LEFT WING LOONS
See other LEFT WING LOONS Articles
Title: Ocasio-Cortez Is Asked How America Will Pay For Her Socialist Dreams. Guess How Much Information She Has In Her Head.
Source:
The Wire
URL Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/3419 ... rica-will-pay-her-hank-berrien
Published: Aug 8, 2018
Author: HANK BERRIEN
Post Date: 2018-08-08 08:59:25 by IbJensen
Keywords: None
Views: 12805
Comments: 93
Speaking with host Jon Lovett on Pod Save America, New York Democratic socialist darling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was asked for details as to how America would pay for her socialist dreams, such as universal healthcare and free college tuition. Although she spouted for roughly two minutes, the answer Ocasio-Cortez offered was this: she has no idea. Lovett prompted the descent into puffery and sound and fury signifying nothing by stating: We don’t talk about what defense costs; we’re about to hit a trillion dollars in debt because of the corporate tax cuts; yet when we talk about pre-K, healthcare, college, suddenly it’s unrealistic because of the cost. And it’s not just bad faith Republicans that make that argument; you hear it from Democrats as well. What’s your response to that? Ocasio-Cortez started like a house afire: “Well, I think it’s that exact same thing.” That makes it abundantly clear. She continued, “It’s that we… you know they say, ‘How are you going to pay for it?’ as though they haven’t used those same ways to pay for unlimited wars, to pay for trillion dollar tax cuts and tax cut extensions. They use these mechanisms to pay for these things all the time.” What “same ways"? What “mechanisms"? But we digress. Ocasio-Cortez waxed eloquent with more brilliantisms: “They only want to know — it just seems like their pockets are empty when we’re talking about education and investing in human capital in the United States: education, healthcare, housing, and investing in the middle class.” It would seem the students who want to game the system by getting college education for free are the ones with empty pockets while in her dreams the adults in the room have to ante up, and what she means by “investing in the middle class” is anyone’s guess, but she had more: All of a sudden, there’s nothing left. All of a sudden the wealthiest nation in the world, we’re just totally scarce. We have complete scarcity when it comes to the things that are the most important. She might want to visit socialist Venezuela for a look at “complete scarcity” of things that are most important, such as food. Ocasio-Cortez continued, "And so for me, I think it belies a lack of moral priority and it’s unfortunate." As opposed to making others pay for your dreams, which used to be called stealing. Ocasio-Cortez then rambled on: I think that — but I also think a lot of these folks, especially those perhaps on the Democratic side, perhaps they don’t even see it, you know? I don’t know. I don’t know if that’s a generous interpretation or not, but I legitimately think that they start kind of buying into conservative talking points. They get dragged into their court all the time. And I think it is because there’s this really myopic, and also, just misunderstanding of politics as this flat 2-dimensional left/right thing. And so they always feel like, “Okay, the Right says this thing. We have to respond to it.” And that’s why they’re winning. That’s why they’ve won for the last ten years, because they’ve dragged us onto their court. And we refuse to have our own strong message to force them to play defense on. In all that verbiage, did you see an answer as to how the young socialist would pay for her dreams? Didn’t think so. https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/1026919316665450496
Poster Comment: Nutsy is a plethora of ideas. Get this gal in Congress! I have a five point plan to pay for these ideas: 1. um, yeah, Catch a leprechaun. 2. uhhhhh, harvest Unicorn Horns, and sell them. 3. um, we can like, you know, like, set up a task force, and stuff, searching for Genie's bottles 4. ♫ When you wish upon a star ♫ 5. um uh Scandivania! So clearly, these things can be paid for if we just, uh, prioritize, and stuff. uh,Ask Bernie!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-52) not displayed.
.
.
.
#53. To: Vicomte13 (#51)
Not true. They are human beings with problems. You get a lot wrong about us right wingers as you call us. You look at right wingers as dirt bags. On more than one occasion you posted about the need to murder us all. Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
I kissed nothing. The lizard and the mouse, one each, were in my right hand. I am who I am.
