Lucky... 0 #26 September 27, 2009 QuoteI haven't the time at the moment (going to go drink some good beer with great friends), but here's a few quotes that I believe reflect my ideals, and I consider myself a conservative. OK, these are your ideals, I asked for Republican ideals in referencce to people's welfare; looks like they're one in the same. Also, it would take you longer to cut-n-paste those than to simply explain how the Repub/Conservative protocol is compassionate to people. I see you agree; THEY'RE NOT. Quote"I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns 6 percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag." So it's all about military expenditures and not about the well-being of people and health of a nation? I see we agree that conc=servative values are such as this. Quote"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. ... This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard." You make the assumption that enhancingg the welfare of peopel would throw a big deficit into the country. Explain how Canada is beating our dollar, has been since GWB, yet they afford uni-care. HINT: I won't wait up late till your drinking session is over. Quote"I believe in the dignity of labor, whether with head or hand; that the world owes no man a living but that it owes every man an opportunity to make a living. " Right and when many work and cannot afford HC and / or the deductables, etc, that working man cannot exist with HC. Quote"Charity is injurious unless it helps the recipient to become independent of it. " So Viet Nam vets, Gulf War vets that have some/no limbs, etc are just being drug along and further injured by the "charity" that is extended. Furthermore, HC can bring people to work as they have higher quality of their lives. Quote"Everyone has the right to make his own decision/s, but none has the right to force his decision on others." And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? And I chose to be born to millionaires....So quit forcing your decision to be unlike the rest of teh world and let's establish uni-care. Just because it is and has been the norm to deny HC doesn't mean it is the standard, it is not. Remember, salvery was once the norm. Quote"In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit." And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? Right and the Repiblican Party has orchestrated some pretty good Ponzi schemes.....er was that just a coincidence? Quote"Capitalism demands the best of every man – his rationality – and rewards him accordingly. It leaves every man free to choose the work he likes, to specialize in it, to trade his product for the products of others, and to go as far on the road of achievement as his ability and ambition will carry him." And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? Capitalism just means the market controls the means of production, the market is controlled by the elite, so this addresses this post in no way. QuoteYou get bonus points if you can name whom they are from. 1) I don't want your bonus points. 2) John D. Rockefeller QuoteI consider myself a conservative. You don't say, which explains why you skirted the question of how Republicans/COnservatives are compassionate to needy people. Rockefeller, now there's a neo-fascist leader we can follow; give the rich everything - fuck the poor. AGAIN, YOU BASICALLY HAVE TOLD ME THAT CONSERVTAIVES DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE DISADVANTAGED, BUT WHY NOT JUST ADMIT IT? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #27 September 27, 2009 QuoteHonestly, this thread is insulting to those with Republican beliefs and to those that are autistic. (ya know... there are actually posters on this site with autistic children.) This is NOT "news" nor is it funny. Talk about internal confusion, being Republican they would want to cut all social progs they could, but wanting your kids to get help yoiu need to open them up. I say open them up, cut the military in 1/2 and let's become a + nation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #28 September 27, 2009 QuoteSixteen months ago, Arthur C. Brooks, a professor at Syracuse University, published "Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth About Compassionate Conservatism." The surprise is that liberals are markedly less charitable than conservatives. Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/...ore_liberal_giv.html Another rightwing site, why not post data from objective sites? Are you one of these guys screaming "FOUL" when we post Moveon,org? Quit posting biased rhetoric and pushing it off as anything important. I didn't see data in there, just drivel. As well, charitability is more than just a check to the Red Cross, it's comprehensive to all areas that further the well-being of the country. You posted: Liberal Kristof Admits Conservatives More Generous Than Liberals The article stated: QuoteNicholas Kristof: "Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates." Firstly, Kristof isn't data, he's a nobel peace prize winning liberal person with an opinion. Secondly he states: Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates. His point is that Liberals are for government-run programs, not that liberals don't want to help. I tend to agree, many of the rich Repubs will doante for a variety of reasons, but they definatley want their write-off. To trust the rich to keep the needy well is idiocy. http://www.philanthropy.iupui.edu/News/2009/docs/GivingReaches300billion_06102009.pdf This article supports that the GOPers give more, of course > 1/3 of all donations go to churches. The point Kristof made was that GOPers give more, but I also think he would agree that relying on the compassion of the rich to donate for a nice tax writeoff rather than legislating that care so the government is compelled to keep helping needy people undermines the real requirement. