The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: Lanie on June 29, 2009, 09:31:51 PM
-
So let me get this straight.
Obama is going to stand by and watch this one sided slaughter from Iran in the name of our rep, BUT he's condemning the coup in Honduras and assisting their President? The man wanted to add an unconstitutional amendment to the Hondurian constitution. It was possibly a step in the direction of being the President indefinately. Oh, and I don't see it as a coinsidence that Chavez was on his side.
Meanwhile, the a-hole "President" of Iran is once again trying to intimidate us because Obama dared to actually say that murdering protesters was wrong.
What the hell? This man does not have his priorities straight at all. It makes me mad.
Okay, rant off.
-
But hey, you know, he's great at getting tax cheats into new jobs, and promoting racist judges. You've got to give him some, um, "credit." :-)
-
(http://op-for.com/attention20whore3lm9.jpg)
-
So let me get this straight.
Obama is going to stand by and watch this one sided slaughter from Iran in the name of our rep, BUT he's condemning the coup in Honduras and assisting their President? The man wanted to add an unconstitutional amendment to the Hondurian constitution. It was possibly a step in the direction of being the President indefinately. Oh, and I don't see it as a coinsidence that Chavez was on his side.
Meanwhile, the a-hole "President" of Iran is once again trying to intimidate us because Obama dared to actually say that murdering protesters was wrong.
What the hell? This man does not have his priorities straight at all. It makes me mad.
Okay, rant off.
You have to look at it from barry's point of view. In Iran, the people are protesting against a totalitarian government, and so barry is siding with that government over it's people. However, in Honduras, barry is siding with the wanna-be totalitarian dictator against the will of it's people.
barry's priorities are right where they always were. Better get used to wearing a headscarf and shouting sieg heil.
-
And the truth shall set you free.
Rev Wright's brand of "liberation theology" has Marxist roots
William Ayers is a Marxist trerrorist
Saul Alinsky was a Marxist agitator
In Cairo the president apologized for Operation: Ajax where the US aided the overthrow of a Soviet puppet state in Iran
In pre-school they teach kids about these things...they're called: PATTERNS
I can't quite say I believe Obama is some sort of Manchurian candidate--BUT--I will say he has built his entire political prespective on the notion America is funadmentally unfair, unjust, imperialistic, racist, scxist etc etc etc and as such he will lunge at opportunities to support so-called "leftist revolutionaries" while remaining mum about real democracies struggling to be free in the name of: not-being-like-those-white-guys-that-came-before.
So how you feeling about your vote these days?
-
And the truth shall set you free.
Rev Wright's brand of "liberation theology" has Marxist roots
William Ayers is a Marxist trerrorist
Saul Alinsky was a Marxist agitator
In Cairo the president apologized for Operation: Ajax where the US aided the overthrow of a Soviet puppet state in Iran
In pre-school they teach kids about these things...they're called: PATTERNS
I can't quite say I believe Obama is some sort of Manchurian candidate--BUT--I will say he has built his entire political prespective on the notion America is funadmentally unfair, unjust, imperialistic, racist, scxist etc etc etc and as such he will lunge at opportunities to support so-called "leftist revolutionaries" while remaining mum about real democracies struggling to be free in the name of: not-being-like-those-white-guys-that-came-before.
So how you feeling about your vote these days?
No matter which way I go, I'm never happy with my vote.
-
No matter which way I go, I'm never happy with my vote.
Trust me I haven't been totally happy since I could vote.
Still, your points are dead-on.
We may yet bring you over to The Dark Side, LLC. You get a daily stipend plus all the kittens you can eat.
-
Trust me I haven't been totally happy since I could vote.
Still, your points are dead-on.
We may yet bring you over to The Dark Side, LLC. You get a daily stipend plus all the kittens you can eat.
Where have you heard that before, Lanie? (Except the kitten-eating thing, of course.) :-)
-
So let me get this straight.
Obama is going to stand by and watch this one sided slaughter from Iran in the name of our rep, BUT he's condemning the coup in Honduras and assisting their President? The man wanted to add an unconstitutional amendment to the Hondurian constitution. It was possibly a step in the direction of being the President indefinately. Oh, and I don't see it as a coinsidence that Chavez was on his side.
Meanwhile, the a-hole "President" of Iran is once again trying to intimidate us because Obama dared to actually say that murdering protesters was wrong.
What the hell? This man does not have his priorities straight at all. It makes me mad.
Okay, rant off.
Lemme see........you voted for him right??
I suppose that this is just another instance where you didn't do your homework.............
Everyone else on this board pretty much had him pegged as a lightweight socialist wannabe, with no experience, and an overabundance of ego......who would be an unmitigated disaster as president......except you, so rant or not you own him now.
I remember endless discussions on CC during the campaign highlighting all of his obvious deficiencies as a potential POTUS, but I guess you dismissed them out of hand because he had a (D) after his name, right??
You got what you wanted........perhaps you will remember this during the next election cycle (however much I doubt it).
doc
-
Lemme see........you voted for him right??
I suppose that this is just another instance where you didn't do your homework.............
Everyone else on this board pretty much had him pegged as a lightweight socialist wannabe, with no experience, and an overabundance of ego......who would be an unmitigated disaster as president......except you, so rant or not you own him now.
I remember endless discussions on CC during the campaign highlighting all of his obvious deficiencies as a potential POTUS, but I guess you dismissed them out of hand because he had a (D) after his name, right??
You got what you wanted........perhaps you will remember this during the next election cycle (however much I doubt it).
doc
I was going to vote for McCain because I really liked Palin. I liked her because she was a woman in power with a lot of enthusiasm. I was also hoping that she would do something to help kids with disabilities (particularly in education). But as time went on, I was becoming more and more convinced that she didn't know enough. Meanwhile, it was looking like McCain wanted to follow Bush's hands off policy. I was scared of having yet another four years of hands off economics. I felt the government had to do something. So yes, I did vote for Obama. I still like Palin. Heck, I joined her fanclub on facebook. lol.
As for why I didn't listen to the Republicans on this subject, it's simple. It's because many Republicans are always screaming "Socialism" and "Communism." After a while, I viewed it as the boy crying wolf. I'm sorry to be offensive, but there's the answer to the question.
I still believe in a middle ground. I don't understand why we can't have something between a hands off economy and a Socialist/totally big brother one.
I also went batshit crazy over some of the stuff Bush said and did. I told myself I wouldn't act this way again. So I'm actually going to have to see more proof before I condemn Obama as a totally bad President. I'm not happy with him now. That doesn't mean I won't be later. Heck, one could ask why Bush and others were so concerned about Israel, but not Sudan. Why are we worried about North Korea, but not China? Why am I a certain way? The media. The media is feeding my emotions and I'm dumb enough to go for it.
I still think we need to be helping Iran, but I don't want to do what I did last time.
-
I was going to vote for McCain because I really liked Palin. I liked her because she was a woman in power with a lot of enthusiasm. I was also hoping that she would do something to help kids with disabilities (particularly in education). But as time went on, I was becoming more and more convinced that she didn't know enough. Meanwhile, it was looking like McCain wanted to follow Bush's hands off policy. I was scared of having yet another four years of hands off economics. I felt the government had to do something.
You forgot about $700 billion in TARP funds? Now we're starting to learn that Bush's TreasSec used the money to strongarm banks into buying financial houses they had no interest in owning...and Obama is no better, i.e. GM.
Nothing would have been the best result because when pols run the economy they do nothing more than feather their own nests. Why bother turning a profit when you can simply use other people's money to buy votes from constituents?
Bush was an idiot because he was trying to give McCain a cushion rather than looking unengaged especially since McCain was claiming to stay campaigning while Obama made hay of going to Washington vote present because he was full of Hopenchange.
So yes, I did vote for Obama. I still like Palin. Heck, I joined her fanclub on facebook. lol.
I am fond of saying: Joe Biden once--once--sponsored a bill to toughen domestic violence laws...Sarah Palin inspired women to learn how to shoot.
As for why I didn't listen to the Republicans on this subject, it's simple. It's because many Republicans are always screaming "Socialism" and "Communism." After a while, I viewed it as the boy crying wolf. I'm sorry to be offensive, but there's the answer to the question.
I'll call that fair but I'll also point out:
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
I still believe in a middle ground. I don't understand why we can't have something between a hands off economy and a Socialist/totally big brother one.
I also went batshit crazy over some of the stuff Bush said and did. I told myself I wouldn't act this way again. So I'm actually going to have to see more proof before I condemn Obama as a totally bad President. I'm not happy with him now. That doesn't mean I won't be later. Heck, one could ask why Bush and others were so concerned about Israel, but not Sudan. Why are we worried about North Korea, but not China? Why am I a certain way? The media. The media is feeding my emotions and I'm dumb enough to go for it.
Because the people fixated on eradicating Israel are also aiming for us. We do give help to other places but generally our SpecOps etc can only go where they are invited. Still, we fry the bad guys when we can but those with international reach take priority.
We focus on the NorKs because they actively threaten us and are within cannon shot of 28,000 US troops while the PRC holds trillions of dollars of bonds we could renege on in a heartbeat if they @#$% with us or our friends.
You're asking fair questions but you're (inadvertently?) using the Perfect to argue against the Good.
-
But as time went on, I was becoming more and more convinced that she didn't know enough.
Bullshit. You heard shit on TV like "I can see Russia from my house", which she NEVER said, and believed it. That woman was hands down more qualified to be the POTUS than the current idiot in office who had NO executive experience whatsoever. As for hand's off economic policies, Obama's grubby hands are ALL OVER the economy right now. How's that shit workin' for ya?
"If we don't act:"
"GM and Chrysler will go bankrupt"
We did, and they did.
"Unemployment will reach 9.5%"
We did, it did.
"Health insurance will become unaffordable"
....I'm starting to see a pattern here.
The Kenyan doesn't know his ass from a ****in' hole in the ground. He's either intentionally destroying this nation as our ancestors knew it, or he's too ignorant to do the job. Either way, I could make a case for impeachment to save the nation.
-
I was going to vote for McCain because I really liked Palin. I liked her because she was a woman in power with a lot of enthusiasm. I was also hoping that she would do something to help kids with disabilities (particularly in education). But as time went on, I was becoming more and more convinced that she didn't know enough. Meanwhile, it was looking like McCain wanted to follow Bush's hands off policy. I was scared of having yet another four years of hands off economics. I felt the government had to do something. So yes, I did vote for Obama. I still like Palin. Heck, I joined her fanclub on facebook. lol.
As for why I didn't listen to the Republicans on this subject, it's simple. It's because many Republicans are always screaming "Socialism" and "Communism." After a while, I viewed it as the boy crying wolf. I'm sorry to be offensive, but there's the answer to the question.
I still believe in a middle ground. I don't understand why we can't have something between a hands off economy and a Socialist/totally big brother one.
I also went batshit crazy over some of the stuff Bush said and did. I told myself I wouldn't act this way again. So I'm actually going to have to see more proof before I condemn Obama as a totally bad President. I'm not happy with him now. That doesn't mean I won't be later. Heck, one could ask why Bush and others were so concerned about Israel, but not Sudan. Why are we worried about North Korea, but not China? Why am I a certain way? The media. The media is feeding my emotions and I'm dumb enough to go for it.
I still think we need to be helping Iran, but I don't want to do what I did last time.
Palin had more experience - as VP - than Obama...and McCain was one of the few that attemped to fix Fannie and Freddie before the collapse. There was literally no comparison...which makes Obama's win even more obviously a vote for his race instead of for a real president.
-
Lanie/Bridget - Bullsh*tting her way through Conservative websites since 2004.
:rolleyes:
She can't stand DU but defended them and justified them left and right at TOS.
Claims to be a Christian at TOS and CC but bashes religion every chance she gets.
Tells us she like McCain and Palin then proceeds to justify why she voted her Liberal conscience and pulled the lever for Obama.
And on...and on...and on
-
Lanie/Bridget - Bullsh*tting her way through Conservative websites since 2004.
:rolleyes:
She can't stand DU but defended them and justified them left and right at TOS.
Claims to be a Christian at TOS and CC but bashes religion every chance she gets.
Tells us she like McCain and Palin then proceeds to justify why she voted her Liberal conscience and pulled the lever for Obama.
And on...and on...and on
Tx, it's obvious that after something that happened a year ago (in which we got along more than fine beforehand), you won't forgive me. You hate my guts. You're never going to give me another chance again. Okay, I get it. Why are you trying to ensure that nobody else gives me one either? Why are you doing everything in your power?
If I am the horrible, evil, rotten, disgusting person you've been portraying me as, then these people don't need your help to see it. Ignore me like you say you're going to. Give me a chance to either sink or swim. Stop trying to push my head under water out of some long term hatred that you have for me. Please. I'll take you off of ignore for this thread.
Next, I'm very much a Christian. I'm a Christian because I accepted Jesus into my heart and I have a relationship with God. I'm not a Christian because some Republicans approve of me. There's only one whose approval I need, and that's God. I don't need yours. I don't bash religion. If you gave me a chance instead of bashing me all the time, I'd be willing to speak about God, scripture, etc. I might even ask you what you think about a subject. You don't give me that chance though, and that's why I only argue.
Next, on politics, that's just how confused I am. I think it's okay to rethink your ideas. I also think it's okay to not be happy with your leaders no matter which side you're on. It's politics for goodness sakes. There really aren't a lot of good politicians IMO.