Perhaps I do. I agree, they are human beings with problems. And the officers, those of us appointed over them, have the duty to help them.
Most of them aren't bleeding hearts and that seems to be the problem. Self reliance/responsibility seems to be a 4 letter word with him.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Nope. Those things are great. But they cannot be carried to the extreme that you want to carry them. The right rule is: self-reliance and responsibility, and you will go far, have quite a bit, live a very comfortable life, have authority and respect, see the world, dine well, and look back on a life well lived. Eschew self-reliance and responsibility, and you will not go far, have little, live an uncomfortable life in drab, working class surroundings, have neither authority nor respect, see little of the world (and what you will see will be the grotty side of some run-down city, eat poorly and look back on a life of much suffering and loss. That is entirely reasonable, and that is what happens WITH social support. Remove social support, and the lack of self-reliance and responsibility will lead to homelessness, starvation, disease, and dying in the streets, as in all of the countries of the world where there is no social welfare support. Grinding poverty does NOT, in fact, act as a spur for people to climb out. It simply acts as a life-shortening, riot-provoking decay - the sprawling slums of India and the Third World. I do not speak of a social welfare state that is gold plated, such that those who do not exercise self-disciple and take on responsibility live like the middle class or upper class. I speak of basic working class conditions only, which are basic necessities, medical care, and an education permitting the determined to climb out. That is all. But you, when you say "self-reliance and responsibility" in the context of social welfare, you mean "have no social welfare", and let the poor starve to death if they won't work. Your solution would be the Third World. That is the difference between us - your lip is curled with hatred and disgust for the poor and the unambitious. You see them as worthy of experiencing extreme suffering and early death, and do not want to provide them ANY support, as that will make them lazy. I see them as unambitious peasants - capable of some manual labor but little else, but available as manpower for, say, a draft (if needed), and with the potential, among some of them, or their offspring, to rise. So, you would simply let them starve, but I say that does not respect God and that they need to have a basic working class life as a minimum. My way is more expensive in the short run (but produces a bigger economy and better-educated people in the long run) and much more humane. You scoff at the humanity. And on this website, from all appearances, most people agree with you and want what you want for the poor, but disagree with me and despise it - and despise me. Nowhere have I ever said anything that would allow you to assert that self- reliance and responsibility are a "four letter word" for me. I simply reject your assertion - and that of so many others here - that a basic subsistence level of material support, health care, and education, for everybody, is opposed to the principle of self-reliance or personal responsibility. I think it is an anti-Christian argument to say that it is. One guy said he was my friend here on this site. This would be a very good moment for ANYBODY reading this who agrees with what I have said to step up and say "Actually, I agree with him." Because here we are, in the middle of a thread created by the site master specifically to attack me, both as a person (delusional, liar, etc.) and my ideas. Plenty have chimed in in agreement, and nobody has stood on my side, which is the side of reason, compassion and, frankly, Christ. Now would be a good time to do it. If I were calling for "nationalizing the means of production" or some radical nonsense, it would be fair game to be calling me a socialist, or Communist, or whatever. I have done no such thing. All I have said is that it is necessary to provide a basic standard of living - working class dignity at least - to everybody, even the marginals at the bottom, rather than letting them starve in the streets. When even THAT causes me to be called some sort of Lefty pinko, well, it shows just what the Right is. Yes, Stone - this is what the Right is. If you don't agree, then tell me about the social welfare, medicine and education you think we DO need. Don't tell me all of the problems - I am well aware of them. Admit that, DESPITE the problems, we DO have to do it anyway, because right now all that anybody ever gives is problems, and that leads any reasonable person to conclude that, because of the problems, your solution is to do nothing at all, just "Let them eat cake" as Marie Antoinette famously never said.
Actually, we're not. That was a different, parallel thread, that I thought I was responding to.
This kind of applies to you. What I am saying is you are full of shit until you give up most of your wealth. Comprende hypocrite?