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jgoose71 0 #29 September 27, 2009 The reason we use one liners is because that seems to be anyone understands anymore. More than one line and people use interest. There has been a general dumbing down of the public. One Liners that some it up: Liberals- Want to give hand outs conservatives- Want to give jobs The fundamental flaw with liberal line of thinking is you can't give a hand out to everybody. Somebody has to have a job so you can tax them. The way you create jobs is to lower taxes on the small business guys so they can create them. The Autistic liberals can't see past their "liberal guilt". They want to give away the farm because they think it will ease the guilt they feel because they live in America with mechanisms set up to allow them to provide for them selves and their families. More one liners: Give a man a fish feed him for a day- Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime."There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss." Life, the Universe, and Everything Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #30 September 27, 2009 Quote Also, it would take you longer to cut-n-paste those than to simply explain how the Repub/Conservative protocol is compassionate to people. I see you agree; THEY'RE NOT. What's more compassionate, expecting people to work for a living, or enabling them to live off the government (ie. the work of others). ? Is that not the same as rewarding something you're trying to prevent? Seems counterproductive. How is that compassionate in any way? Quote So it's all about military expenditures and not about the well-being of people and health of a nation? I see we agree that concservative values are such as this. An yet another point that you miss. You really see what you want to see don't you? Quote You make the assumption that enhancing the welfare of peopel would throw a big deficit into the country. Given that we're 12,000,000,000,000 in the hole, I'd say it's a fair assumption. Quote Explain how Canada is beating our dollar, has been since GWB, yet they afford uni-care. Well, the fed is printing money like it's going out of style, and they have politicians that can think of something other than spending more money - it appears that all of out politicians try to spend their way out of everything. Quote HINT: I won't wait up late till your drinking session is over. I wouldn't expect you to. Had a good time playing Guitar Hero and enjoyed a bottle of Rogue Double Dead Guy Ale with my boss. Quote Right and when many work and cannot afford HC and / or the deductables, etc, that working man cannot exist with HC. How much was the cost of health care increasing before government got involved (medicare and medicaid). ? Weren't those programs created to solve the very problems we have now? Quote So Viet Nam vets, Gulf War vets that have some/no limbs, etc are just being drug along and further injured by the "charity" that is extended. Furthermore, HC can bring people to work as they have higher quality of their lives. Are you really that dense? Quote And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? By not infringing on the right of people to live their lives as they see fit, whether the decisions they make be positive or negative. Quote And I chose to be born to millionaires....So quit forcing your decision to be unlike the rest of teh world and let's establish uni-care. Forcing my decision? If anyone's trying to force anything upon anyone, it's you. That's pretty obvious. Quote Just because it is and has been the norm to deny HC doesn't mean it is the standard, it is not. You're confusing denying with not providing. Two completely different things, no matter how you rationalize it. Quote Remember, salvery was once the norm. So was personal responsibility. Quote And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? Right and the Repiblican Party has orchestrated some pretty good Ponzi schemes.....er was that just a coincidence? I'm wasting my time..... QuoteQuote"Capitalism demands the best of every man – his rationality – and rewards him accordingly. It leaves every man free to choose the work he likes, to specialize in it, to trade his product for the products of others, and to go as far on the road of achievement as his ability and ambition will carry him." And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? Capitalism just means the market controls the means of production, the market is controlled by the elite, so this addresses this post in no way.Quote Again, I'm wasting my time. It appears you're going to see what you want to regardless. Quote 1) I don't want your bonus points. 2) John D. Rockefeller Only 1. Some of the others were from Ayn Rand. The gold standard one was from Alan Greenspan of all people. Quote You don't say, which explains why you skirted the question of how Republicans/COnservatives are compassionate to needy people. Tell me, how is giving someone other peoples' money compassionate? How is enabling welfare dependency compassionate? Quote AGAIN, YOU BASICALLY HAVE TOLD ME THAT CONSERVTAIVES DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE DISADVANTAGED, BUT WHY NOT JUST ADMIT IT? "disadvantaged" is such a bullshit term. I don't give a fuck about people that don't give a fuck about themselves. I have no respect for people that seek approval by giving away other people's money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #31 September 27, 2009 QuoteThe reason we use one liners is because that seems to be anyone understands anymore. Good, because I don't understand that. BTW, you use one-liners and answer questions other than that of which was asked because that is your