And even if I am nothing but a liberal, so what? What's wrong with wanting to speak to the other side about subjects? This country has been divided my entire life. Deep divisions that rip people apart. I've never known this country to be any different. Every four years, all hell breaks loose. It's ridiculous. Tell me what's wrong with wanting to find common ground with some on the other side. And next, some people here have suggested I speak more about stuff I agree about anyway. You bash me when I argue with people here. You bash me when I try to show common ground. You bash me for the sole purpose of bashing me. Give it a rest. At this point, I'm convinced that you're holding a grudge and you flat out hate me. I'm not saying you should never challenge me, but it's becoming clear that you're looking for any excuse to bash me and try to push me out of here. You hate me the way you hated certain other people a few years ago. It's just an insane derangement syndrome with you.
I think the problem is that you believe that if you're not involved, I'll be able to swim. Give these people the credit they deserve, and let them judge me for themselves.
Give it a rest before I start singing "Give Peace a Chance." You don't want to hear me sing. I'll do it.
-
Don't make me remove the .357 from the holster.
-
Don't make me remove the .357 from the holster.
lol.
-
Don't make me remove the .357 from the holster.
Ahh, the ladies favorite. Question is, what's a dude doing with one? :nutkick:
-
Ahh, the ladies favorite. Question is, what's a dude doing with one? :nutkick:
You can use it to bash kittens...and ptarmigans.
-
Ahh, the ladies favorite. Question is, what's a dude doing with one? :nutkick:
Yours does seem to enjoy it.
:fuelfire:
-
As for why I didn't listen to the Republicans on this subject, it's simple. It's because many Republicans are always screaming "Socialism" and "Communism." After a while, I viewed it as the boy crying wolf. I'm sorry to be offensive, but there's the answer to the question.
I still believe in a middle ground. I don't understand why we can't have something between a hands off economy and a Socialist/totally big brother one.
And based on FACTS and ACTIONS that we are seeing from the lightweight in the WH........those "many Republicans" were correct about his socialist leanings.........were they not? So far he is attempting to at least partially nationalize the banking, insurance, auto, and health industries.........he IS a socialist by any reasonable definition.
THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND........either a country's economy and government is based on capitalist principles with individual rights and freedoms, or it is based on a socialist concepts which EVERY TIME results in economic decline/stagnation, loss of personal freedom, and eventually despotism.........it has happened every time it has been attempted, and the result is always the same.......The two governing concepts are diametrically opposed, and will never successfully be mixed.
This is the reason many of us on this board have no use for liberals........of any stripe........their ideas are impractical, silly, Utopian, and never work in actual practice........but they keep dragging them out again and again hoping for a different result........which places liberalism in the category of a mental disorder rather than an ideology........we grow weary of it, and this divide will never be spanned........and I for one, have no patience for anyone that voted for him........you got what you asked for.........and the results may end up being hazardous to your health........
For a person who professes to want to teach you are certainly ignorant of history..........
doc
-
Lanie, what the hell do you think is happening to America since 0bama took the helm?? He is doing NOTHING BUT progressing his socialist agenda. Redistribution of wealth, government run health care, gun control initiatives, higher taxes, controlling the populous of this country through the cap & trade tax, etc are ALL prime examples of a socialist society. We ARE being forced to become socialists. This is dividing the country and will ultimately result in another Revolution. Democrats are no longer liberals, they are "progressives". Look up the term "progressive" in the political sense. Perhaps that will enlighten you.
-
And based on FACTS and ACTIONS that we are seeing from the lightweight in the WH........those "many Republicans" were correct about his socialist leanings.........were they not? So far he is attempting to at least partially nationalize the banking, insurance, auto, and health industries.........he IS a socialist by any reasonable definition.
THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND........either a country's economy and government is based on capitalist principles with individual rights and freedoms, or it is based on a socialist concepts which EVERY TIME results in economic decline/stagnation, loss of personal freedom, and eventually despotism.........it has happened every time it has been attempted, and the result is always the same.......The two governing concepts are diametrically opposed, and will never successfully be mixed.
This is the reason many of us on this board have no use for liberals........of any stripe........their ideas are impractical, silly, Utopian, and never work in actual practice........but they keep dragging them out again and again hoping for a different result........which places liberalism in the category of a mental disorder rather than an ideology........we grow weary of it, and this divide will never be spanned........and I for one, have no patience for anyone that voted for him........you got what you asked for.........and the results may end up being hazardous to your health........
For a person who professes to want to teach you are certainly ignorant of history..........
doc
I agree with the concept that I made my bed, and now I can lie in it. I've often said that about voters no matter which way they voted. I'm still hoping it's not as bad as some conservatives thought.
I do notice the history of places like the USSR and so forth. I've also noticed the countries in the present that have been a Social Democracy. For the most part, they're working out (although Britain needs serious healthcare reform).
-
I agree with the concept that I made my bed, and now I can lie in it. I've often said that about voters no matter which way they voted. I'm still hoping it's not as bad as some conservatives thought.
I do notice the history of places like the USSR and so forth. I've also noticed the countries in the present that have been a Social Democracy. For the most part, they're working out (although Britain needs serious healthcare reform).
Yeah, that's working out for them well, isn't it?? Taxes for them are through the roof. Homes are hyper-inflated. Health care is poor, at best. Crime is at all time highs, even though they have a gun ban over there. Fuel is over $7/ gallon. Need I go on??
-
Lanie, what the hell do you think is happening to America since 0bama took the helm?? He is doing NOTHING BUT progressing his socialist agenda. Redistribution of wealth, government run health care, gun control initiatives, higher taxes, controlling the populous of this country through the cap & trade tax, etc are ALL prime examples of a socialist society. We ARE being forced to become socialists. This is dividing the country and will ultimately result in another Revolution. Democrats are no longer liberals, they are "progressives". Look up the term "progressive" in the political sense. Perhaps that will enlighten you.
With all due respect, I heard similar stuff when Bush was in office. I heard similar stuff when Clinton was in office. They probably said this stuff when Reagan was in office. It's the same old song and dance. This country has been divided up for as long as I've been alive. The idea that one man caused it is ridiculous.
People voted for Obama and Clinton because they really don't want this hands off, companies can do what they want to, crappy healthcare system. Instead of labeling them all as Socialists, why not try to address the problems? Healthcare is a joke in this country. You have to pay money to get a donor's list. Did you know that? That's Capitalism at it's most disgusting part. For those of us who do have private insurance, all of us don't have insurance that will cover pre-conditions. If you're mostly going to the doctor for pre-conditions, then what the hell good is health insurance? Plus, if one comes down with Cancer or another fatal disase, a lot of insurance companies try not to cover it. This all might be fine if going to the doctor wasn't over a hundred dollars and prescription medications were not out the roof. I don't mean to sound harsh, but this is one shitty, ****ed up system you're supporting.
What's worse is that if an idea goes against one side, they're automatically against it. For example, some have spoken up against Wal-Mart's system of selling generic prescriptions for really cheap. They argue it came from countries that might not be FDA regulated. I've been arguing that it's probably not just Wal-Mart since other stores are offering cheap prescriptions and stop trying to get in the way of the poor getting medicine. And the same goes for Canada. Bush acted like he wanted to stop it with the excuse that it might be dangerous. Oh my gosh, has it killed the Canadians yet? Stop trying to get in the way of the poor here. Conservatives supported Bush on this even though they *claim* to want less government regulation.
I can understand not wanting Universal Healthcare because of waiting lists, but do you really want to keep the same piece of crap of a system that we have now? It's garbage. Something needs to be done.
I don't agree with regulating companies to the extend that Obama is wanting. The dork is wanting cigarette companies to get rid of lights and Ultra lights labels for crying outloud. He's turning out to be a total idiot in some areas. What gets me is that he smokes. I sometimes wonder if he isn't just having a big nicotene fit, and is taking it out on the rest of the country. But if a lot of conservatives had their way, there would be no regulations at all. That's also dangerous. Why should we be forced between not affording healthcare because visits and medicine costs too much and investing our money into often USELESS health insurance? Why should we have to choose between this shitty system and a system that puts people on long waiting lists?
Why did I as a voter have to choose between the Republicans (who make it clear that the economy should be allowed to crash and burn for its own good at times) and Obama (who wants to be everybody's big ass brother)? What the hell type of choice is that?
Maybe you all don't think there's a middle ground, but I say there is one.
-
Yeah, that's working out for them well, isn't it?? Taxes for them are through the roof. Homes are hyper-inflated. Health care is poor, at best. Crime is at all time highs, even though they have a gun ban over there. Fuel is over $7/ gallon. Need I go on??
We have a much higher crime rate than all of those countries, probably more than all those countries put together. I don't blame that on guns. I blame it on a culture which always says that violence and punishment is always the answer. Obama said he wanted to focus on rehabilitation. Japan does that, and their repeat crime rate is really low.
And not that it's the President's fault, but didn't gas skyrocket under Bush? I don't think there's much we can do about fuel outside of look for alternative forms of energy. We can't live on the remains of dinosaurs but for so long. I don't know much about the home situation. I do remember speaking to a German who said that she came here for opportunity and realized her thinking was flawed. She said if she had stayed in Germany, that she would have her house by now. I don't know if that's true or not, but she seems to have thought so.
-
...
People voted for Obama and Clinton because they really don't want this hands off, companies can do what they want to, crappy healthcare system. Instead of labeling them all as Socialists, why not try to address the problems? Healthcare is a joke in this country. You have to pay money to get a donor's list. Did you know that? That's Capitalism at it's most disgusting part. For those of us who do have private insurance, all of us don't have insurance that will cover pre-conditions. If you're mostly going to the doctor for pre-conditions, then what the hell good is health insurance? Plus, if one comes down with Cancer or another fatal disase, a lot of insurance companies try not to cover it. This all might be fine if going to the doctor wasn't over a hundred dollars and prescription medications were not out the roof. I don't mean to sound harsh, but this is one shitty, ****ed up system you're supporting.
...
If it is so crappy why are Canadians still coming to the US for healthcare? Why are private clinics in Canada booming?
Hell, Canada barely foots a bill for national defense (they get to take our blood and money for granted) and their system sucks. Ditto the EU, Russia, China and EVERYWHERE ELSE socialist medicine exists.
You can blame capitalism but the fact remains the doctors, hospitals and researchers don't/won't/can't work for free. It takes 10+ years and over $300 million to bring the average drug to market bt all we here about is how unfair it is that pharmaceutical companies want to make a profit.
-
For the record, I haven't really LIKED our Presidents since 1976. Reagan did a lot of good, but he also allowed some damage, especially to civil liberties. It's been downhill ever since. Perhaps you're not old enough to know what Reagan and Bush 41 did.
As far as health care, I can't complain about mine. Many companies provide health care and pre-existing conditions are waived when one signs up for many of the programs. Are there health care programs that are less than optimal?? Certainly. The #1 thing the government should do for health care is limit medical malpractice lawsuits in MOST cases. There are some cases that the Doctor needs to lose their license to practice and pay some hefty restitution. (Like removing the wrong organ, operating on the wrong body part, etc) I don't know about WalMart medications. I DO know that we pay far too much for most prescription medicine.
The FDA is ridiculous. Too many people rely on the Government to run their lives and that is where the problem lies. I don't WANT the government to run my life. Hell, they can't even run themselves properly. If I want to smoke, and drink, so be it. The Government is taxing those "luxuries" out of our reach. It won't be long before the Government will control most every facet of our lives and that is where I have the problem.
As far as fuel, we have PLENTY available to us. The eco-nazis refuse to let us get at it.
-
If it is so crappy why are Canadians still coming to the US for healthcare? Why are private clinics in Canada booming?
Hell, Canada barely foots a bill for national defense (they get to take our blood and money for granted) and their system sucks. Ditto the EU, Russia, China and EVERYWHERE ELSE socialist medicine exists.
You can blame capitalism but the fact remains the doctors, hospitals and researchers don't/won't/can't work for free. It takes 10+ years and over $300 million to bring the average drug to market bt all we here about is how unfair it is that pharmaceutical companies want to make a profit.
I've spoken to people who live in Canada who think their healthcare system is wonderful. They have family members getting serious treatment there.
Actually, I would favor private clinics staying open. If one has the money to go private, then they should be allowed to.
I'm not saying it *should* be universal healthcare, but we do need a reform IMO.
-
For a person who professes to want to teach you are certainly ignorant of history..........
doc
Again...proof positive she's so far out on the left she doesn't ealize what "normal" is.
-
I've spoken to people who live in Canada who think their healthcare system is wonderful. They have family members getting serious treatment there.
The best man at my wedding, a teacher here in the Augusta area who is from Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario, says that for anything other than the sniffles, it sucks ass. Here in the states, we treat that shit at home.
-
The best man at my wedding, a teacher here in the Augusta area who is from Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario, says that for anything other than the sniffles, it sucks ass. Here in the states, we treat that shit at home.
There used to be a member at TOS that is/was Canadian that moved to the U.S. that used to tell us horror stories about socialized medicine.
How the Canucks were always coming across the border to get treatment in days that would take MONTHS at best to get up north.
There's a reason that people from other countries take "medical holidays" to the states.
Don't see too many of those kind of trips heading outbound.
-
I've spoken to people who live in Canada who think their healthcare system is wonderful. They have family members getting serious treatment there.