Are you a liar or do you have a reading comprehension problem? It is one or the other because he already told your pathetic ass that he isn't for no social welfare. Of course it is the governments job to take care of extreme things like famines and stuff like that. Joshua did it in Egypt. You're basically a socialist hypocrite. Do as I say not as I do.
Again you have a reading comprehension problem. Or are you semi retarded? I didn't start this thread.
Actually you said you don't believe in Christ or his Bible. You worship a man who calls himself holy father pope. An asshole fake and a liar who perverts Gods word. God said in the Bible if you don't work you don't eat. Don't bother responding I already heard your lies before.
If you don't want to watch the whole video start at about 10 min.
She has the look of a woman I wouldn't want to go sleep in the same house with her.
WHAT wealth, ignoramus? The wealth I might have accumulated since the theft has mostly been put into preparing an American Olympian and generally supporting the American team effort. I live plainly, in an old tract house, driving an 11-year old car. I eat simply. I have put my wealth into my offspring's head and heart, and into the US Olympic athletic effort. And some into poverty relief at the church. My net worth is pretty close to zero. You assume that I don't practice what I preach. Actually, I live almost completely in conformity to my moral beliefs. When it comes to matters of wealth and power, I am not a hypocrite at all. If you want to know my weakness, it is very specific and clear, and I will admit it is a fault. I still love the women I truly loved in the past. I don't still sleep with them, but I do truly love them, and I always will. This is adultery, as Jesus defines it. I can help what I DO, but I cannot help what I feel and think. So there, that is my true weakness. I very deeply love three women. I am married to one. I do not cheat in the flesh, but that's not Jesus' standard, is it? No, it isn't. I am incapable of ceasing to love without cutting my heart out and dying. So, there's my hypocrisy, my weakness, my sin, laid bare. If you want to criticize me for something of which I am actually guilty, call me an adulterer under Christ's standards, and you would be correct (under the standards of the law, you would not be). Trying to call me out on financial matters is funny, because you are so far off the mark it reveals more of your own guilty conscience than mine. God ensured that I do not have to worry about that by twice stripping a lot of money away from me and forcing me to live hand-to-mouth. I adjusted my desires downwards to the point where I basically eat the same thing as a bear, sleep without air conditioning, wear old clothes, live in an old house, drive a squeaky old car, and put my purse into my daughter's head, the US Team, and poverty relief. In short: Not Guilty, of that. Guilty of something else. If you're going to accuse me, get the charge right. I'm not greedy. I don't care about power or money. I don't pile up wealth. I use what I have to educate, motivate and help. My weakness is that I love too much. Attack me for that. It's legitimate. The other blows don't even land. They're whiffs at the air.
The Bible was compiled by the Church, not Christ. I do not worship the Pope. God never said that. Paul said that in one of his letters, and he was referring to a specific situation, not making a general law of God - which he did not have the power to make anyway. Because your religion equates the Bible to God, and therefore elevates Paul to the status of God, and because you misread Paul to say that the jobless must not eat (by divine commandment), therefore, you take the position that to feed the jobless is sin. And you really believe that what you believe is the will of God. Truly there is nothing for us to talk about. We have different gods. You believe fervently in yours; I know mine directly.
John 1 King James Version (KJV) 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Sure you do. You say he can over rule the Bible. You call him holy father.
God said he would preserve his word. I guess you think he is a liar.
God ensured that I do not have to worry about that by twice stripping a lot of money away from me and forcing me to live hand-to-mouth. You are the one who bragged you were in the top 1 percent and we could learn from you. We can learn from your example. I didn't say give where you have to live hand to mouth. I"m saying give as much as Jesus told the rich guy to give which was everything. You ware the one who judges people saying they need to give to the poor. Give to the government is what you believe in. Not giving to the Church. You equate the government with God and use old testament commandments which you say you don't believe in to say to give to the government. So you shouldn't be a hypocrite anymore. Sell all you have you have more then the rich man in the Bible had. Hypocrite. You want others to give and you say you do some olympic crap. Olympic crap is no excuse and isn't holy in the least. I call you out on this and only you because i am judging you by the standards you judge. Hypocrite.