protocol. Remember Palin during the debates? She was constantly answering different question than that of which she was asked; remember? Of course not. QuoteLiberals- Want to give hand outs conservatives- Want to give jobs Liberals want to ensure economic security and HC. Conservatives want to give sub-minimum wage jobs to illegals. If ya don't think so, then answer why Reagan gave them all amnesty in 1986. QuoteThe fundamental flaw with liberal line of thinking is you can't give a hand out to everybody. Somebody has to have a job so you can tax them. Then perhaps, in your infinite wisdom, explain how the unemployment rate over the last 28 years, actually longer but it's a good refrence point, why is it that the unemp rate has been faaar higher with an R in office than in times when a D has been in office. See, your points just fall thru when a GD liberal comes along and drops data on you. BTW, just ask and I will provide a link. QuoteThe way you create jobs is to lower taxes on the small business guys so they can create them. Then explain how during the Great Depression, as it kicked off, Hoover lowered taxes and the GD slipped deeper into unemployment and total hazzard. Then at the end of Hoover's term, he realized he fucked up after unemployment was 25% and raised taxes, FDR did too and the unemployment rate dropped every year from 1933 thru the war with the exception of 1937-38 when there was a mid-reecovery recession. Then explain how during the Reagan years we had the highest unemp rate since the GD at 10.8%....BTW, he cut taxes too, incredibly. Then as GWB entered office he cut taxes and shed the most jobs in some time. Also, explain how Clinton inherited 7% unemployment, sharply raised taxes and then dropped the debt increase to virtually level, took a 290B deficit that turned to a 236B surplus 8 years later and unemployment was left at 4%. I know, I know, you will find something else to talk about. BTW, if anyone wants a data reference for any/all of this, LMK. QuoteThe Autistic liberals can't see past their "liberal guilt". Yes, we're guilty of unfucking the R mess, as stated above. QuoteThey want to give away the farm because they think it will ease the guilt they feel because they live in America with mechanisms set up to allow them to provide for them selves and their families. See, listen to your rhetoric, I post historically accurate facts and you post some BS about weak-kneed liberals this and tough Republican that. Try posting some factual data (unemp, debt, deficit, etc) unless that is hard to do to support your position. QuoteMore one liners: Give a man a fish feed him for a day- Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime. And even that, tuition at my local univ at least doubled, so you can't even teach a man to fish w/o dropping the bank while under Republican rule. Nice cliches, address ALL of the data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #32 September 27, 2009 Quote What's more compassionate, expecting people to work for a living, or enabling them to live off the government (ie. the work of others). ? Is that not the same as rewarding something you're trying to prevent? Seems counterproductive. How is that compassionate in any way? People w/preexisting conditions, handicapped people, undereducated, uneducated, low-income people,etc..... You've made your point, you and your party simply don't care about poor people. Quote LUCKY....: So it's all about military expenditures and not about the well-being of people and health of a nation? I see we agree that concservative values are such as this. ---------------------------------------- An yet another point that you miss. You really see what you want to see don't you? Your way of ignoring the needs of people in a bad way. WHy not address the question? I nailed it, all for the military, none for social svs; fuck poor people - we hear ya. Quote Given that we're 12,000,000,000,000 in the hole, I'd say it's a fair assumption. Reagan and GWB are responsible for that in the way of tax cuts and military spending. GWHB and Clinton raised taxes and sharply cut the military which is how we got into the 12T debt we are. Under Clinton that mess was terminated, which was setup by GHWB's tax increases and spending cuts. Can you really argue that? Quote LUCKY...: Explain how Canada is beating our dollar, has been since GWB, yet they afford uni-care. _____________________________ Well, the fed is printing money like it's going out of style, and they have politicians that can think of something other than spending more money - it appears that all of out politicians try to spend their way out of everything. As Clinton took office it took $1.28 Canadian to buy $1 US. As he left it was $1.55 Canadian to buy $1 US. Under GWB the US Dollar fell below the Candian dollar a year before he left, then when the market crashed people pulled out and stuck it in bonds which gave him a little bump to $1.20ish. Still, even with the bump, under Clinton with tax increases the US Dollar gained considerable value, so once again your point is your personal rhetoric rather than fact. Quote How much was the cost of health care increasing before government got involved (medicare and medicaid). ? Weren't those programs created to solve the very problems we have now? Are you saying that HC was never a problem? I'd say as Fascist Pig Ronnie came in and sucked corporations is when HC became an issue. Quote LUCKY...:So Viet Nam vets, Gulf War vets that have some/no limbs, etc are just being drug along and further injured by the "charity" that is extended. Furthermore, HC can bring people to work as they have higher quality of their lives. -------------------------------------------------- Are you really that dense? Are you really that unable to answer the question that you have to