Actually, I would favor private clinics staying open. If one has the money to go private, then they should be allowed to.
I'm not saying it *should* be universal healthcare, but we do need a reform IMO.
And I have friends from Canada who despise it.
The best reform would be to allow market forces to resume control; a thing that has not happened since HMOs were fabricated by the gov't.
If you set $1 million dollars on a desk and tell people to only take what they need you be pretty certain they will suddenly need a million dollars and those who say they don't need it will be driven out of business by those who do take the money. All health insurance does is create a non-market driven pool of money.
Healthcare, like every other commodity--i.e. food, clothing, housing etc--should be market driven. The fact that suppliers would be trying to reach as broad a market as possible would keep prices down. But insurance comes in and displaces the poor by creating more money than the market could actually generate. Why seek to make healthcare accessible to the poor when the middle and upper classes can displace those dollars with insurance funds?
Instead you seek a system that by its very nature no longer sees consumers as potential customers (read: people giving money) but instead sees them as a virtually unlimited number of consumers of very limited resources. Worse, the system will be governed by a group that has already shown through TARP, the auto bailout, the stimulus package and now Cap-n-Trade that they bankroll cronyism to get their political will.
We scream tyranny and socialism because there is no other definition for the things we describe. Stop giving the self-serving crooks power over your life--and by default our's too. Demand they stick only those things mandated in the Constitution...it's there for a reason.
-
For the record, I haven't really LIKED our Presidents since 1976. Reagan did a lot of good, but he also allowed some damage, especially to civil liberties. It's been downhill ever since. Perhaps you're not old enough to know what Reagan and Bush 41 did.
As far as health care, I can't complain about mine. Many companies provide health care and pre-existing conditions are waived when one signs up for many of the programs. Are there health care programs that are less than optimal?? Certainly. The #1 thing the government should do for health care is limit medical malpractice lawsuits in MOST cases. There are some cases that the Doctor needs to lose their license to practice and pay some hefty restitution. (Like removing the wrong organ, operating on the wrong body part, etc) I don't know about WalMart medications. I DO know that we pay far too much for most prescription medicine.
The FDA is ridiculous. Too many people rely on the Government to run their lives and that is where the problem lies. I don't WANT the government to run my life. Hell, they can't even run themselves properly. If I want to smoke, and drink, so be it. The Government is taxing those "luxuries" out of our reach. It won't be long before the Government will control most every facet of our lives and that is where I have the problem.
As far as fuel, we have PLENTY available to us. The eco-nazis refuse to let us get at it.
I'm old enough to remember seeing Reagan on TV and that's it. I don't remember him as an actual President for what he did. I have had time to read up on the good and bad points about him. I know people think his supply side economics got us out of the recession that Carter was in office for the beginning of. That might be true, but I remember hearing the argument that it hurt the poor. It was supposedly during his administration that buildings in bad shape got destroyed and people were left without a place for a while. In theory, the government is supposed to help them find a new place, but what if they can't get one with the same affordable rates and so forth? I also have issues with his involvement in the Iran/Iraq war. Which side were we supposed to be on? Why did we get involved? I do think we were wrong to push the Shah because the people really didn't want it. I believe in sovereignty.
I do know that Reagan wasn't guilty of starting the help in Afghanistan against the Communists like he was accused of. Carter (a Democrat) started that. I tend to think if the cure is worse than the illness, then stay out of it. Some have argued that Mousavi won't be any better than the current President, but he actually did want to do some reforms. It also appears that people want him there. It also appears that we're being accused of interference regardless, so we might as well do what we want. I think what bothers me the most about Reagan is that he pretty much sealed the Republican Party into the Religious Right. Now, all those activist groups expect Republican candidates to cater to them. Conservative is now associated with a bunch of socially conservative ideas, even though those socially conservative ideas are all about government interference (meaning it's not conservative at all).
I remember the first Bush. I remember him for the month long Persian Gulf War and the recession. Late on, I read a document from the DIA on the Kuwait subject that really bothered me. It pretty much said we needed to do anything, including war to protect our oil interests. From where going to war for oil is NOW wrong, I remember people constantly arguing that it would be justified to go to war for economical reasons. Those ideas lasted until at least the late 1990s.
I remember Clinton. It does look like he got us out of the recession in the mid 1990s, but then he signed away the factory jobs. These ideas would be better enforced by Bush later. I remember him trying to get us into wars that I thought we really shouldn't be getting into (so I was complaining even then). I remember saying that he kept out of Vietnam, but that he would drag us into a war himself. Meanwhile, I heard all the horrible things about him being a "baby killer," a "war dodger," and a man who favored gay marriage. Nevermind that Clinton signed the "Defense of Marriage Act."
George H.W. Bush. Cowboy that freaking scared the hell out of a lot of us. He wouldn't let us know he wasn't as bad as we thought at times.
I think my thing is that I want the government to regulate as much as necessary, but I don't want a big brother. I don't want a completely universal system that takes away my choice, but I don't want to always be at the mercy of big companies. I don't want work places to be able to exploit their workers. With the exception of the factories, sexual haressment cases, and the butcher shops, I don't think we need a lot of government regulation between employers and employees. I can handle my asshole of a boss on my own. Thank you. I don't want Obama regulating the banks and acting like the companies are our enemies. I don't want government telling us what we can do in our private lives with a few exceptions. The Religious Right wants way too much. I don't want to be spied on by my government unless a real reason has been given. I don't want the right to own property to be taken away.
In short, I want a government that doesn't interfere a lot. I'm sorry, but neither party is it. Democrats interfere a lot economically. Republicans interfere a lot socially. You can justify that all you want to, but it's still government interference, and there's nothing conservative about it.
-
And I have friends from Canada who despise it.
The best reform would be to allow market forces to resume control; a thing that has not happened since HMOs were fabricated by the gov't.
If you set $1 million dollars on a desk and tell people to only take what they need you be pretty certain they will suddenly need a million dollars and those who say they don't need it will be driven out of business by those who do take the money. All health insurance does is create a non-market driven pool of money.
Healthcare, like every other commodity--i.e. food, clothing, housing etc--should be market driven. The fact that suppliers would be trying to reach as broad a market as possible would keep prices down. But insurance comes in and displaces the poor by creating more money than the market could actually generate. Why seek to make healthcare accessible to the poor when the middle and upper classes can displace those dollars with insurance funds?
Instead you seek a system that by its very nature no longer sees consumers as potential customers (read: people giving money) but instead sees them as a virtually unlimited number of consumers of very limited resources. Worse, the system will be governed by a group that has already shown through TARP, the auto bailout, the stimulus package and now Cap-n-Trade that they bankroll cronyism to get their political will.
We scream tyranny and socialism because there is no other definition for the things we describe. Stop giving the self-serving crooks power over your life--and by default our's too. Demand they stick only those things mandated in the Constitution...it's there for a reason.
Outside of the right to own guns and property, I don't see where the Constitution supports Capitalism.
How would you propose that we get rid of the system that sells insurance? I have to say that if the prices of healthcare would go down, I wouldn't need it outside of potential surgery.
-
I agree with the concept that I made my bed, and now I can lie in it. I've often said that about voters no matter which way they voted. I'm still hoping it's not as bad as some conservatives thought.
I do notice the history of places like the USSR and so forth. I've also noticed the countries in the present that have been a Social Democracy. For the most part, they're working out (although Britain needs serious healthcare reform).
Have you also noticed that a significant number of European countries are beginning to figure it out and move AWAY from socialism.......France and Germany are privatizing their health care system, changing labor laws to become more competitive, slamming the door on immigration, and their individual governments are becoming more and more conservative.........the only reason that ANY of the EU contries have been able to sustain a "socialist" democracy is that we.....the US taxpayers.......have been footing the bill for their defense since 1945........hell, they couldn't even handle the problems in Serbia, Bosnia, and Kosovo......their own back yard.......we, the decadent capitalists, that they love to look down their respective noses at, spent our blood and treasure, yet again for Europe. Don't cite the EU to me as an example of a functional "social democracy", because if it weren't for us, they either would be speaking German or Russian (or both),
If you want to look at a "real life" example of how well socialism works, take a look at Venezuela......it is happening right now in real time.........check out the economic facts about that country, and the general welfare of its citizens........food shortages, medical care shortages, no jobs.........runaway inflation, when Chavez nationalized oil production, the companies with the talent and knowledge bailed (or were thrown out), and now his oil production is sagging, and there is nobody left in the country that knows how to run it...........that's socialism at work. Eventually, the people will get fed up, and another revolution will take place..........more lives lost in the usless persuit of a leftist "Utopia" that will never exist. And frankly that is what I fear will happen here, if no one reigns the messiah in, and does it quickly......
Our founders are spinning in their graves........
doc
-
Have you also noticed that a significant number of European countries are beginning to figure it out and move AWAY from socialism.......France and Germany are privatizing their health care system, changing labor laws to become more competitive, slamming the door on immigration, and their individual governments are becoming more and more conservative.........the only reason that ANY of the EU contries have been able to sustain a "socialist" democracy is that we.....the US taxpayers.......have been footing the bill for their defense since 1945........hell, they couldn't even handle the problems in Serbia, Bosnia, and Kosovo......their own back yard.......we, the decadent capitalists, that they love to look down their respective noses at, spent our blood and treasure, yet again for Europe. Don't cite the EU to me as an example of a functional "social democracy", because if it weren't for us, they either would be speaking German or Russian (or both),
If you want to look at a "real life" example of how well socialism works, take a look at Venezuela......it is happening right now in real time.........check out the economic facts about that country, and the general welfare of its citizens........food shortages, medical care shortages, no jobs.........runaway inflation, when Chavez nationalized oil production, the companies with the talent and knowledge bailed (or were thrown out), and now his oil production is sagging, and there is nobody left in the country that knows how to run it...........that's socialism at work. Eventually, the people will get fed up, and another revolution will take place..........more lives lost in the usless persuit of a leftist "Utopia" that will never exist. And frankly that is what I fear will happen here, if no one reigns the messiah in, and does it quickly......
Our founders are spinning in their graves........
doc
A revolution in Venezuela might happen because Chavez has quite a grip on them.
I didn't realize that France and Germany were moving away from the Social system in healthcare. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. It's also a good point about the US aid to those countries. I'll give that some thought.
-
Lanie:
Outside of the right to own guns and property, I don't see where the Constitution supports Capitalism.
This is where your naivete really shows itself.
The operative word here isn't "capitalism" or "communism" or any other type of ECONOMIC system that is represented and extolled within the Constitution.
The operative word is FREEDOM.
Personal freedom and personal power (capitalism) versus state power and lessening of personal freedoms all in the guise of "we're from the government and we're here to help you."
Along the way, I freely admit, the original intent of the Constitution has become clouded, mostly due to well-meaning but incredibly misguided bureaucrats, politicians and lawyers who somehow found a problem that is best solved by mandating the federal government to fix it. Ergo, we've got untold thousands of laws, regulations, standards, and "suggestions" that fill entire libraries.
All of this was done because somebody thought the power should go to the federal government. And too many people rolled over and yawned, then went back to sleep.
You libs still haven't woken up to realize the the government is an entity that does NOT serve you and me. It serves ITSELF.
Don't believe me? Look at Congress and what it's done for itself, all on our nickel. Look at the U.N. and what it does with the millions of dollars that the US taxpayer wastes on that POS body. Look at Lord Zero and what he's doing for his socialist agenda.
-
Lanie:
This is where your naivete really shows itself.
The operative word here isn't "capitalism" or "communism" or any other type of ECONOMIC system that is represented and extolled within the Constitution.
The operative word is FREEDOM.
Personal freedom and personal power (capitalism) versus state power and lessening of personal freedoms all in the guise of "we're from the government and we're here to help you."
Along the way, I freely admit, the original intent of the Constitution has become clouded, mostly due to well-meaning but incredibly misguided bureaucrats, politicians and lawyers who somehow found a problem that is best solved by mandating the federal government to fix it. Ergo, we've got untold thousands of laws, regulations, standards, and "suggestions" that fill entire libraries.
All of this was done because somebody thought the power should go to the federal government. And too many people rolled over and yawned, then went back to sleep.
You libs still haven't woken up to realize the the government is an entity that does NOT serve you and me. It serves ITSELF.
Don't believe me? Look at Congress and what it's done for itself, all on our nickel. Look at the U.N. and what it does with the millions of dollars that the US taxpayer wastes on that POS body. Look at Lord Zero and what he's doing for his socialist agenda.
The problem is everybody does not agree with your definition of freedom. If you're a single mom who can't get a job because nobody can look after your kid, then that's not freedom. If you can't work because you can't get medical help for a condition, then that's not freedom either.
And yes, I know. Nobody should be given help if they are human and make a mistake in life. Nobody should be given a second chance. I've been told all about that.
-
I can understand not wanting Universal Healthcare because of waiting lists, but do you really want to keep the same piece of crap of a system that we have now? It's garbage. Something needs to be done.
Why did I as a voter have to choose between the Republicans (who make it clear that the economy should be allowed to crash and burn for its own good at times) and Obama (who wants to be everybody's big ass brother)? What the hell type of choice is that?
Maybe you all don't think there's a middle ground, but I say there is one.