You equate God's word with the Bible. That's where you err. In the beginning was the Bible, and the Bible was with God, and the Bible was God? Nope.
God's word is his will. All of it. Paul and even Peter the betrayer.
But I am in the top 1%, of earners (not of wealth accumulators). I do not accumulate the wealth. I spend it on education and on development and charity. The "Olympic crap" that you say is not holy in the least - you are such and ignorant, judgmental man. Few go to the Olympics, but the process of getting to that level of skill in any sport at all requires years, and years and years of training. In America, there is no state sponsorship of sport to speak of, so the sort of training required would normally limit Olympic hopefuls to the rich. But actually there is a feeder system whereby kids from the poorest areas - the veritable ghettos of New York City - can come, get physical conditioning, spend their time learning and preparing for a sport (and not be on the streets), and have academic guidance and counseling (so that even if they don't go to the Olympics, as 1 in 1000 has a shot of doing, they get their education, stay in school, and go on to college (as opposed to onto the streets). Because the sport is drug tested, the imperative of avoiding drugs is instilled, and the correlation between bad activity and harm to physical conditioning is made clear by the fact of the physical conditioning. The boys and girls who come up through the programs, which are charitable in nature, end up mostly getting their educations, avoiding crime, avoiding drugs, and many of them believe in it and come and give their time to the community. Sport is, in short, a way out, a path away, a way by which individuals growing up in terrible conditions DON'T simply get sucked into the ghetto, but come away and live productive lives DESPITE the fact that they grow up in it. Sport in this way is the most practical, effective social service and future poverty relief you have never imagined, and it lifts hundreds and hundreds of kids out of a future of gangs, crime and waste. YOU'RE not paying for it, because the government doesn't do this. Private institutions do it, with contributions of time and effort. A handful of these kids actually have the God-given talent to go to the Olympics and represent the USA in their sport. Most never really had any prospect of that from the beginning. I tire of you. You're self-righteous, ignorant and abusive.
I have nothing against anyone going to the Olympics or helping their children. Except for you because you could spend that money feeding the poor. To live up to your values you preach. You want the government to to take so you can feel good. A hypocrite. You won't go first. Also the penalty for not paying taxes is not to murder them like you want. You're a certified hypocrite.
AND...they'd like us to be wiling accomplices. The thing is...we know the vast majority of Americans DON'T support this now unbridled open hostility toward God. Nor do we support Socialism other than "Safety-Net" and SS (way too late to do anything about FDR's Communism.) The World Elites/PTB are and have been setting us up...with their goal to replace God as THE Authority that re-defines "good" and "evil". We *know* exactly what's going on (creating a World-Anarchy that's sets up their iron-fisted satanic One World Gummit that "restores order"). But it doesn't mean we have to make it easy for them. What STILL surprises me is the number of Baby-Boomers who've remained filthy hippie-Commies and whining narcissist rebels into their 60s and 70s (even AS they've lived blessed lives within Christendom's system of economic and political liberty). We even see them posting HERE.