use personal attacks? Quote LUCKY...: And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? ---------------------------------------------- By not infringing on the right of people to live their lives as they see fit, whether the decisions they make be positive or negative. Giving more choices isn't an infringement, abridging choices is. Quote Forcing my decision? If anyone's trying to force anything upon anyone, it's you. That's pretty obvious. I'm not trying to tell you how to live or which HC to use. You are to me. Quote LUCKY...: Just because it is and has been the norm to deny HC doesn't mean it is the standard, it is not. ------------------------------------------------------ You're confusing denying with not providing. Two completely different things, no matter how you rationalize it. If you cannot afford HC, you are denied it. Try calling a doctor or hospital and see what they say when you want to go there w/o cash or ins. YOU GET DENIED. Quote LUCKY...: Remember, salvery was once the norm. ------------------------------------------ So was personal responsibility. And being sick w/o money to afford HC is irresponsible? WHat of you lose your job, your career dissolves, etc, etc....? Is that irresponsible? Quote LUCKY...: And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? Right and the Repiblican Party has orchestrated some pretty good Ponzi schemes.....er was that just a coincidence? ----------------------------------------------- I'm wasting my time..... See, Sarah Palin, corner you and you run. WE GET IT, REPUBLICANS ARE AS COMPASSIONATE AS THE GARDEN VARIETY SERIAL KILLER. Quote LUCKY...: And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? Capitalism just means the market controls the means of production, the market is controlled by the elite, so this addresses this post in no way. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To ------------------------------------------------ Again, I'm wasting my time. It appears you're going to see what you want to regardless. And again, you're stuck so you cut-n-run. Answer the above question. Quote LUCKY...: You don't say, which explains why you skirted the question of how Republicans/COnservatives are compassionate to needy people. ------------------------------------ Tell me, how is giving someone other peoples' money compassionate? How is enabling welfare dependency compassionate? THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN TAX OUTLAYS AND TAX REVENUE OTHER THAN AN INDIRECT JUNCTION AT THE DEBT / DEFICIT, and that is very indirect. How is it compassion overboosting a military that is not needed at its level and spends 8 times that of the #2 spender while there are homeless and other issues? See, you just can't bring yourself to say, 'FUCK THE POOR' BUT WE KNOW THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN. Quote "disadvantaged" is such a bullshit term. I don't give a fuck about people that don't give a fuck about themselves. THANK YOU, I WILL SAY YOU HAVE CHARACTER IN THE AREA OF HONESTY, AT LEAST WITH THIS QUESTION. LET'S JUST TAKE THIS PARTIAL QUOTE FROM YOU...... Quote "I don't give a fuck about people ..." yEP. Quote I have no respect for people that seek approval by giving away other people's money. I don't want to give away anyone's money, just to establish gov progs. Furthermore, I will be thinking of you when the HC Bill passes. Reconcilliation, here we come. And in teh list of things you won't do, connect how taxation and spending outlays are in any way connected. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TankBuster 0 #33 September 27, 2009 What is the better measure of compassion? What a person gives of their own free will, or what one group forces another to give?The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TankBuster 0 #34 September 27, 2009 Give a man a fish feed him for a day- Teach a man to fish, and he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day.The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Lucky... 0 #35 September 27, 2009 QuoteWhat is the better measure of compassion? What a person gives of their own free will, or what one group forces another to give? I hear ya, I've had to spend on this overbuilt military all my life. Of course I'm posturing as you, there is no direct process where you or I pay for either. 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. With your logic, an indigent person could not be compassionate. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Compassion a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering. So does the definition really describe the origin of the help, or the desire? I wrote the above and edited this in. I nailed it pretty closely. Conservatives seem to worry more about, "fair" or their definition of it rather than compassion. I think we can define conservatives as incompassionate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TankBuster 0 #36 September 27, 2009 QuoteI 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. I don't think you really believe that. We could then go to Saudi Arabia, take over their oil fields, and give all the money to whomever needed it. Say, Africa. Saudi definitely has the ability to pay, and Africa certainly the need. That's compassion on a global scale, no?The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #37 September 27, 2009 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. 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. You support government controlling the people instead of the people controlling the government. Ok, I get it know. I still don’t agree. 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? 