Claptrap.......the US has the finest healthcare in the world. 90% of the technology and research leading to treatments/cures comes from the US........if anything, we have progressed so far that lives of people are being preserved that a decade ago would have been removed from the gene pool.......and I'm not certain that that is a good thing........the only catch is that if you want the best care, you actually have to get a job, become productive, and PAY FOR YOUR CARE. Unique concept isn't it, you can go nearly anywhere in this country and get basic care for free, but if you want the best, it is going to cost you for the talent and resources that you use........what a country!!
The foolishness of the liberal mantra of "universal health care" is just as stupid as saying that everyone has a right to a Rolls Royce.........if you want a Rolls, you are free to work your ass off and buy one in this country......but don't ask ME to pay for yours.........if you can't afford the Rolls, I guess that you are stuck with the used Yugo.
In a free economy, companies come and go......the market rises and falls.......only when government meddles in free trade do we see crashes and mass failures, inflation and runaway unemployment. There are cycles to free and competitive economies, however when government steps in to buy failing companies just to shore up their union campaign contributors all that happens is a delay in the inevitable.........the jobs and the unions with them will eventually vanish, and someone else will fill the void in a more competitive manner.......
doc
-
The problem is everybody does not agree with your definition of freedom. If you're a single mom who can't get a job because nobody can look after your kid, then that's not freedom. If you can't work because you can't get medical help for a condition, then that's not freedom either.
And yes, I know. Nobody should be given help if they are human and make a mistake in life. Nobody should be given a second chance. I've been told all about that.
It's not MY definition of freedom, Lanie. It what the founders envisioned. Personal freedom vice state power. John Adams leaned in your direction in that he advocated a strong central government, but there is no way in hell you can tell me that he thought that the federal ****ing government was going to get into the health care business.
Our very system demands spirited debate, on the issue of personal freedom vice state power. The founders certainly got into those debates and most of them were quite heated.
On your "single mom" argument, are you one? Do you know what the **** you're talking about? I happen to have a daughter older than you by a half decade who is a single mother times FOUR. Why? Because she, like you, thinks that the more kids she begets, the more money she gets from the ****ing government.
Don't sit there on your liberal ass and preach to me about single mothers. I live with that ridiculous bullshit.
Ever heard of charities? Of churches? Of NON-GOVERNMENT organizations whose FUNCTION it is to provide for those who "need a second chance"? Ever hear of those things, Lanie?
How much do YOU contribute to your church? How much do YOU contribute to charity?
You, in your ignorant, blissful little liberal utopia world, still manage to think that it's the ****ing GOVERNMENT's job to bail people out of trouble.
That shit doesn't work in my world, Lanie.
Get a ****ing clue.
I've read every word you've written on this thread and all I can do is shake my head with the realization that until you get your head squarely out of your ASS, you are doomed to repeat the mistakes that the idiot you voted for makes as we speak.
Surely, there can't be that much idiocy in this world.
-
Claptrap.......the US has the finest healthcare in the world. 90% of the technology and research leading to treatments/cures comes from the US........if anything, we have progressed so far that lives of people are being preserved that a decade ago would have been removed from the gene pool.......and I'm not certain that that is a good thing........the only catch is that if you want the best care, you actually have to get a job, become productive, and PAY FOR YOUR CARE. Unique concept isn't it, you can go nearly anywhere in this country and get basic care for free, but if you want the best, it is going to cost you for the talent and resources that you use........what a country!!
The foolishness of the liberal mantra of "universal health care" is just as stupid as saying that everyone has a right to a Rolls Royce.........if you want a Rolls, you are free to work your ass off and buy one in this country......but don't ask ME to pay for yours.........if you can't afford the Rolls, I guess that you are stuck with the used Yugo.
In a free economy, companies come and go......the market rises and falls.......only when government meddles in free trade do we see crashes and mass failures, inflation and runaway unemployment. There are cycles to free and competitive economies, however when government steps in to buy failing companies just to shore up their union campaign contributors all that happens is a delay in the inevitable.........the jobs and the unions with them will eventually vanish, and someone else will fill the void in a more competitive manner.......
doc
We don't really need more than the basic healthcare unless of course one wants surgery or their pre-conditions to be paid for. The idea that these people are just lazy people who should be allowed to suffer is extremely cold. Attitudes like that is EXACTLY why people are pushing so hard for universal healthcare. Seriously.
And nobody even dared answered my concern that you actually have to pay money to get put on a donor's list. This means anybody who doesn't have the money can just die.
That's a really cold system.
I don't mind working for a living, but I do mind a judgmental disgusting system that looks down on the poor and says "let them eat cake."
And now, I'm gonna get it. Oh well, at least I earned my beating this time.
-
Outside of the right to own guns and property, I don't see where the Constitution supports Capitalism.
How would you propose that we get rid of the system that sells insurance? I have to say that if the prices of healthcare would go down, I wouldn't need it outside of potential surgery.
It supports capitalism by securing property rights and limiting the economic purview of the federal government to weights and measure and interstate commerce. Unless something is speccifically delegated to congress via the constitution the 10th amendment forbids congress from writing laws.
Please tell us where in the constitution congress can write healthcare law, establish public schools, regulate energy, provide other people's money to people who have done nothing to earn it, etc etc etc
-
The problem is everybody does not agree with your definition of freedom. If you're a single mom who can't get a job because nobody can look after your kid, then that's not freedom. If you can't work because you can't get medical help for a condition, then that's not freedom either.
WTF? So freedom is someone stealing me to pay for this dumbass and her kids? Your definition of freedom is ****ing warped. She is free. Free to get a job closer, buy a bike, or bum a ride to work. Her freedom ends where mine begins.
And yes, I know. Nobody should be given help if they are human and make a mistake in life. Nobody should be given a second chance. I've been told all about that.
Sure they should. Just don't act like people are FORCED to give her a second chance.
-
And nobody even dared answered my concern that you actually have to pay money to get put on a donor's list. This means anybody who doesn't have the money can just die.
That's a really cold system.
What's your problem, Lanie?
Why is it a problem for somebody to pay money for a service? For a product that's one-of-a-kind?
Why are you insisting that life is a ****ing bowl of cherries? Who said life is fair and that if you need a liver transplant through no fault of your own that you've got to pony up money to get put on a list that that's a travesty?
Are you advocating that the TAXPAYER should pony up that money? Or that the entire organ harvesting and donor program should be run by the government? Is that what you're pushing?
Life's a bitch. And then you die.
Get used to it, Lanie.
-
It's not MY definition of freedom, Lanie. It what the founders envisioned. Personal freedom vice state power. John Adams leaned in your direction in that he advocated a strong central government, but there is no way in hell you can tell me that he thought that the federal ****ing government was going to get into the health care business.
Our very system demands spirited debate, on the issue of personal freedom vice state power. The founders certainly got into those debates and most of them were quite heated.
On your "single mom" argument, are you one? Do you know what the **** you're talking about? I happen to have a daughter older than you by a half decade who is a single mother times FOUR. Why? Because she, like you, thinks that the more kids she begets, the more money she gets from the ****ing government.
Don't sit there on your liberal ass and preach to me about single mothers. I live with that ridiculous bullshit.
Ever heard of charities? Of churches? Of NON-GOVERNMENT organizations whose FUNCTION it is to provide for those who "need a second chance"? Ever hear of those things, Lanie?
How much do YOU contribute to your church? How much do YOU contribute to charity?
You, in your ignorant, blissful little liberal utopia world, still manage to think that it's the ****ing GOVERNMENT's job to bail people out of trouble.
That shit doesn't work in my world, Lanie.
Get a ****ing clue.
I've read every word you've written on this thread and all I can do is shake my head with the realization that until you get your head squarely out of your ASS, you are doomed to repeat the mistakes that the idiot you voted for makes as we speak.
Surely, there can't be that much idiocy in this world.
My sister is a single mother, and she isn't using the system to get ahead. Thanks to the idea that government shouldn't be too involved, her deadbeat ex-husband is two thousand dollars behind on child support. So much for conservativism equaling personal responsibility. I'm sorry about your daughter, but that doesn't give you the right to judge all single mothers.
Hell, I know a married mother that's attempting to shit the system.
I've known other single mothers. One of them wanted to get a job, but couldn't afford the child care. Actually, she wasn't a single mother. Her boyfriend/father of her baby just wasn't worth much at times.
Welfare is designed so one will lose their medical benefits as soon as they get a job. That's fine unless you have a child. Getting one's own insurance might be fine if the woman probably wasn't settling for minimum wage like jobs. She needs all that money for supporting her kid.
We need more job training programs, not just condemning those who aren't on their feet right away or who make a mistake. That's what I view Republican ideas as being thanks to people like you.
Oh, onto private charities. The church was able to help my sister out years ago. There's also a Medical Ministries which helps people out who need prescriptions. But honestly, even my sister's preacher admitted the charities are not efficient enough. She was trying to get help for a woman whose husband was needing a heart and was out of work. My preacher admitted straight out there wasn't enough resources to help out everybody who needed help in the area. Now who's ignorant?
But then again, you have a daughter who has had four children. You know everything I don't know.
-
What's your problem, Lanie?
Why is it a problem for somebody to pay money for a service? For a product that's one-of-a-kind?
Why are you insisting that life is a ****ing bowl of cherries? Who said life is fair and that if you need a liver transplant through no fault of your own that you've got to pony up money to get put on a list that that's a travesty?
Are you advocating that the TAXPAYER should pony up that money? Or that the entire organ harvesting and donor program should be run by the government? Is that what you're pushing?
Life's a bitch. And then you die.
Get used to it, Lanie.
Oh my gosh, you really are nothing but a judgmental ****. You actually justify this shit? That makes you a really cold, heartless mother ****er. And ASSuming that a person who needs a transplant could have done something to prevent it? In some cases, yes. Not always. You are un****ingbelieveable. You are a heartless mother****er that represents everything people see wrong with the Republican Party. People like you are why people like McCain lose.
on edit: These ideas violate the right to life. One doesn't even have the right to stay alive under a system this Capitalist, and you support that?
-
It supports capitalism by securing property rights and limiting the economic purview of the federal government to weights and measure and interstate commerce. Unless something is speccifically delegated to congress via the constitution the 10th amendment forbids congress from writing laws.
Please tell us where in the constitution congress can write healthcare law, establish public schools, regulate energy, provide other people's money to people who have done nothing to earn it, etc etc etc
I agree that specific things are not in the Constitution, but the Constitution does not forbid Congress from making laws. It's only about limiting federal government so states can have some rights.
-
The problem is everybody does not agree with your definition of freedom. If you're a single mom who can't get a job because nobody can look after your kid, then that's not freedom. If you can't work because you can't get medical help for a condition, then that's not freedom either.
And yes, I know. Nobody should be given help if they are human and make a mistake in life. Nobody should be given a second chance. I've been told all about that.
There is no argument about the definition of freedom.........it is immortalized in our Constitution......in great detail.....
As a woman you are "free" to keep your knees together, therefore eliminating the "single mother" syndrome........and since we are on the topic, I worked and raised my children, why the hell should I have to pay for yours!
You are entitled to as many "chances" as you are capable of going out and creating for yourself.......it is not my job to create "chances" for people, or financially underwrite their mistakes in judgement.......unless I choose to do so voluntarily.
doc
-
You've answered my question:
You're not a single mother, therefore do not have direct experience with the issue. I seriously doubt you are involved financially with your sister, as I have been with my daughter (to the extent I am willing to go).
On that subject, please STFU.
Welfare is designed to keep those on the public dole on the public dole. Remove it, and we'll see who has the gumption to get off his/her ass and put food on the table. Again, you're whining about people who make choices in life, then get hit with the consequences of making those choices.
On the subject of charities, once again, you have no personal experience. You speak of your sister again. Uh huh.
Did you ever stop to think that the REASON churches and charities aren't as "efficient" (wow, now THAT's a word :whatever: ) is because people like you think that Big Brotha Government is supposed to dole out money for those who stand there with their hands out?
You know somebody with a bad heart? Or is it you know somebody who knows somebody with a bad heart?
You got to be the most indirectly connected person I've ever seen.
You know everything about everything, but your personal experience is limited to third parties.
Got it. ;)
-
Well Eupher, you've just seen the real bitch that is Lanie/Bridget.
-
There is no argument about the definition of freedom.........it is immortalized in our Constitution......in great detail.....
As a woman you are "free" to keep your knees together, therefore eliminating the "single mother" syndrome........and since we are on the topic, I worked and raised my children, why the hell should I have to pay for yours!
You are entitled to as many "chances" as you are capable of going out and creating for yourself.......it is not my job to create "chances" for people, or financially underwrite their mistakes in judgement.......unless I choose to do so voluntarily.
doc
Honey, I've said no to men more often than nearly all you all put together so don't even give me that self-righteous talk.
So people should never be given another chance to fix where they messed up, not even for the sake of their kids? The Republican Party is soooooo Christian, isn't it? Not in the slightest. I'm not saying one can't be a Christian and be a Republican, but this idea that only Republicans can be Christians is laughable in light of this.
-
Honey, I've said no to men more often than nearly all you all put together so don't even give me that self-righteous talk.
They actually stayed that long? I figured they'd run for the hills as soon as you opened your piehole.
-
Well Eupher, you've just seen the real bitch that is Lanie/Bridget.
:rotf: :rotf:
Yeah, even a worm learns!
-
Soon to come:
"Fine, I'm leaving and NEVER coming back!" :bawl:
-
Well Eupher, you've just seen the real bitch that is Lanie/Bridget.