Well frankly, in some senses you *are* wanting it both ways. Speaking of "reasonably" or reason and "practicality" as defined by Democrats and Republicans (as well as subsets on conservatives and independents), we are now to the point where definitions and reality lie in different universes. (THANKS TO THE DEMOCRATS/SECULAR HUMANISTS/COMMUNISTS WHO'VE TOTALLY HIJACKED THE LANGUAGE AND ACADEMIA). Individually there is little way of us affecting THE world. But we CAN influence and affect our respective circles and sphere of influence. As you know, at our foundation of success and liberty in America (as well as in Western Europe) are the morals and ethics taught and advanced in Christendom. Christendom is NOT compatible with many of Socialism's platforms. Some of which you strongly support. This undermines the principles of Christendom's personal and collective economic liberty as well as weakening the common sense demands and expectations of personal responsibility. I just don't change much, but I get accused of it. It puzzles me. I think what it is is that there are certain set-piece political beliefs that come as a package with party in the US. I'm an Independent. I see strength and weaknesses of both major parties. I have almost always voted Republican because the weaknesses of the Democrats have often been most glaring and worried me more, but I have none of the Republican partisan RAGE against Democrats, and I don't think that the Republicans are the bulwark against Communism or any such over the top rhetoric. That's just silly to me. So when I get targeted with rhetoric of that sort I just skim over it and ignore it. It's poppycock. Maybe in your mind you feel you haven't changed much; Is it a stretch to say that just maybe you've amplified your feelings and opinions over the years? And supported Socialism more than say 10-20 years ago? I realize and acknowledge that you are most "independent" than anything. Probably the same can be said of most of us here, though most of us identify with conservatism. That said, certain platforms must be supported/opposed. With respect to Republicanism v Democrat philosophy, it MUST be conceded that the core of the Democrat Party has now careened into Communist-Fascist territory. One can be "independent" but only to a degree while CW2 is raging. Political "gray-area" doesn't exist in times of war. Like a lot of people, you've mistakenly confused the Establishment GOP with the conservatives who by necessity join the Republican Party; They are TWO DIFFERENT entities with TWO DIFFERENT GOALS. ANY reasonable, logical patriot who also calls themselves an "American" OR "Christian" should indeed be "enraged" by Democrats, their lies, coercion, propaganda, inversion of morals & ethics, their subversive policies and agenda. That is IF one is paying even cursory attention. THAT is NOT silly or "rhetoric"; That's FACT. And yes, Republicanism HAS been a national bulwark or inoculation against a creeping socialism-Communism. AT the Democrat/Socialism-Communism core we'll find a militant atheism, a bullying Secular Humanism, and fascistic anti-personal & national sovereignty positions. Whereas some of your political and personal positions and "wish-list" may be compassionate and Utopian, ANY support of Democrats in ANY sense at this juncture of history only weakens and undermines America and Freedom.
I'm only saying they should be made to be responsible just like you said I should have my money stolen from me at gunpoint to subsidize those folks. CZ's simple point and context make great sense to me. Because this theft of the money WE earn should NOT be confiscated and "shared" just because the Socialist/Communist thinks THIS defines "fair". By any sense of logic and honesty it isn't. Oh and here’s another one: He who steals must steal no longer; but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has need. Can't refute any of these Biblical lessons. Unless one is a Socialist/Communist. Is there such a thing as "Charity"? Of course. But what Socialism-Communism demands is EQUAL RESULTS from ALL. Despite UNEQUAL efforts, planning, sacrifices, and circumstances. Why do you think he's [Trump] also bringing back the work mandate for Welfare? (In your eyes just to be mean I suppose). Trump also wants to build a wall to keep even more lazy MFers out of this country, to keep them from sucking it dry monetarily. Is there something about those concepts that you don't like...? "Workfare" is a common sense solution/resolution that helps otherwise idle healthy men and women EARN a living, which does a man's body AND soul good. The Dem-Left has portrayed "Workfare" as some kind of derivative of "slavery". And THAT is a lie. The Dem-Left has instead made the WORKING MAN "slaves" to the healthy idle, the lazy, the parasitic. TANGENT: Let's face it -- many of these welfare programs and "Gimme-Dat" benefits and even created unnecessary gummint jobs are designed (By Democrats) to be de facto "REPARATIONS", subsidized by Whitey. The entire Tsunami of Third World Flotsam (Legal AND Illegal, Mexican, Asian, Muzzies, etal) are another way the West (and its majority of European White natives) are being guilted into a "Global Reparation". WITHOUT OUR CONSENT. How many billion is it now? 1, 2, 5?? You’re a historian you tell me… So who's the reasonable/responsible one here Vic...? Reasonable premise and questions that requires reasonable justification (and answer) in my opinion. AS an American. Constitutionalist. Patriot. AND Christian. (I'll look further into the thread to find your answer, Vic.) TO BOTH: Won WHAT?? I *hope* Vic hasn't implied that Socialism has "won". Yes...and as Margaret Thatcher put it, "The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money". Socialism ALWAYS has historically led to full-blown Communism, Fascism, and national/economic ruination, slavery and mass murder. To endorse a National Socialism in America TODAY (Gee -- what's THAT sound like??) as Venezuela has provided Exhibit "A" of the result of their mandated hijacking of private industry and individualism, aka "Socialism" must be fought against tooth & nail. As I've opined already, there is NO gray area. Vic, you're hardly alone in your position. There are a few posters here that I consider borderline morons. LITERALLY. This is not to pick on you specifically. But considering your intellect and grasp of history, your position is more disappointing than anything. We all have blind spots. Yours is a YUGE one. This should be an easy decision to discern and make. Either one supports Trump's core policies, OR jumps ship and dives into the Kool-Ade cauldron of suicidal Maxine Water/Ocasio-Sanders politics of the DEMOCRAT PARTY (who've are lying sociopaths now engaged in a coup against Donald Trump, the US Constitution, AND The American People.)