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”.) Yep, you have years of success stories upon which to base claims of being the superior of mind Now, don’t get me wrong. I blame the government in total. It seems you pick a party with a track record to be proud of.Did I get this right? "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #38 September 27, 2009 QuoteWasn’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”.) i don't know about you - but i find this type of throwaway comment about black people (stereotyping black people as not a success story) racist...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #39 September 27, 2009 Quote 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”.) i don't know about you - but i find this type of throwaway comment about black people (stereotyping black people as not a success story) racist... You are right, you dont know about meNice try though. Call me what you will. If I was a racist you couldnt shut me up with your kind of PC bullshit. And since I am not, you fail even fucking worseThe party you supports failures and lies do leave a mark on you though, dont they"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #40 September 27, 2009 The proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites goofyjumper 0 #41 September 27, 2009 Quote mmmm..... Quote Radio personality Jack Rice leapt into the news this weekend by asking if Republicans were autistic. The metaphor is crude, and largely undeserved, but merits further exploration. The word autism was first used in 1911 to describe human behaviors so self-centered as to suggest failure to process the realities of the outside world in language, and an inability to relate to other humans. In the 1940s symptoms were defined further as social withdrawal, difficulty in communicating, extreme self-absorption, and repetitive or stereotyped behaviors. Now called Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), it is generally agreed that people with ASD have few linguistic, social, cultural or logical constraints to manage their lives. A current definition adds " ...people with ASD have difficulty seeing things from another person's perspective. Most 5-year-olds understand that other people have different information, feelings, and goals than they have. A person with ASD may lack such understanding. This inability leaves them unable to predict or understand other people's actions." http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/26-0 That was damn funny!----------------- I love and Miss you so much Honey! Orfun #3 ~ Darla Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #42 September 27, 2009 QuoteThe proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites timmyfitz 0 #43 September 27, 2009 QuoteQuoteWasn’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”.) i don't know about you - but i find this type of throwaway comment about black people (stereotyping black people as not a success story) racist... Is there anything you don't see as racist? On another note. Here is a paragraph from an article linked earlier in this thread. Just made me chuckle a little. "In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity because Vice President Al Gore's charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore "gave at the office." By using public office to give other peoples' money to government programs, he was being charitable, as liberals increasingly, and conveniently, understand that word." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #44 September 27, 2009 Quote Quote The proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. A childish attack and no content!See! You helped with the point! Thanks "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #45 September 27, 2009 QuoteOne Liners that some it up: Liberals- Want to give hand outs conservatives- Want to give jobs Hm. Logically, that means that moderates want to give hand jobs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #46 September 27, 2009 QuoteQuoteOne Liners that some it up: Liberals- Want to give hand outs conservatives- Want to give jobs Hm. Logically, that means that moderates want to give out hand jobs.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites timmyfitz 0 #47 September 27, 2009 QuoteQuoteThe proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. You whin. He mispeled a werd. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #48 September 27, 2009 Quote Quote Quote The proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. A childish attack and no content!See! You helped with the point! Thanks I guess I was just titillated by the tittle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 23 #49 September 27, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote The proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. A childish attack and no content!See! You helped with the point! Thanks I guess I was just titillated by the tittle. Will I am hapy to hlp"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Tolgak 0 #50 September 27, 2009 I was just going to lurk the thread until I saw this. Quote Quote And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? By not infringing on the right of people to live their lives as they see fit, whether the decisions they make be positive or negative. 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. 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.Dropzones are terrible places for inspiration. What does one think when one looks up for a sign only to see a bunch of people falling? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 2 of 5 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. 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. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Lucky... 