charity” instead of allowing the people to take care of others because they know (at least conservatives know) it is the right thing to do.



To wait for the charity to roll in isn't structured, and the collector's of that charity can decide who gets it and for waht. To have gov progs and guidelines set up that are foreeable is the most efficient way.

Quote

You support government controlling the people instead of the people controlling the government.



No, that's communism. You DO get it Socialism is when the means of production is controlled by the people. BTW, the VN, IRAQ and other wars ensued long after polarity fell, so don't think this is a new process where the gov does things that some dislike. What about slavery?What about it? I was abolished here years ago

Quote

Oh, and I see a ( I assume this) one of your favorite programs, Social Security, will be running in the red next year. Wasn’t it your compassionate democrats who said the program is solvent for years to come and fought to keep it the same as today?



Didn't they expand it to include Medicare, Medicaid? It will run out as the population ages and they'll have to find a way to refund it.

Quote

Wasn’t it the Democrats who said follow us and vote for us and we will bring the black people up? Hmmm, another success story you think? (oh, I know it was the evil republicans who really kept them “down”.)



Well it was LBJ who signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act that made sounthern hillbillies realize tehy hated blacks more than they hate city slickers so tehy switched parties and became known as the Yellow Dog Dems. Are you saying minorities haven't risen?No, I am not saying that. The policies that affect the inner cities have severed to keep the status quo. In other words failed, the country and the people the SAY they are trying to help. To cure the problem would eliminate an industry that flourishes on it however. That industry is racism.

Quote

Yep, you have years of success stories upon which to base claims of being the superior of mind



Yep, esp fiscal; the Dems has as of late esp been the saviors.

Quote

It seems you pick a party with a track record to be proud of.



Sure, shall we talk neo-con economics?



I will take your so called neoconservative economics any day. It is easy to hang on to when those like you stop lying and bastardizing what really happens.

And you know, I spent more time fixing spelling errors you made here than I did posting. (at least in the parts I replied to)
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

AGAIN, YOU BASICALLY HAVE TOLD ME THAT CONSERVTAIVES DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE DISADVANTAGED, BUT WHY NOT JUST ADMIT IT?

I recently met a kid, who moved in, across the street, and have gotten to know him.
His dad is on govt. subsistance, due to medical problems, so the kid, pretty much, has the 'gimme' attitude, ingrained in him.
He wanted to borrow my mower, to make some money, but thought that I should lend it to him, for free, since he considers me a friend.
I told him that I get 30% of the gross, because it's not a cheap mower.... He has to pay for the gas.
I caught him lying about how much money he had made, and told him that he had three choices. Pay me the money, which he owed me, mow my yard or never use my mower, again.

Which attitude, do you think, taught him the greatest life lesson?

Sure, here's my mower. Go, tear it up, or this is how the real world works, economically?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If I'm going to waste time arguing on the internet, I'm going to at least find someone I can have an actual conversation with.

Lucky seems to like taking what you said, paraphrasing or interpreting it into his own view, and then arguing his point against his view of your point.

In the end, it's just annoying. I'll spend my time elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If I'm going to waste time arguing on the internet, I'm going to at least find someone I can have an actual conversation with.

Lucky seems to like taking what you said, paraphrasing or interpreting it into his own view, and then arguing his point against his view of your point.

In the end, it's just annoying. I'll spend my time elsewhere.



Good points.

But I dont let him or anyone annoy me. I do find them amusing however.

I gotta think he is getting paid to post here and other sites. Other wise he is unemployed living on welfare
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I recently met a kid, who moved in, across the street, and have gotten to know him.
His dad is on govt. subsistance, due to medical problems, so the kid, pretty much, has the 'gimme' attitude, ingrained in him.
He wanted to borrow my mower, to make some money, but thought that I should lend it to him, for free, since he considers me a friend.
I told him that I get 30% of the gross, because it's not a cheap mower.... He has to pay for the gas.
I caught him lying about how much money he had made, and told him that he had three choices. Pay me the money, which he owed me, mow my yard or never use my mower, again.

Which attitude, do you think, taught him the greatest life lesson?

Sure, here's my mower. Go, tear it up, or this is how the real world works, economically?



Do you declare as income and pay taxes on your 30% cut, or do you feel that it's okay for those with the capital to subscribe to the "gimme attitude?"

Cheating on taxes (which you may well not be doing) is the same as getting a free handout from the government.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I didn't ask for a definition. That's easy enough to find. What I asked was which was the better measure of compassion.

Quote

I guess compassion doesn't measure where the money comes from, just where it goes. Compassion is the hope, the desire to help regardless of ability or origin, but just the destity of the aid.



Your words. If it doesn't matter where the money comes from, and you are willing to take it from others, and all that matters is the destination, then my example is exactly along the lines of your thought.

Why does your compassion have geographic borders? Africa has much worse poverty.
The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Do you declare as income and pay taxes on your 30% cut, or do you feel that it's okay for those with the capital to subscribe to the "gimme attitude?"

I recognize the fact that it would cost hundreds, if not thousands, to process my little .60 worth of taxes, so, being the generous conservative, that I am, I simply redistributed it, as I saw fit.... The govt. owes me a commission, due to saving them all of that money, on bureaucratic processing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Do you declare as income and pay taxes on your 30% cut, or do you feel that it's okay for those with the capital to subscribe to the "gimme attitude?"

I recognize the fact that it would cost hundreds, if not thousands, to process my little .60 worth of taxes, so, being the generous conservative, that I am, I simply redistributed it, as I saw fit.... The govt. owes me a commission, due to saving them all of that money, on bureaucratic processing.



I see. So, you acknowledge that you're stealing money from taxpayers. Fair enough. There's much to be said for honesty.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I will take your so called neoconservative economics any day. It is easy to hang on to when those like you stop lying and bastardizing what really happens.