I do! Example: "Trump’s professed opposition to cutting Social Security and Medicare has been both a hallmark of his campaign and one of his greatest departures from traditional conservative ideology." - May 2016 Example: "Support up to six weeks of paid maternity leave and encourage employers to provide child care at work." January, 2017 Example: Trump: I Will Defend Medicaid. - June, 2017 Example: "We're going to be cutting tremendous amounts of money and waste and fraud and abuse. But, no, I'm not cutting services, but I am cutting spending. - Education has to be local." Example: "Our Country was built on Tarriffs, and Tarriffs are now leading us to great new Trade Deals..." Trump and I agree more than Trump and you do. You just don't realize it.
So I'm curious as to how different the sprawling Leftard Ghettos of this country with all of your social programs are compared to those in the Third World countries that don't have those programs?? HINT: Not much at all crime is rampant in both and so is poverty, I know I've been to the ones in this country and those in others. The biggest difference is the ghetto dwellers here want to shoot each other just as fast as they can, in other countries they don't. Doesn't look like your war on poverty is worth a schitt but you'll never admit that will you??
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Life expectancy. Literacy. Starvation. Untreated disease. The difference between the two places is vast.
Seriously Vic you really need to grow up and quit exaggerating. There are plenty of people who need our help with social programs and there are plenty of them who don't need social programs to live but that's how they "WANT" to live, at someone else's expense. You want the rest of us to support all of them but unless I miss my guess you want everybody but you to do that, don't you??
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
So what is the life expectancy in the Chicago ghettos of those you haven't aborted?? Isn't that the way you reduce crime abort them before they have a chance to be just as bad as those you waste your social programs on?? Your way is 3 times as expensive as my way and it's dumber because you don't give those who could be exceptional a chance to live and prove it. And your way is a big waste of limited resources. Let natural selection take it's course instead of trying to be smarter than the person in the Bible you claim to worship...
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Another dissertation that says nothing come on Vic you can do better than this or is this all you know? Really Vic, my views are extreme? ROTFLMAO!!!!! You must not get out much or aren’t much into history (although you do well at the copy/paste type and making it look like your own words) because if you were you would know this… Ever since man has been on this planet the following 2 unspoken/unwritten rules have dominated his behavior: 1).”If you don’t work, don’t hunt, don’t fish or don’t farm/garden you don’t eat”!! (You can’t/don’t rely on your neighbors to feed you). 2). “Family, family, family, it’s all about family and how it always takes care of itself, not pawn off it’s responsibility onto someone else”. Now if you think my views are extreme them man’s views all thru his history must be extreme too. (I guess that goes with being uncivilized/gauche eh)? lol… The only people who embrace your views are the purposely lazy, the week minded, self-proclaimed intellectuals, the bleeding hearts, and those pandering for votes and power. (I.E. a very small minority). HINT, HINT: Trump was not elected because he embraces your views, just the opposite. In fact those 2 unwritten rules are still much en vogue today across much of this planet. I’d pretty much bet about 90% or so of the 7+ billion souls on Earth still prescribe to them. Your silly way of controlling the population/crime of the world is thru abortions (how many potentially exceptional souls have been killed off because of this)? The time tested method is to let the irresponsible off themselves thru their lack of gumption. (I do believe Darwin called this process Natural Selection didn’t he, the rest of us call it culling the herd)?