0 #31 September 27, 2009 QuoteThe reason we use one liners is because that seems to be anyone understands anymore. Good, because I don't understand that. BTW, you use one-liners and answer questions other than that of which was asked because that is your protocol. Remember Palin during the debates? She was constantly answering different question than that of which she was asked; remember? Of course not. QuoteLiberals- Want to give hand outs conservatives- Want to give jobs Liberals want to ensure economic security and HC. Conservatives want to give sub-minimum wage jobs to illegals. If ya don't think so, then answer why Reagan gave them all amnesty in 1986. QuoteThe fundamental flaw with liberal line of thinking is you can't give a hand out to everybody. Somebody has to have a job so you can tax them. Then perhaps, in your infinite wisdom, explain how the unemployment rate over the last 28 years, actually longer but it's a good refrence point, why is it that the unemp rate has been faaar higher with an R in office than in times when a D has been in office. See, your points just fall thru when a GD liberal comes along and drops data on you. BTW, just ask and I will provide a link. QuoteThe way you create jobs is to lower taxes on the small business guys so they can create them. Then explain how during the Great Depression, as it kicked off, Hoover lowered taxes and the GD slipped deeper into unemployment and total hazzard. Then at the end of Hoover's term, he realized he fucked up after unemployment was 25% and raised taxes, FDR did too and the unemployment rate dropped every year from 1933 thru the war with the exception of 1937-38 when there was a mid-reecovery recession. Then explain how during the Reagan years we had the highest unemp rate since the GD at 10.8%....BTW, he cut taxes too, incredibly. Then as GWB entered office he cut taxes and shed the most jobs in some time. Also, explain how Clinton inherited 7% unemployment, sharply raised taxes and then dropped the debt increase to virtually level, took a 290B deficit that turned to a 236B surplus 8 years later and unemployment was left at 4%. I know, I know, you will find something else to talk about. BTW, if anyone wants a data reference for any/all of this, LMK. QuoteThe Autistic liberals can't see past their "liberal guilt". Yes, we're guilty of unfucking the R mess, as stated above. QuoteThey want to give away the farm because they think it will ease the guilt they feel because they live in America with mechanisms set up to allow them to provide for them selves and their families. See, listen to your rhetoric, I post historically accurate facts and you post some BS about weak-kneed liberals this and tough Republican that. Try posting some factual data (unemp, debt, deficit, etc) unless that is hard to do to support your position. QuoteMore one liners: Give a man a fish feed him for a day- Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime. And even that, tuition at my local univ at least doubled, so you can't even teach a man to fish w/o dropping the bank while under Republican rule. Nice cliches, address ALL of the data. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #32 September 27, 2009 Quote What's more compassionate, expecting people to work for a living, or enabling them to live off the government (ie. the work of others). ? Is that not the same as rewarding something you're trying to prevent? Seems counterproductive. How is that compassionate in any way? People w/preexisting conditions, handicapped people, undereducated, uneducated, low-income people,etc..... You've made your point, you and your party simply don't care about poor people. Quote LUCKY....: So it's all about military expenditures and not about the well-being of people and health of a nation? I see we agree that concservative values are such as this. ---------------------------------------- An yet another point that you miss. You really see what you want to see don't you? Your way of ignoring the needs of people in a bad way. WHy not address the question? I nailed it, all for the military, none for social svs; fuck poor people - we hear ya. Quote Given that we're 12,000,000,000,000 in the hole, I'd say it's a fair assumption. Reagan and GWB are responsible for that in the way of tax cuts and military spending. GWHB and Clinton raised taxes and sharply cut the military which is how we got into the 12T debt we are. Under Clinton that mess was terminated, which was setup by GHWB's tax increases and spending cuts. Can you really argue that? Quote LUCKY...: Explain how Canada is beating our dollar, has been since GWB, yet they afford uni-care. _____________________________ Well, the fed is printing money like it's going out of style, and they have politicians that can think of something other than spending more money - it appears that all of out politicians try to spend their way out of everything. As Clinton took office it took $1.28 Canadian to buy $1 US. As he left it was $1.55 Canadian to buy $1 US. Under GWB the US Dollar fell below the Candian dollar a year before he left, then when the market crashed people pulled out and stuck it in bonds which gave him a little bump to $1.20ish. Still, even with the bump, under Clinton with tax increases the US Dollar gained considerable value, so once again your point is your personal rhetoric rather than fact. Quote How much was the cost of health care increasing before government got involved (medicare and medicaid). ? Weren't those programs created to solve the very problems we have now? Are you saying that HC was never a problem? I'd say as Fascist Pig Ronnie came in and sucked corporations is when HC became an issue. Quote LUCKY...:So Viet Nam vets, Gulf War vets that have some/no limbs, etc are just being drug along and further injured by the "charity" that is extended. Furthermore, HC can bring people to work as they have higher quality of their lives. -------------------------------------------------- Are you really