So you're going to ignire that entire long response I made and reply with nothing; wwe get it, you agree that the Repubs / Conservs are incompassionate - it's not a newsflash.

Quote

And you know, I spent more time fixing spelling errors you made here than I did posting. (at least in the parts I replied to)



This sticks the last fork in it, you can't defend your position, so you resort to typos. WHat's next; syntax?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say, Africa. Saudi definitely has the ability to pay, and Africa certainly the need. That's compassion on a global scale, no?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Quote

And there inlies my point: Saudi has no duty to Africa, this country has a basic duty to its people for basic welfare and you disagree, defining my position that conservatives are incompassionate toward American poor people.

Why is compassion confined to what affects you, personally? That's not very big of you. I'm thinking, once the One World Government starts, then we each owe a duty to all men. Then, we can, seriously, start exploring space, because I'm sure there are Galactical Ghettos, out there, somewhere, where beings are being deprived of their right, to free space travel.:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I recently met a kid, who moved in, across the street, and have gotten to know him.
His dad is on govt. subsistance, due to medical problems, so the kid, pretty much, has the 'gimme' attitude, ingrained in him.



That's it, a non-random sample size of 1; I'm convinced. I say we line them up and shoot em.

Quote

He wanted to borrow my mower, to make some money, but thought that I should lend it to him, for free, since he considers me a friend.



Hmmm, how can I make money from the poor....hmmmm?

Quote

I told him that I get 30% of the gross, because it's not a cheap mower.... He has to pay for the gas.



And then maybe you could loan-shark him; offer to lend him the money for the gas at 50% interest. Then maybe become his bookie. And tehn you won him.....sounds so.... I dunno....Republican.

Quote

I caught him lying about how much money he had made, and told him that he had three choices. Pay me the money, which he owed me, mow my yard or never use my mower, again.



I think incarceration would have been better, you're such a nice guy for letting him off easy.

Quote

Which attitude, do you think, taught him the greatest life lesson?



Yours that told him he would never not be indebted to you.

Quote

Sure, here's my mower. Go, tear it up, or this is how the real world works, economically?



Why not give him a chance to buy your mower from you by paying you most of his income until it's paid off, taht way he feels he has a chance at ownership. Your example really defines conservative practice. They just keep you dragging along with little chance of autonomy. There's always an ownership in there somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

If I'm going to waste time arguing on the internet, I'm going to at least find someone I can have an actual conversation with.

Lucky seems to like taking what you said, paraphrasing or interpreting it into his own view, and then arguing his point against his view of your point.

In the end, it's just annoying. I'll spend my time elsewhere.



Truth is I post data instead of what my diddy taught me, etc. I take that as a compliment, thank you, you are unable to answer my posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Firstly, Kristof isn't data, he's a nobel peace prize winning liberal person with an opinion.

The left sure jumped onto Nobel prize winning, Al Gore's data, as the end all, to the global warming hoax.



Show me what you're talking about that most of the reputable science community is against the notion of global warming. Then show me where they feel that burning of so-called fossil fuels isn't destroying the ecology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Truth is I post data instead of what my diddy taught me, etc. I take that as a compliment, thank you, you are unable to answer my posts.



Data like this?


To have the vile hatred toward poor people to want to deny them basic social svs under the guise of fairness requires the formation of mens rea, hence they cannot be autistic. If they were they would have an excuse for their depraved sense of humainity.


Take it as what you want, but don't confuse unwilling with unable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I gotta think he is getting paid to post here and other sites.



This explains volumes. Paranoia transitioning into dellusion.


Paranioa??

:D

Where the hell did that come from:D

You just have so much time to miss-spell everything here you must not have a job:ph34r::ph34r:



:D

Paranioa

YOU are funny:D
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I didn't ask for a definition. That's easy enough to find. What I asked was which was the better measure of compassion.



In law and in many other areas not related to the love of Jebus and other silly conservative processes, we define our terms to measure them. So the definition is:

a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering.

So now we know what compassion is, let's measure it, as in quantify it in different situations.

YOURS: What a person gives of their own free will

MINE: I guess compassion doesn't measure where the money comes from, just where it goes. Compassion is the hope, the desire to help regardless of ability or origin, but just the destiny of the aid.

With yours the compassion is voluntary, sporadic, could be exclusive, and could be discriminatory. With mine it is guaranteed, constant, available, and universal.

Quote

Your words. If it doesn't matter where the money comes from, and you are willing to take it from others, and all that matters is the destination, then my example is exactly along the lines of your thought.



My words go as far as not mattering where the money comes from, the rest is yours. As for take it from others, once again your words, there is no correlation between taxation and outlays, so it isn't taken from others, you just use that as rationale to deny people, what your motive really is.

Your example is not as mine is, yours relies on donation, mine is gov mandated.

Quote

Why does your compassion have geographic borders? Africa has much worse poverty.



It has to do with duty to your country and your fellow citizens versus the world. Once you get your affairs in order then you can help other nations. I just find a divide between nations when it comes to mandatory aid, I think it's great when global aid is voluntary. You would object to mandatory aid to foreign countries so I know you are being both hypothetical and abstract. Unless you subscribe to thievery of an entire different nation, but again, I don't think you subscribe to that so you are being hypothetical and abstract again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Do you declare as income and pay taxes on your 30% cut, or do you feel that it's okay for those with the capital to subscribe to the "gimme attitude?"

I recognize the fact that it would cost hundreds, if not thousands, to process my little .60 worth of taxes, so, being the generous conservative, that I am, I simply redistributed it, as I saw fit.... The govt. owes me a commission, due to saving them all of that money, on bureaucratic processing.



And if you don't feel like it then the poor families go without. That defines conservative compassion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0