And vice versa. I had no clue that some here were that heartless toward people. I favor a person's right to live through a disease if it's possible. But I'm the bitch? Only in the sense that I speak up for what's right. I care about people. Eupher doesn't. I've held my tongue in a lot of situations when it's only about being mean toward me. But these other people who just want to live? People who just want to feed their kids? My God. Literally. My God. How can some be so cold?
-
So people should never be given another chance to fix where they messed up, not even for the sake of their kids? The Republican Party is soooooo Christian, isn't it? Not in the slightest. I'm not saying one can't be a Christian and be a Republican, but this idea that only Republicans can be Christians is laughable in light of this.
Apparently, your reading comprehension sucks.
Read what doc wrote:
You are entitled to as many "chances" as you are capable of going out and creating for yourself.......it is not my job to create "chances" for people, or financially underwrite their mistakes in judgement.......unless I choose to do so voluntarily.
Stop asking questions when the answer's already been given.
-
And vice versa. I had no clue that some here were that heartless toward people.
Because YOU DON'T GET IT! There are charities, churches, ANYTHING other than demanding the Damn government confiscate the people's earnings at the point of a gun and with the threat of incarceration. Conservatives are the most compassionate people in the country and contribute a helluva lot more than liberals. Just don't DEMAND it from us because, quite frankly, we don't owe you a Damn thing. People that demand my earnings can up and die for all I care. Call it Darwinism. You want my help, ASK FOR IT.
-
They actually stayed that long? I figured they'd run for the hills as soon as you opened your piehole.
Did you wait until marriage to have sex? If not, then what right do you have to judge others? You're clearly doing something that could result in a baby.
-
The problem is everybody does not agree with your definition of freedom. If you're a single mom who can't get a job because nobody can look after your kid, then that's not freedom. If you can't work because you can't get medical help for a condition, then that's not freedom either.
And what do the people who have the money for THEIR families taken away from them get in exchange?
And if one class can take from another class without permission or the need to give back what is to stop them from becoming outright thieves?
And yes, I know. Nobody should be given help if they are human and make a mistake in life. Nobody should be given a second chance. I've been told all about that.
Straw Man to the Rescue!
-
I care about people. Eupher doesn't.
Oh, and fine. Do it with your own money. So, how much do you contribute to charity?
-
And what do the people who have the money for THEIR families taken away from them get in exchange?
Robbed, raped, carjacked, murdered, burglarized, beat, stolen from, called evil, and have their votes canceled out by the leeches.
-
And vice versa. I had no clue that some here were that heartless toward people. I favor a person's right to live through a disease if it's possible. But I'm the bitch? Only in the sense that I speak up for what's right. I care about people. Eupher doesn't. I've held my tongue in a lot of situations when it's only about being mean toward me. But these other people who just want to live? People who just want to feed their kids? My God. Literally. My God. How can some be so cold?
You're wrong, as usual, Lanie.
You think I'm a heartless bastard? Not to my family, I'm not. And I'm not to those to whom I am FREE to help, either financially or otherwise.
Everybody else? You're on your own.
You call that heartless? I call it REAL.
It is not my function or call in life to fall all over myself helping out every hard luck story that's out there.
Now that that's said, when was the last time you worked in a soup kitchen? For free? Donated to a charity? Got off your liberal ass long enough to stop weeping and wringing your hands and GET TO ****ING WORK???
-
You've answered my question:
You're not a single mother, therefore do not have direct experience with the issue. I seriously doubt you are involved financially with your sister, as I have been with my daughter (to the extent I am willing to go).
On that subject, please STFU.
Welfare is designed to keep those on the public dole on the public dole. Remove it, and we'll see who has the gumption to get off his/her ass and put food on the table. Again, you're whining about people who make choices in life, then get hit with the consequences of making those choices.
On the subject of charities, once again, you have no personal experience. You speak of your sister again. Uh huh.
Did you ever stop to think that the REASON churches and charities aren't as "efficient" (wow, now THAT's a word :whatever: ) is because people like you think that Big Brotha Government is supposed to dole out money for those who stand there with their hands out?
You know somebody with a bad heart? Or is it you know somebody who knows somebody with a bad heart?
You got to be the most indirectly connected person I've ever seen.
You know everything about everything, but your personal experience is limited to third parties.
Got it. ;)
Uh, I bought my niece's school clothes this past year. I took care of her a lot more than her father ever did when she was little. If there's something she needs, I do make sure she has it. That's more than I can ever say for her father. And if something happened to my sister, I would be trying to get custody. Still want to act like you know about my situation? Maybe you should STFU.
Next, I say you're heartless because you actually believe somebody should die if they don't have the money to be put on a donor's list.
I don't really see how my pov about politics has any effect on church charities.
Oh, and what in the hell makes you think I don't participate in any charities? You ASSume a lot.
-
Honey, I've said no to men more often than nearly all you all put together so don't even give me that self-righteous talk.
So people should never be given another chance to fix where they messed up, not even for the sake of their kids? The Republican Party is soooooo Christian, isn't it? Not in the slightest. I'm not saying one can't be a Christian and be a Republican, but this idea that only Republicans can be Christians is laughable in light of this.
First of all, don't call me "honey".........that is reserved for my wife, and she is reading over my sholder and laughing her ass of at the concept that someone can be as nieve as you and still remember to breath regularly.
Also don't drag Christianity into this discussion, as a Christian I contribute to literally dozens of charities and benefits, but I do it voluntarily, and in many cases anonomously.........not at the point of a gun.
I repeat......I'm not responsible to pay for the poor judgement of others, unless I choose to do so..........
doc
-
Because YOU DON'T GET IT! There are charities, churches, ANYTHING other than demanding the Damn government confiscate the people's earnings at the point of a gun and with the threat of incarceration. Conservatives are the most compassionate people in the country and contribute a helluva lot more than liberals. Just don't DEMAND it from us because, quite frankly, we don't owe you a Damn thing. People that demand my earnings can up and die for all I care. Call it Darwinism. You want my help, ASK FOR IT.
Rebel, I probably wouldn't ask for your help or for Eupher's help for anything. I'd think you two were too judgmental to give it. Honestly. There are some conservatives I've gotten help from, and I've helped out conservatives.
-
Rebel, I probably wouldn't ask for your help or for Eupher's help for anything. I'd think you two were too judgmental to give it.
Hypocrite much?
-
Uh, I bought my niece's school clothes this past year. I took care of her a lot more than her father ever did when she was little. If there's something she needs, I do make sure she has it. That's more than I can ever say for her father. And if something happened to my sister, I would be trying to get custody. Still want to act like you know about my situation? Maybe you should STFU.
Next, I say you're heartless because you actually believe somebody should die if they don't have the money to be put on a donor's list.
I don't really see how my pov about politics has any effect on church charities.
Oh, and what in the hell makes you think I don't participate in any charities? You ASSume a lot.
So why'd your sister shack-up with a dirtbag?
And good for you for buying your niece clothes. You're family; that's what family is for...but why am I obligated to pay for your sister? It seems to me that by paying for her life I and the other 80 million taxpayers have done more for her than the guy she had sex with...do we even get a hand-job out it?
-
And what do the people who have the money for THEIR families taken away from them get in exchange?
And if one class can take from another class without permission or the need to give back what is to stop them from becoming outright thieves?
Straw Man to the Rescue!
If you'll read on, you'll see I was right about what people were going to say. That's why I said my last line.
I agree with your first point. That's actually why I agree with progressive taxation. Parents should get a bigger taxcut than non-parents. People should not be taxed to the point that they can't pay their own bills.
-
I agree with your first point. That's actually why I agree with progressive taxation. Parents should get a bigger taxcut than non-parents. People should not be taxed to the point that they can't pay their own bills.
Why? Why in the hell should someone who decides to have a child have less of their money confiscated than someone who decides to hold off or not have one at all? WTF kinda logic is that? They decided to have the child, I didn't.
-
First of all, don't call me "honey".........that is reserved for my wife, and she is reading over my sholder and laughing her ass of at the concept that someone can be as nieve as you and still remember to breath regularly.
Also don't drag Christianity into this discussion, as a Christian I contribute to literally dozens of charities and benefits, but I do it voluntarily, and in many cases anonomously.........not at the point of a gun.
I repeat......I'm not responsible to pay for the poor judgement of others, unless I choose to do so..........
doc
Honey, honey, honey!
As for your wife, tell her I said "hi hon."
I don't really care to grant the request of somebody who is so judgmental toward those they know nothing about. The argument that those who favor helping single mothers are just wanting to be sluts with no consequences is a dumb argument.
-
Don't worry Mrs. TVDOC, you have NO reason to be jealous. That I can assure you.
-
So why'd your sister shack-up with a dirtbag?
And good for you for buying your niece clothes. You're family; that's what family is for...but why am I obligated to pay for your sister? It seems to me that by paying for her life I and the other 80 million taxpayers have done more for her than the guy she had sex with...do we even get a hand-job out it?
She didn't shack up; she married him. Again with the assuming and the judgmentalness.
As for why she did it, he had a completely different personality before the marriage. He didn't drink that much. He took my sister out. He showed a lot of personal responsibility at first. Heck, he even traveled to do some work on his grandfather's house. But after they got married, everything changed. He suddenly drank like a fish, got verbally abusive, and couldn't hold down a job. He still can't hold down a job. Most of us could not see that coming. My sister isn't the only woman who has gone through that in marriage. It's pretty much tricking somebody into marrying you by pretending to be somebody else.
-
So get a life insurance policy and snipe his ass. Hell, snatch his ass up in a bear trap.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCu85V7VhqA
-
You're wrong, as usual, Lanie.
You think I'm a heartless bastard? Not to my family, I'm not. And I'm not to those to whom I am FREE to help, either financially or otherwise.
Everybody else? You're on your own.
You call that heartless? I call it REAL.
It is not my function or call in life to fall all over myself helping out every hard luck story that's out there.
Now that that's said, when was the last time you worked in a soup kitchen? For free? Donated to a charity? Got off your liberal ass long enough to stop weeping and wringing your hands and GET TO ****ING WORK???
Well, the soup kitchen I donate to often says they don't need any extra help. The one time I did stay, I felt like I was in the way. I tend to donate to charity nearly everytime I go through the K-Mart and Wal-Mart lines. I donated a while back for an AIDS fundraiser. I want to donate more, but often am penny pinching.
on edit: I really do want to donate more and do more volunteer work than I've been doing. I'm hoping I can get to that point within a year or less.
-
Take this shit into the fight club, you bunch of whiny assed pussies.
-
Take this shit into the fight club, you bunch of whiny assed pussies.
Go stick a road cone up your ass.
-
So get a life insurance policy and snipe his ass. Hell, snatch his ass up in a bear trap.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCu85V7VhqA
That just seems really funny.
Right now, I have a song going through my head.
Bartender, I really did it this time.
I broke my parole to have a goodtime.
(snip)
So I took the keys to this freakin thread
Crashed that piece of shit, and then stepped away.
Maybe I'll finish the song.
I don't normally act like this. It's sort of rare for me now a days. I guess I just got shocked.
Okay, I need to step away from this thread for a while because I need to do some stuff. I might be back tonight.
Thanks to particular people for at least letting me earn my beating. I don't want a beating in every thread, but it's a comfort to know that I at least did something to deserve getting popped in the mouth. Okay, later.
I can do better later. I'm hungry. Need to go to church and ask for an exorcist. Need to practice certain studies. Later.
-
That's OK, I don't care to f'n hear it.
-
I don't really care to grant the request of somebody who is so judgmental toward those they know nothing about. The argument that those who favor helping single mothers are just wanting to be sluts with no consequences is a dumb argument.
I didn't see anyone making a "request"..........
I doubt that there is any conservative on this board that is not in favor of helping "single mothers"........however, we are not in favor of having our wealth conficated to do it without our express consent to do so.
We also reserve the right to point out to the "single mother" that her actions have consequences, and it is not our job to bail her out of her poor decisions......if we do so, we do so out of the goodness of our heart, not by government mandate.
One of the fundamental differences between liberals and conservatives (so aptly displayed in this thread) is that conservatives believe that people are responsible for their own actions.........in many cases we are happy to help a person in need, but we strongly object to government-mandated "contributions" to irresponsible people, and particularly to those who continue, time and time again, to act irresponsibly.
Liberals however, long for a world where no one is responsible for their lives, it is always "someone else's fault". This, at its base, is the reason that the divide between liberalism and conservativism will never be bridged..........until modern liberalism is completely defeated, and rendered harmless as a political ideology, and I, for one, am dedicated to that cause.
doc
-
Well, the soup kitchen I donate to often says they don't need any extra help. The one time I did stay, I felt like I was in the way. I tend to donate to charity nearly everytime I go through the K-Mart and Wal-Mart lines. I donated a while back for an AIDS fundraiser. I want to donate more, but often am penny pinching.
on edit: I really do want to donate more and do more volunteer work than I've been doing. I'm hoping I can get to that point within a year or less.
Jeezus H. Sufferin' Keeristmas. What kind of bullshit is "I felt like I was in the way"? Nobody said you had to make a ******* souffle!
How about schlepping in a few cases of canned tomatoes and put 'em in the storeroom? How about washing some pots and pans? How about sweeping up the dining room and even commiserating with the "unfortunates"? How about doing something other than cry and whine about how heartless and cruel somebody is on the web because he insists on personal responsibility and keeping the government out of our lives?