that dense? Are you really that unable to answer the question that you have to use personal attacks? Quote LUCKY...: And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? ---------------------------------------------- By not infringing on the right of people to live their lives as they see fit, whether the decisions they make be positive or negative. Giving more choices isn't an infringement, abridging choices is. Quote Forcing my decision? If anyone's trying to force anything upon anyone, it's you. That's pretty obvious. I'm not trying to tell you how to live or which HC to use. You are to me. Quote LUCKY...: Just because it is and has been the norm to deny HC doesn't mean it is the standard, it is not. ------------------------------------------------------ You're confusing denying with not providing. Two completely different things, no matter how you rationalize it. If you cannot afford HC, you are denied it. Try calling a doctor or hospital and see what they say when you want to go there w/o cash or ins. YOU GET DENIED. Quote LUCKY...: Remember, salvery was once the norm. ------------------------------------------ So was personal responsibility. And being sick w/o money to afford HC is irresponsible? WHat of you lose your job, your career dissolves, etc, etc....? Is that irresponsible? Quote LUCKY...: And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? Right and the Repiblican Party has orchestrated some pretty good Ponzi schemes.....er was that just a coincidence? ----------------------------------------------- I'm wasting my time..... See, Sarah Palin, corner you and you run. WE GET IT, REPUBLICANS ARE AS COMPASSIONATE AS THE GARDEN VARIETY SERIAL KILLER. Quote LUCKY...: And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? Capitalism just means the market controls the means of production, the market is controlled by the elite, so this addresses this post in no way. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In Reply To ------------------------------------------------ Again, I'm wasting my time. It appears you're going to see what you want to regardless. And again, you're stuck so you cut-n-run. Answer the above question. Quote LUCKY...: You don't say, which explains why you skirted the question of how Republicans/COnservatives are compassionate to needy people. ------------------------------------ Tell me, how is giving someone other peoples' money compassionate? How is enabling welfare dependency compassionate? THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN TAX OUTLAYS AND TAX REVENUE OTHER THAN AN INDIRECT JUNCTION AT THE DEBT / DEFICIT, and that is very indirect. How is it compassion overboosting a military that is not needed at its level and spends 8 times that of the #2 spender while there are homeless and other issues? See, you just can't bring yourself to say, 'FUCK THE POOR' BUT WE KNOW THAT'S WHAT YOU MEAN. Quote "disadvantaged" is such a bullshit term. I don't give a fuck about people that don't give a fuck about themselves. THANK YOU, I WILL SAY YOU HAVE CHARACTER IN THE AREA OF HONESTY, AT LEAST WITH THIS QUESTION. LET'S JUST TAKE THIS PARTIAL QUOTE FROM YOU...... Quote "I don't give a fuck about people ..." yEP. Quote I have no respect for people that seek approval by giving away other people's money. I don't want to give away anyone's money, just to establish gov progs. Furthermore, I will be thinking of you when the HC Bill passes. Reconcilliation, here we come. And in teh list of things you won't do, connect how taxation and spending outlays are in any way connected. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TankBuster 0 #33 September 27, 2009 What is the better measure of compassion? What a person gives of their own free will, or what one group forces another to give?The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TankBuster 0 #34 September 27, 2009 Give a man a fish feed him for a day- Teach a man to fish, and he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day.The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #35 September 27, 2009 QuoteWhat is the better measure of compassion? What a person gives of their own free will, or what one group forces another to give? I hear ya, I've had to spend on this overbuilt military all my life. Of course I'm posturing as you, there is no direct process where you or I pay for either. 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. With your logic, an indigent person could not be compassionate. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Compassion a feeling of deep sympathy and sorrow for another who is stricken by misfortune, accompanied by a strong desire to alleviate the suffering. So does the definition really describe the origin of the help, or the desire? I wrote the above and edited this in. I nailed it pretty closely. Conservatives seem to worry more about, "fair" or their definition of it rather than compassion. I think we can define conservatives as incompassionate. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TankBuster 0 #36 September 27, 2009 QuoteI 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. I don't think you really believe that. We could then go to Saudi Arabia, take over their oil fields, and give all the money to whomever needed it. Say, Africa. Saudi definitely has the ability to pay, and Africa certainly the need. That's compassion on a global scale, no?The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #37 September 27, 2009 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. 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. You support government controlling the people instead of the people controlling the government. Ok, I get it know. I still don’t agree. 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? 