-
Lanie, I'm am now utterly convinced you are a moonbat's moonbat. :loser:
Congratulations. You've hit rock bottom.
-
Take this shit into the fight club, you bunch of whiny assed pussies.
:rotf:
I'd bitch-slap you just on principle, but that little feature went away some time ago.
-
Lanie, I'm am now utterly convinced you are a moonbat's moonbat. :loser:
Congratulations. You've hit rock bottom.
Actually she has been there going way back to TOS.........she was just trying to head fake us for the past few months, in a manner of speaking.........
Ten pages before midnight...........
doc
-
Rebel, I probably wouldn't ask for your help or for Eupher's help for anything. I'd think you two were too judgmental to give it. Honestly. ...snip...
Thank God. You're learning. But I'm afraid it's a lost cause, because you are a moonbat's moonbat. It's hopeless. Are you a life member of DU?
If not, are your dues paid up? Or is that something else that you expect the government to provide you?
:popcorn:
-
It's pretty much tricking somebody into marrying you by pretending to be somebody else.
Women do that to men all the time. :rotf:
-
She didn't shack up; she married him. Again with the assuming and the judgmentalness.
As for why she did it, he had a completely different personality before the marriage. He didn't drink that much. He took my sister out. He showed a lot of personal responsibility at first. Heck, he even traveled to do some work on his grandfather's house. But after they got married, everything changed. He suddenly drank like a fish, got verbally abusive, and couldn't hold down a job. He still can't hold down a job. Most of us could not see that coming. My sister isn't the only woman who has gone through that in marriage. It's pretty much tricking somebody into marrying you by pretending to be somebody else.
Marriage is a legally binding contract that can bring the full power of the government to bear on those that renege on its terms. Marriage is established for the express purpose of ensuring spouses cannot be discarded without consequence (unlike the liberal myth that its so fags can express hormonal preference). Unless some social trend has diluted the enforcement of marriage your sister has all the recourse she needs avoid reliance on governmentally extorted funds.
You complained that no one took on your question about organ donations going to those who pay to be on a recipient list. I retorted round-about, with my remark about your sister owing us hand-jobs because you ignored one of my questions.
I'll be nice and answer yours first...
...you pay to go on to a waiting list because organ transplants are a scarce commodity. They have to go to someone so it has to be decided by some means and that means happens to be based on the ability to pay. The payment to get on the list ensures that ability. If not organs will go to those who cannot pay and when they do not pay resources must be taken from elsewhere to cover the difference. In your zeal to guarantee organ transplants are you have to be willing to make sacrifices elsewhere. Surety of payment--while cold on the surface--guarantees the most good can be done for the most people.
Now to return to my unawswered question...
...if one class can take from another class without permission or the need to give back what is to stop them from becoming outright thieves?
-
:rotf:
I'd bitch-slap you just on principle, but that little feature went away some time ago.
We could bring back a vitural bitchslap I suppose.
:bash: :asssmack: :chairshot: :tazeme: :beathorse: :zap:
-
We could bring back a vitural bitchslap I suppose.
:bash: :asssmack: :chairshot: :tazeme: :beathorse: :zap:
I like the chairshot.
-
Take this shit into the fight club, you bunch of whiny assed pussies.
Actually there is a "Lanie" thread going in Fight Club..........
doc
-
Marriage is a legally binding contract that can bring the full power of the government to bear on those that renege on its terms. Marriage is established for the express purpose of ensuring spouses cannot be discarded without consequence (unlike the liberal myth that its so fags can express hormonal preference). Unless some social trend has diluted the enforcement of marriage your sister has all the recourse she needs avoid reliance on governmentally extorted funds.
You complained that no one took on your question about organ donations going to those who pay to be on a recipient list. I retorted round-about, with my remark about your sister owing us hand-jobs because you ignored one of my questions.
I'll be nice and answer yours first...
...you pay to go on to a waiting list because organ transplants are a scarce commodity. They have to go to someone so it has to be decided by some means and that means happens to be based on the ability to pay. The payment to get on the list ensures that ability. If not organs will go to those who cannot pay and when they do not pay resources must be taken from elsewhere to cover the difference. In your zeal to guarantee organ transplants are you have to be willing to make sacrifices elsewhere. Surety of payment--while cold on the surface--guarantees the most good can be done for the most people.
Now to return to my unawswered question...
...if one class can take from another class without permission or the need to give back what is to stop them from becoming outright thieves?
First, I want to apologize for cussing people out earlier. I still think there's a lot of judgmentalness and hatefulness toward the poor in this thread.
In regards to your question, I view the issue of welfare as it being our tax money. We the people are deciding what our money is going to pay for. We're all paying money for something we don't agree with. I don't agree with the death penalty, but you don't see me calling the Department of Corrections a bunch of thieves for using government money for their stuff. Some people want to use the money to help the poor. What's wrong with people other than conservatives having a say about where our money goes? It's not stealing. If that's stealing, then the Department of Corrections is stealing from those who don't agree with the death penalty.
Welfare is a program that one can only use for five years. Most people who want to condemn the people who are on it ignore that fact. You cannot live on welfare, not for long anyway. Most of the other forms of assistance require people to show their receipts to show that they're spending their money on legitimate items (food, rent, etc) and still don't have enough money for particular things. They have to keep showing this evidence as long as they're on assistance. In order to keep getting unemployment insurance, one has to show where they've been looking for work. Unemployment insurance also runs out, so one can't live off of that for long. So this idea that you can go through life not working and "stealing" from others is wrong.
-
Jeezus H. Sufferin' Keeristmas. What kind of bullshit is "I felt like I was in the way"? Nobody said you had to make a ******* souffle!
How about schlepping in a few cases of canned tomatoes and put 'em in the storeroom? How about washing some pots and pans? How about sweeping up the dining room and even commiserating with the "unfortunates"? How about doing something other than cry and whine about how heartless and cruel somebody is on the web because he insists on personal responsibility and keeping the government out of our lives?
I do give food. As for the rest, they really don't want me there. They have a lot of people already doing it. I've volunteered to stay and do something. They send me away. You're just being jugmental. Oh, and I've never made a souffle. You really are just wanting be judgmental. You're looking for any reason to judge me even though I had already cleared up that I regularly gave food to the shelter.
Trying to hold back from doing what I did earlier.
-
Actually there is a "Lanie" thread going in Fight Club..........
doc
And here I had blocked myself out of that. Coming.
-
And nobody even dared answered my concern that you actually have to pay money to get put on a donor's list. This means anybody who doesn't have the money can just die.
Not if you're on Medicaid or Medicare.
-
I don't really care to grant the request of somebody who is so judgmental toward those they know nothing about.
This is the exact same sentiment the vast majority of us have about Bridget.
-
This is the exact same sentiment the vast majority of us have about Bridget.
If I start to show less judgmentalness toward people, would you consider calling me Lanie or Melanie? Just wondering.
-
Not if you're on Medicaid or Medicare.
Good point, and that's government insurance.
If one has a job, but has to quit because their health situation is just that bad, how long does it take to get on Medicaid?
-
First, I want to apologize for cussing people out earlier. I still think there's a lot of judgmentalness and hatefulness toward the poor in this thread.
In regards to your question, I view the issue of welfare as it being our tax money. We the people are deciding what our money is going to pay for. We're all paying money for something we don't agree with. I don't agree with the death penalty, but you don't see me calling the Department of Corrections a bunch of thieves for using government money for their stuff. Some people want to use the money to help the poor. What's wrong with people other than conservatives having a say about where our money goes? It's not stealing. If that's stealing, then the Department of Corrections is stealing from those who don't agree with the death penalty.
Welfare is a program that one can only use for five years. Most people who want to condemn the people who are on it ignore that fact. You cannot live on welfare, not for long anyway. Most of the other forms of assistance require people to show their receipts to show that they're spending their money on legitimate items (food, rent, etc) and still don't have enough money for particular things. They have to keep showing this evidence as long as they're on assistance. In order to keep getting unemployment insurance, one has to show where they've been looking for work. Unemployment insurance also runs out, so one can't live off of that for long. So this idea that you can go through life not working and "stealing" from others is wrong.
I haven't read this thread but if you can't live on welfare for "long" then why do we have generational welfare?
-
I haven't read this thread but if you can't live on welfare for "long" then why do we have generational welfare?
Do you mean when it gets passed down from generation to generation? I personally think it comes from the idea that you can never get out of your poor situation. Poor parents often think that of their kids, and it's backed up by a society who expects it. This is where I think some poor people are wrong. I think it's important to help some poor people get passed the idea that they have to be victims their entire lives by encouraging them to do better. Some would argue that it means taking welfare and other assistance programs away. FWIW, I don't favor assistance programs to live off of (unless one has a disability preventing them from work). I only favor it long enough for one to get on their feet. I do sometimes favor assistance with daycare to ensure the parents can stay on their feet.
But one individual really can't live off of welfare for long. That was ended during the Clinton Administration.
-
First, I want to apologize for cussing people out earlier. I still think there's a lot of judgmentalness and hatefulness toward the poor in this thread.
In regards to your question, I view the issue of welfare as it being our tax money. We the people are deciding what our money is going to pay for. We're all paying money for something we don't agree with. I don't agree with the death penalty, but you don't see me calling the Department of Corrections a bunch of thieves for using government money for their stuff. Some people want to use the money to help the poor. What's wrong with people other than conservatives having a say about where our money goes? It's not stealing. If that's stealing, then the Department of Corrections is stealing from those who don't agree with the death penalty.
Welfare is a program that one can only use for five years. Most people who want to condemn the people who are on it ignore that fact. You cannot live on welfare, not for long anyway. Most of the other forms of assistance require people to show their receipts to show that they're spending their money on legitimate items (food, rent, etc) and still don't have enough money for particular things. They have to keep showing this evidence as long as they're on assistance. In order to keep getting unemployment insurance, one has to show where they've been looking for work. Unemployment insurance also runs out, so one can't live off of that for long. So this idea that you can go through life not working and "stealing" from others is wrong.
You truly are very naive, Lanie. Most of those who would have collected welfare long term now make sure to feign some ailment to collect permanent disability. I've seen it firsthand--perm disability is like the welfare jackpot with some people here in Ohio and there are no limits on it or programs like section 8, food stamps, and other assistance programs. What about the EITC, Lanie? the 5000 or 6000 a year 'bonus' we pay to unwed 'low income' working mothers? No cap on that either. Just don't report you have a boyfriend or the dad living with you and don't marry him and all is good. You glorify the 'poor' yet most of those poor receive so many services and free up their discretionary income for all kinds of material goods. Like I said a good majority of them do it via fraud--you don't think a 5 year limit can hold back a good scam artist do you? Do you really think some of the 'poor' out there really play by the rules? Like I said, you are naive. You truly are. I know people who have lists of even what charities to hit up for things like food and formule evne though they get WIC and food stamps--they do it to make extra income selling the excess or to pay for drugs. Really, I wonder how many 'poor' people you know very well to not have a clue as to how some of this works.
So excuse me if I am 'judgemental' with regards to 'poor' people, but I don't really care for scam artists and fraud peddlers bilking hardworking people of their money by playing on their compassion.
-
Do you mean when it gets passed down from generation to generation? I personally think it comes from the idea that you can never get out of your poor situation. Poor parents often think that of their kids, and it's backed up by a society who expects it. This is where I think some poor people are wrong. I think it's important to help some poor people get passed the idea that they have to be victims their entire lives by encouraging them to do better. Some would argue that it means taking welfare and other assistance programs away. FWIW, I don't favor assistance programs to live off of (unless one has a disability preventing them from work). I only favor it long enough for one to get on their feet. I do sometimes favor assistance with daycare to ensure the parents can stay on their feet.
But one individual really can't live off of welfare for long. That was ended during the Clinton Administration.
Bullshit--scam artists have no qualms with using the children they create to live a life that revolves around no work. When that is how you live your life, that is the values that you pass on to those children, not to mention the fact that the children grow up knowing they are just property to be used to support their parents. That value gets passed down.
If it didn't, then NOBODY would ever get out of 'poverty' but some kids actually escape it by not wanting to use their own children for chattle and wanting to do better for themselves. The ones I've seen succeed either do have parents who are REALLY in poverty but have a good work ethic and morals OR they get as far away from the leeches as possible and go on to live a good life.
You can't make me unsee what I've seen in my life, Lanie and it stands in direct opposition to your very typical liberal view of the 'noble poor'. Some...perhaps...but they usually aren't the lifetime leeches. Now you add to it a burden of unwed mothers(and their sperm donors) who have been coddled to think that if they have a child there is nothing wrong with expecting the public to help you out the first few years and you have a gigantic monetary elephant in the room.
-
And what do the people who have the money for THEIR families taken away from them get in exchange?
And if one class can take from another class without permission or the need to give back what is to stop them from becoming outright thieves?
Straw Man to the Rescue!
That's a relevant statement, Snuggles. As long as a good portion of the 'products' that come out of homes receiving public assistance are so abyssmal...people have the right to be pissed about it. These people who take from other families, oftentimes can't even raise good, quality individuals, but we aren't supposed to be mad or comment about it. I got news for Lanie and others like it--where the money is so is the power or it should be. Think of it as when you lived in your parents house and you lived by their rules. IMO, if someone accepts assistance there should be rules, hoops, and outright responsibilities for taking the hard earned money of another family. If you want help, you accept the rules by which you will parent those children, how you keep your house, and how you conduct your life. You want freedom? Then do it on your own damn dime.
-
That's a relevant statement, Snuggles. As long as a good portion of the 'products' that come out of homes receiving public assistance are so abyssmal...people have the right to be pissed about it. These people who take from other families, oftentimes can't even raise good, quality individuals, but we aren't supposed to be mad or comment about it. I got news for Lanie and others like it--where the money is so is the power or it should be. Think of it as when you lived in your parents house and you lived by their rules. IMO, if someone accepts assistance there should be rules, hoops, and outright responsibilities for taking the hard earned money of another family. If you want help, you accept the rules by which you will parent those children, how you keep your house, and how you conduct your life. You want freedom? Then do it on your own damn dime.
Ding ding ding...we have a winner. :bow:
-
That's a relevant statement, Snuggles. As long as a good portion of the 'products' that come out of homes receiving public assistance are so abyssmal...people have the right to be pissed about it. These people who take from other families, oftentimes can't even raise good, quality individuals, but we aren't supposed to be mad or comment about it. I got news for Lanie and others like it--where the money is so is the power or it should be. Think of it as when you lived in your parents house and you lived by their rules. IMO, if someone accepts assistance there should be rules, hoops, and outright responsibilities for taking the hard earned money of another family. If you want help, you accept the rules by which you will parent those children, how you keep your house, and how you conduct your life. You want freedom? Then do it on your own damn dime.
And high up on that list of rules for government aid should be drug and alcohol testing.
-
That's a relevant statement, Snuggles. As long as a good portion of the 'products' that come out of homes receiving public assistance are so abyssmal...people have the right to be pissed about it. These people who take from other families, oftentimes can't even raise good, quality individuals, but we aren't supposed to be mad or comment about it. I got news for Lanie and others like it--where the money is so is the power or it should be. Think of it as when you lived in your parents house and you lived by their rules. IMO, if someone accepts assistance there should be rules, hoops, and outright responsibilities for taking the hard earned money of another family. If you want help, you accept the rules by which you will parent those children, how you keep your house, and how you conduct your life. You want freedom? Then do it on your own damn dime.
I agree with the idea of the people asking for assistance being told to abide by the rules of the government (which is ran by the people). I don't think you'll ever hear me saying otherwise. And the government agrees as well. They don't quite get as personal as you want them to, but only because nobody would be able to agree on parenting or other issues.
And I guess that (not the concept of "But I'm a victim of theft") is a true argument in favor of the idea of Capitalism equaling freedom.
I agree that there are scam artists, and that a lot of poor people are up to no good. I grew up in a trailer park for crying out loud. I know. I guess I just don't agree with the concept that this makes up the majority of those on welfare or other assistance.
I remember thinking in high school that it's just dumb to have baby after baby to get money because that money has to go toward the baby. If they're not putting the money toward the baby and are instead spending it on drugs, then they need their kids taken away (after proof shown that it's happening of course). I honestly can't help but think that if one is that good at being a scam artist, then they can put their talent to better use. Welfare doesn't pay a lot.
I understand, and I agree about scam artists. I just don't agree about it making up the majority of those on assistance.
-
And high up on that list of rules for government aid should be drug and alcohol testing.
I agree with that as well.
-
I agree with that as well.
Sigh. Bridget, do you honestly think anyone gives a **** what you think here? Seriously?
-
Sigh. Bridget, do you honestly think anyone gives a **** what you think here? Seriously?
To be honest, yes. Why? People respond. When I don't care, I don't respond.
I'm trying to show where I actually have something in common instead of just arguing. Is that okay with you?
-
To be honest, yes. Why? People respond. When I don't care, I don't respond.
I'm trying to show where I actually have something in common instead of just arguing. Is that okay with you?
But that's all you're doing is arguing. You agree with someone and then give the reasons why what they said is wrong....etc, etc.
People aren't responding to you because they care, as usual thy are responding to your naivete, ignorance....et cetra, et cetra
-
Lanie:
I agree with the idea of the people asking for assistance being told to abide by the rules of the government (which is ran by the people).
:thatsright:
Once again, Lanie, you miscue - the government SHOULD be run by the people, but it's not. It SHOULD be run by the representatives whom we elect, but it's not. It's run by lobbyists, special interests, and currently, socialists.
Apart from that, jty is spot on - there should be hoops, hell, entire obstacle courses to jump through if you want to collect so much as a damned dime on the public dole.
Like her, I've seen far too many examples of how piss-poor ideas of how to be paid to be lazy actually succeed and in order to reduce at least some of that to an acceptable level, some hard decisions have to be made.
You want food stamps? Get in that line that's over a mile long.
You want ADC? Get in that line that's over three miles long.
And if your paperwork isn't completely and totally filled out, properly and with no missing information, you get tossed out on your ass.
I have NO PATIENCE with scum suckers, especially those who are lazy scum suckers to boot.
-
But that's all you're doing is arguing. You agree with someone and then give the reasons why what they said is wrong....etc, etc.
People aren't responding to you because they care, as usual thy are responding to your naivete, ignorance....et cetra, et cetra
Perhaps that's a good point. I'll take that into consideration, along with some of the other thoughts posted in this thread.
-
Many years ago, a man named LaGuardia was elected mayor of New York City (a place where I have lived, and have some familiarity). He decided that every person on public assistance was required to spend 50 hours per week with a broom, or a pointed stick and a canvas bag sweeping the streets and picking up the trash in the city.
After about a year of this, two things happened.........first New York became a beautiful city, with no trash or debris to be seen, anywhere.......second, the work was so publically degrading that the public assistance rolls dropped by one-half.........
The taxpayers were so pleased that they eventually named their airport after him.......
I am of the opinion that all forms of public assistance need to become embarrassing and degrading enough to stigmatize the recipient to the point where they are motivated to get off of these programs. (It won't work for all, as there are those who have no sense of personal pride, but I suspect that it would work for most).
I think that this concept would bear consideration today......
doc
-
Many years ago, a man named LaGuardia was elected mayor of New York City (a place where I have lived, and have some familiarity). He decided that every person on public assistance was required to spend 50 hours per week with a broom, or a pointed stick and a canvas bag sweeping the streets and picking up the trash in the city.
After about a year of this, two things happened.........first New York became a beautiful city, with no trash or debris to be seen, anywhere.......second, the work was so publically degrading that the public assistance rolls dropped by one-half.........
The taxpayers were so pleased that they eventually named their airport after him.......
I am of the opinion that all forms of public assistance need to become embarrassing and degrading enough to stigmatize the recipient to the point where they are motivated to get off of these programs. (It won't work for all, as there are those who have no sense of personal pride, but I suspect that it would work for most).
I think that this concept would bear consideration today......
doc
Spot-on, doc. :clap: :clap: :clap:
-
Many years ago, a man named LaGuardia was elected mayor of New York City (a place where I have lived, and have some familiarity). He decided that every person on public assistance was required to spend 50 hours per week with a broom, or a pointed stick and a canvas bag sweeping the streets and picking up the trash in the city.
After about a year of this, two things happened.........first New York became a beautiful city, with no trash or debris to be seen, anywhere.......second, the work was so publically degrading that the public assistance rolls dropped by one-half.........
The taxpayers were so pleased that they eventually named their airport after him.......
I am of the opinion that all forms of public assistance need to become embarrassing and degrading enough to stigmatize the recipient to the point where they are motivated to get off of these programs. (It won't work for all, as there are those who have no sense of personal pride, but I suspect that it would work for most).
I think that this concept would bear consideration today......
doc
Since it's shown to work, it should be considered (exception being those on disability). That should weed out those who are on the assistance to be lazy from those who aren't. It would also have them doing something for the community in return (cleaning the sidewalk or whatever).
-
Doc's point notwithstanding, I think it's fair to say that today is a different time and era from LaGuardia's day.
Far, far too many people simply have no sense of decency, honor, and pride. In fact, it would be a full-time job for a battalion of people to ride herd over these people on the public dole.
I pity the poor bastard who would have to work with the majority of these people. There would be whining, complaints of back pain, OSHA recordables, and all manner of shit designed to do nothing but wreak havoc.
While the supervisors and managers are dealing with THAT shit, the scumsuckers sham. And collect their money.
I've seen too much of this kind of shit when the work gets tough or demeaning. The whiners whine, the shammers sham, and the real workers are rewarded by doing more of the work that the shammers goldbrick out of.
-
Doc's point notwithstanding, I think it's fair to say that today is a different time and era from LaGuardia's day.
Far, far too many people simply have no sense of decency, honor, and pride. In fact, it would be a full-time job for a battalion of people to ride herd over these people on the public dole.
I pity the poor bastard who would have to work with the majority of these people. There would be whining, complaints of back pain, OSHA recordables, and all manner of shit designed to do nothing but wreak havoc.
While the supervisors and managers are dealing with THAT shit, the scumsuckers sham. And collect their money.
I've seen too much of this kind of shit when the work gets tough or demeaning. The whiners whine, the shammers sham, and the real workers are rewarded by doing more of the work that the shammers goldbrick out of.
There are several problems with such a program today that didn't exist in LaGuardia's time.........first are the UNIONS, who would never allow such "unpaid" efforts to infringe on their ricebowl, and second are the "liberals" who don't agree that welfare in its various forms should be "stigmatizing", hell they don't even issue food stamps any more, because it was considered embarassing for the recipient to use them in the check-out line......now recipients are issued a "credit card", so that it appears that they are just like any other customer........
Perhaps the credit card should be issued in bright red, with "Taxpayer Funded" printed in large letters on both sides......
doc
-
Since it's shown to work, it should be considered (exception being those on disability). That should weed out those who are on the assistance to be lazy from those who aren't. It would also have them doing something for the community in return (cleaning the sidewalk or whatever).
Most on "disability" are scammers with some form of mental issues, hell, obesity and alcoholism are now considered "disabilities"......like the members of the DUmp.......you can pick up trash from a wheelchair just as well as you can standing, with a pointed stick.......
doc
-
Many years ago, a man named LaGuardia was elected mayor of New York City (a place where I have lived, and have some familiarity). He decided that every person on public assistance was required to spend 50 hours per week with a broom, or a pointed stick and a canvas bag sweeping the streets and picking up the trash in the city.
After about a year of this, two things happened.........first New York became a beautiful city, with no trash or debris to be seen, anywhere.......second, the work was so publically degrading that the public assistance rolls dropped by one-half.........
The taxpayers were so pleased that they eventually named their airport after him.......
I am of the opinion that all forms of public assistance need to become embarrassing and degrading enough to stigmatize the recipient to the point where they are motivated to get off of these programs. (It won't work for all, as there are those who have no sense of personal pride, but I suspect that it would work for most).
I think that this concept would bear consideration today......
doc
Reagain did the kinda same thing in California when he was Gov.
-
Reagain did the kinda same thing in California when he was Gov.
Guiliani also tried it again in New York, and got sued six ways from sunday by the municipal employees union.....but at least he gave it a shot.......
doc
-
Most on "disability" are scammers with some form of mental issues, hell, obesity and alcoholism are now considered "disabilities"......like the members of the DUmp.......you can pick up trash from a wheelchair just as well as you can standing, with a pointed stick.......
doc
I don't know how it is in other places, but nearly anybody who applies for Disability in NC is turned down the first two or three times. It's not easy to get on over here.
Disability is about ability to hold down a job. If a condition keeps one from being a good worker or a worker at all, then that's what Disability is determined on. I think it's also based on the type of work the person is qualified for. I guess in theory a person who is no longer fit to do physically hard work might be able to get qualified for office work. Even then, office work isn't just sitting at the computer and employers will take it into consideration.
-
Guiliani also tried it again in New York, and got sued six ways from sunday by the municipal employees union.....but at least he gave it a shot.......
doc
I don't understand why the Unions have a say in it if they're not already involved with a company (or in this case, the government). I'm not arguing. I just don't understand that.
-
...snip...
Disability is about ability to hold down a job. If a condition keeps one from being a good worker or a worker at all, then that's what Disability is determined on. I think it's also based on the type of work the person is qualified for. I guess in theory a person who is no longer fit to do physically hard work might be able to get qualified for office work. Even then, office work isn't just sitting at the computer and employers will take it into consideration.
Lanie, are you in the disability business in NC? Do you have some kind of information that supports what you're saying?
Where are you getting your definitions as to what "disability" is?
How is it you know what determines whether or not a person is disabled?
No backpedaling here. Just answer the questions, please.
:popcorn:
-
I don't understand why the Unions have a say in it if they're not already involved with a company (or in this case, the government). I'm not arguing. I just don't understand that.
Maybe because the people that are doing the work are doing the work instead of the union members? Maybe because the union workers feel threatened that their job of picking up garbage is being done by those on the public dole?
Lanie, are you sure you aren't asking a really, really stupid question here?
-
In Mississippi they generally turn down all applicants the first time around. My father finally received it the second time. Don't know why they do it other than being typical government pricks. ...which is why anyone who relies on the government as their sole provider is an idiot.
-
Lanie, are you in the disability business in NC? Do you have some kind of information that supports what you're saying?
Where are you getting your definitions as to what "disability" is?
How is it you know what determines whether or not a person is disabled?