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”.) Yep, you have years of success stories upon which to base claims of being the superior of mind Now, don’t get me wrong. I blame the government in total. It seems you pick a party with a track record to be proud of.Did I get this right? "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #38 September 27, 2009 QuoteWasn’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”.) i don't know about you - but i find this type of throwaway comment about black people (stereotyping black people as not a success story) racist...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #39 September 27, 2009 Quote 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”.) i don't know about you - but i find this type of throwaway comment about black people (stereotyping black people as not a success story) racist... You are right, you dont know about meNice try though. Call me what you will. If I was a racist you couldnt shut me up with your kind of PC bullshit. And since I am not, you fail even fucking worseThe party you supports failures and lies do leave a mark on you though, dont they"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #40 September 27, 2009 The proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goofyjumper 0 #41 September 27, 2009 Quote mmmm..... Quote Radio personality Jack Rice leapt into the news this weekend by asking if Republicans were autistic. The metaphor is crude, and largely undeserved, but merits further exploration. The word autism was first used in 1911 to describe human behaviors so self-centered as to suggest failure to process the realities of the outside world in language, and an inability to relate to other humans. In the 1940s symptoms were defined further as social withdrawal, difficulty in communicating, extreme self-absorption, and repetitive or stereotyped behaviors. Now called Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), it is generally agreed that people with ASD have few linguistic, social, cultural or logical constraints to manage their lives. A current definition adds " ...people with ASD have difficulty seeing things from another person's perspective. Most 5-year-olds understand that other people have different information, feelings, and goals than they have. A person with ASD may lack such understanding. This inability leaves them unable to predict or understand other people's actions." http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/26-0 That was damn funny!----------------- I love and Miss you so much Honey! Orfun #3 ~ Darla Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #42 September 27, 2009 QuoteThe proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #43 September 27, 2009 QuoteQuoteWasn’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”.) i don't know about you - but i find this type of throwaway comment about black people (stereotyping black people as not a success story) racist... Is there anything you don't see as racist? On another note. Here is a paragraph from an article linked earlier in this thread. Just made me chuckle a little. "In 2000, brows were furrowed in perplexity because Vice President Al Gore's charitable contributions, as a percentage of his income, were below the national average: He gave 0.2 percent of his family income, one-seventh of the average for donating households. But Gore "gave at the office." By using public office to give other peoples' money to government programs, he was being charitable, as liberals increasingly, and conveniently, understand that word." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #44 September 27, 2009 Quote Quote The proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. A childish attack and no content!See! You helped with the point! Thanks "America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #45 September 27, 2009 QuoteOne Liners that some it up: Liberals- Want to give hand outs conservatives- Want to give jobs Hm. Logically, that means that moderates want to give hand jobs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #46 September 27, 2009 QuoteQuoteOne Liners that some it up: Liberals- Want to give hand outs conservatives- Want to give jobs Hm. Logically, that means that moderates want to give out hand jobs.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
timmyfitz 0 #47 September 27, 2009 QuoteQuoteThe proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. You whin. He mispeled a werd. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #48 September 27, 2009 Quote Quote Quote The proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. A childish attack and no content!See! You helped with the point! Thanks I guess I was just titillated by the tittle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #49 September 27, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote The proper tittle for this thread should be. "A demonstration of the left using PC thugery" Sigh. OK, back to the 2nd Grade. 1 "t". 2 "g's". Unless you're turning this into a Bonfire thread. A childish attack and no content!See! You helped with the point! Thanks I guess I was just titillated by the tittle. Will I am hapy to hlp"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tolgak 0 #50 September 27, 2009 I was just going to lurk the thread until I saw this. Quote Quote And this describes how Republicans are compassionate exactly how? By not infringing on the right of people to live their lives as they see fit, whether the decisions they make be positive or negative. 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. 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.Dropzones are terrible places for inspiration. What does one think when one looks up for a sign only to see a bunch of people falling? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