No backpedaling here. Just answer the questions, please.
:popcorn:
I'm a little bit afraid to completely answer that question (No, I'm not on disability or trying to be).
I did chat with a cop one night. He said his wife was a severe Epileptic. Everybody said she couldn't work (doctors, etc). Disability turned her down. He got mad and wrote Howard Coble. The secretary called him and asked for more info. They suddenly got passed.
But nearly everybody here gets turned down the first one to three times. Everybody in NC knows that.
-
In Mississippi they generally turn down all applicants the first time around. My father finally received it the second time. Don't know why they do it other than being typical government pricks. ...which is why anyone who relies on the government as their sole provider is an idiot.
Werd. You don't do that unless you're backed into a corner. (not talking about your father, just people in general).
-
I'm a little bit afraid to completely answer that question (No, I'm not on disability or trying to be).
I did chat with a cop one night. He said his wife was a severe Epileptic. Everybody said she couldn't work (doctors, etc). Disability turned her down. He got mad and wrote Howard Coble. The secretary called him and asked for more info. They suddenly got passed.
But nearly everybody here gets turned down the first one to three times. Everybody in NC knows that.
Once again, Lanie, you're using anecdotal information as fact.
You have a very annoying habit of doing that, and you've been called on it before. Consider yourself called on it again.
"Everybody in NC knows that." Uh huh. You mean to tell me that Bert, the tobacco grower up in Spruce Pine knows all about welfare and disability, what to do, where to go, and how to get on the rolls?
Jeezus. Look at your words and tell me that you know factually what you're talking about.
-
Once again, Lanie, you're using anecdotal information as fact.
You have a very annoying habit of doing that, and you've been called on it before. Consider yourself called on it again.
"Everybody in NC knows that." Uh huh. You mean to tell me that Bert, the tobacco grower up in Spruce Pine knows all about welfare and disability, what to do, where to go, and how to get on the rolls?
Jeezus. Look at your words and tell me that you know factually what you're talking about.
I just said I didn't want to talk about my knowledge on the subject. It would open up a new sense of being judged and people I know being judged. I don't think I can handle that. Judging me is one thing; judging people I'm close to is another.
And yes, I am aware of the process.
-
Werd. You don't do that unless you're backed into a corner. (not talking about your father, just people in general).
Lanie, did you know that there are teams of doctors and lawyers that will, for a fee, get anyone that has had a bad hair day on SSDI?
Are you aware that this is a very lucrative business........scamming the taxpayers out of our money..........how many of your friends at the DUmp are on some form of disability?? But they can post on the DUmp all day and complain about how crappy their lives are..........hell if they can type on an internet board, they can do data entry work........they can answer phones........they can do something.....
They just don't want to, they want someone to give them a free ride, and we are getting fed up with it.
doc
-
Lanie, did you know that there are teams of doctors and lawyers that will, for a fee, get anyone that has had a bad hair day on SSDI?
Are you aware that this is a very lucrative business........scamming the taxpayers out of our money..........how many of your friends at the DUmp are on some form of disability?? But they can post on the DUmp all day and complain about how crappy their lives are..........hell if they can type on an internet board, they can do data entry work........they can answer phones........they can do something.....
They just don't want to, they want someone to give them a free ride, and we are getting fed up with it.
doc
I sure would like a data entry job. It sure beats working in stores. I type 70 wpm. I'm always being told I'm not qualified though because I don't have a lot of past experience in the office, don't have a piece of paper, don't know somebody who can get me in they way they got their less qualified friends in. Isn't that some crap? And I have personal experience with trying to get a job like that, so NOW what's going to be the argument against me? I type 70 WPM.
-
I just said I didn't want to talk about my knowledge on the subject. It would open up a new sense of being judged and people I know being judged. I don't think I can handle that. Judging me is one thing; judging people I'm close to is another.
And yes, I am aware of the process.
Noone (that bastard) is judging anyone you are close to. We aren't asking which member of your family is a layabout trying to milk the system due to obesity.
What eupher asked is how you are aware of this, and then make the sweeping, unsupported generalization that "everyone in NC knows about this". Guess what, I'm a NC resident, and I don't know this. Betcha CH doesn't either. That makes you either an intentional liar, or a blowhard. There's no pamphlet handed out when you move to NC saying "If you apply for disability, expect to be turned down at least twice. It's our SOP". No statement like that on official state website either. Nothing in the lawbooks. Nothing that says that even every reasonable person in NC should know that.
So, yes, I'm judging you, and I have yet to make my conclusion: liar or blowhard. Which one is it Bridget?
-
I just said I didn't want to talk about my knowledge on the subject. It would open up a new sense of being judged and people I know being judged. I don't think I can handle that. Judging me is one thing; judging people I'm close to is another.
And yes, I am aware of the process.
Wrong again. This is what you said:
I'm a little bit afraid to completely answer that question (No, I'm not on disability or trying to be).
Being "a little bit afraid" to completely answer a question isn't the same thing as saying you didn't want to talk about it.
Do you forget what you've said that quickly?
-
Lanie, are you in the disability business in NC? Do you have some kind of information that supports what you're saying?
Where are you getting your definitions as to what "disability" is?
How is it you know what determines whether or not a person is disabled?
No backpedaling here. Just answer the questions, please.
:popcorn:
Everything she knows on the topic she learned at teh DUmp
-
I sure would like a data entry job. It sure beats working in stores. I type 70 wpm. I'm always being told I'm not qualified though because I don't have a lot of past experience in the office, don't have a piece of paper, don't know somebody who can get me in they way they got their less qualified friends in. Isn't that some crap? And I have personal experience with trying to get a job like that, so NOW what's going to be the argument against me? I type 70 WPM.
Sign up at some temp agencies. I moved to Raleigh on January 3, 2007. Three days later, I had a full-time job through a temp agency doing data entry for Nationwide Insurance.
-
Noone (that bastard) is judging anyone you are close to. We aren't asking which member of your family is a layabout trying to milk the system due to obesity.
What eupher asked is how you are aware of this, and then make the sweeping, unsupported generalization that "everyone in NC knows about this". Guess what, I'm a NC resident, and I don't know this. Betcha CH doesn't either. That makes you either an intentional liar, or a blowhard. There's no pamphlet handed out when you move to NC saying "If you apply for disability, expect to be turned down at least twice. It's our SOP". No statement like that on official state website either. Nothing in the lawbooks. Nothing that says that even every reasonable person in NC should know that.
So, yes, I'm judging you, and I have yet to make my conclusion: liar or blowhard. Which one is it Bridget?
**** you. I'm not opening up about anything.
I know that Disability wants the regular doctors to send in a report with their professional opinions. I know one has to see *their* doctors. I know it's a lot of paperwork. If one truly is mentally ill or having problems filling out stuff, they need somebody else to do it for them. I know where the Disability office is in Greensboro. I know where to test for becoming a Disability caseworker in Raleigh. I know how hard that test is to become a Disability caseworker. I know that job has a high turnover rate. I know it takes a long time for Disability to let one know their decision (I think about a year). I know you can reapply if you don't get it the first time.
-
Wrong again. This is what you said:
Being "a little bit afraid" to completely answer a question isn't the same thing as saying you didn't want to talk about it.
Do you forget what you've said that quickly?
And getting back to the point - your continual use of anecdotal information in lieu of facts is disturbing. Yes, very DU-like.
Fact is, you know nothing about public assistance, what's required to qualify, how to get on, and more importantly - how to cheat to get on. You're simply babbling.
-
I sure would like a data entry job. It sure beats working in stores. I type 70 wpm. I'm always being told I'm not qualified though because I don't have a lot of past experience in the office, don't have a piece of paper, don't know somebody who can get me in they way they got their less qualified friends in. Isn't that some crap? And I have personal experience with trying to get a job like that, so NOW what's going to be the argument against me? I type 70 WPM.
If you can keyboard 70 wpm, you can get a job......you may have to relocate to do it, but you can get one......stop whining and go do it.......
doc
-
Everything she knows on the topic she learned at teh DUmp
How many times do I have to tell you that I hardly post there. I don't hardly know anybody there. But nevermind your world and the world of many here revolves around DU, and that's all that matters. You think because your life is all about DU means any liberal's life is as well.
-
And getting back to the point - your continual use of anecdotal information in lieu of facts is disturbing. Yes, very DU-like.
Fact is, you know nothing about public assistance, what's required to qualify, how to get on, and more importantly - how to cheat to get on. You're simply babbling.
You don't know a ****ing thing about what I know and I ain't ****ing sharing with you judgmental, hateful people.
-
**** you. I'm not opening up about anything.
I know that Disability wants the regular doctors to send in a report with their professional opinions. I know one has to see *their* doctors. I know it's a lot of paperwork. If one truly is mentally ill or having problems filling out stuff, they need somebody else to do it for them. I know where the Disability office is in Greensboro. I know where to test for becoming a Disability caseworker in Raleigh. I know how hard that test is to become a Disability caseworker. I know that job has a high turnover rate. I know it takes a long time for Disability to let one know their decision (I think about a year). I know you can reapply if you don't get it the first time.
Congratulations. You've just succeeded in illustrating how pointy your head really is.
Since you know everything there is to know about the disability process in NC (or at least Greensboro), what you've just described is a typical bureaucratic process in ANY system.
So the question stands. Are you a liar or a blowhard?
-
You don't know a ****ing thing about what I know and I ain't ****ing sharing with you judgmental, hateful people.
:rotf: :lmao:
Oh, Lanie. Take a pill and come back when you can't stay so long. :loser:
-
You don't know a ******* thing about what I know and I ain't ******* sharing with you judgmental, hateful people.
I'll hazard that based on your comments in this thread, we know a hell of a lot about what you DON'T know........
doc
-
Lanie, you know stupidity is, for the most part generally excusable......people can't help being born with a low IQ......
Willful ignorance, however, is not excusable, and more and more you seem to fall into the latter category.......
doc
-
You don't know a ****ing thing about what I know and I ain't ****ing sharing with you judgmental, hateful people.
How long before she comes back and apologizes AGAIN for cussing and being "mean"? :-)
-
How long before she comes back and apologizes AGAIN for cussing and being "mean"? :-)
Or tells us she's leaving again.....
doc
-
Or tells us she's leaving again.....
doc
It's so predictable but I still kinda like her. I don't know why but I do.
-
It's so predictable but I still kinda like her. I don't know why but I do.
She's either gutsy or insane. I haven't quite figured out which yet.
-
Probably Bi-polar. All in all, this is turning into another Fight Club thread.
-
Blow an attorney. If you type 70WPM, I'm sure he'll give you a job as a legal secretary. Pay will be determined by your "experience".
-
She's either gutsy or insane. I haven't quite figured out which yet.
I wonder as well, why would a naive liberal come to a largely conservative board and involve herself in the actual political discussion.......
She could post in a half-dozen other forums on this board, and be perfectly fine, nobody would even notice her politics......but she seems to be strangely motivated to jump into the snake pit of politics, knowing that she is going to get severely challenged, and does so in a manner that is strangely "simple".........simple in the intellectual sense.
I started out in this thread with a backhanded idea that I would challenge in order to educate, however this thread has so many twists and turns that I've lost track.......
It seems as though when she runs up against a challenge that she can't manage, she changes the subject subtly, to derail the topic into a completely different direction......it is really bizarre the way she expresses herself in these threads.
Perhaps she IS bipolar......dunno......
doc
-
I wonder as well, why would a naive liberal come to a largely conservative board and involve herself in the actual political discussion.......
She's a masochist with a huge crush on me.
-
She's a masochist with a huge crush on me.
Geez.....I'm not quite sure how to respond to that statement.......
doc
-
She's a masochist with a huge crush on me.
Oh, puleeeze........... crush on you ?!?!?!? :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
-
You don't know a ******* thing about what I know and I ain't ******* sharing with you judgmental, hateful people.
Translated:
She knows between jack and sh*t about this crap she blathers on about.
And Jack just headed for the door.
-
Just out of curiosity...how do you people treat sinners when they wander into church? Do you lay hands, command them to be healed then punt if they seem uneffected?
-
Just out of curiosity...how do you people treat sinners when they wander into church? Do you lay hands, command them to be healed then punt if they seem uneffected?
Of course not. But then I doubt any church tolerates someone claiming they want to be healed who then proceeds to turn around and spit on religion at the same time.
-
Just out of curiosity...how do you people treat sinners when they wander into church? Do you lay hands, command them to be healed then punt if they seem uneffected?
Well....since we are all sinners, we pretty much treat everyone as neighbors...........
doc
-
Lanie asked for it's account to be deactivated. It has been done. ;)
-
Thus endeth the "rant".....
doc
-
Lanie asked for it's account to be deactivated. It has been done. ;)
Is that her way of removing the temptation to come back in a few days/weeks?
-
Thus endeth the "rant".....
doc
Is it time to play Taps? Or shall we wait until the autopsy is done?
-
Is it time to play Taps? Or shall we wait until the autopsy is done?
Wait 'til the autopsy is done. The vivisection might just revive her when it dislodges her cranium from it's location in her colon.
-
Wait 'til the autopsy is done. The vivisection might just revive her when it dislodges her cranium from it's location in her colon.
I agree.....plus this is an "open" forum, so you know she is lurking.........You gotta love Thor's sense of humor, "Lanie has asked for its account to be deactivated......"
Hey.....I just hit 1,000 posts!
doc