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
I aborted somebody? News to me.
That seems to be a big problem nowadays people lack common sense. They think just because something is the way it is it has to stay that way, when common sense says "that's a bunch of bullschitt and needs to be fixed". Vic is living in the "That's the way it is and if you don't like it then phuck you" era...
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
I never, ever do that. If you think I do, go ahead and cut MY words and put them in a bunch of search engines to find the texts I have copied and pasted. You won't find any. Everything I write, I write myself. I sit down, I think about it, and I type. Nothing more, nothing less. The way you guys attack me is just crazy. Babies I've aborted? I've been opposed to abortion since 9th grade. Cut and paste? It's just desperate and pathetic. And it's why I have grown, on this very website, to come and take a dimmer and dimmer and dimmer view of the Right, and Republicans. You guys do this sort of thing. It's just bullshit. Apparently you saw what I wrote in response to Chelsea Clinton's comments, the bit about how abortion reduces crime and welfare (it does, and it does). Apparently you missed the vital twist at the end, where I said 'Yeah, except for the ETERNAL DAMNATION thing, abortion sure seems swell.'
Isn't that the way you claimed we need to control crime?? (On another thread) And isn't abortion more predominate in the black communities than it is in white ones??
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
Not you specifically aborting someone, just the social programs you support in which abortion is a big part of. Attacked? If you can't stand the heat then maybe the kitchen isn't the best place for you.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
I see you've skipped over natural selection and letting God decide, I wonder why??
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
NO. Go back to the thread. Yes, abortion DOES reduce crime and welfare. That is true. But where you go off the rails is in saying that I said that's the way I SAID we need to control crime. NO. I observed that it DOES control crime. But then - and this is the key - I noted that the price of the expendient is the IMMORTAL SOUL of the killers of the babies. You read the first part, where I observed the effect, but you skipped over the final clause, where I said that EXCEPT FOR THE ETERNAL DAMNATION PART, that's all just swell. You're not really reading what I am writing (not cutting and pasting, writing). You're seeing part of it and then going off half cocked. Abortion is premeditated murder. Sure, if we just slaughtered everybody in prison and nuked all of the major cities, our crime rate and welfare rate would go down too, which is great...except for the mass murder and genocide part.
Letting God decide WHAT?
Yes, attacked. You didn't actually READ what I said about abortion. You went off half cocked and came after me over the opposite of what I actually said, because you didn't bother to actually READ what I said. You read half a sentence and then attacked. I can stand the heat just fine, if it's argument. You guys are setting fire to the whole house, over nothing. It's mental.
As I said, that which I support is helping the poor get out of poverty. Only one in a thousandg gets an athletic career out of it, but everybody in the program does better than without it.
But the American Right winger looks at drug addicts as dirt bags and scum,
#54. To: A K A Stone (#52)
Maybe in a fairy tale where you kiss mice and lizards and bring them back from the dead.
#55. To: A K A Stone (#53)
Not true. They are human beings with problems. You get a lot wrong about us right wingers as you call us.
#56. To: A K A Stone (#53)
You look at right wingers as dirt bags.
#57. To: CZ82 (#56)
Self reliance/responsibility seems to be a 4 letter word with him.
#58. To: All (#57)
Because here we are, in the middle of a thread created by the site master specifically to attack me, both as a person (delusional, liar, etc.) and my ideas.
#59. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
The right rule is: self-reliance and responsibility, and you will go far, have quite a bit, live a very comfortable life, have authority and respect, see the world, dine well, and look back on a life well lived.
#60. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
But you, when you say "self-reliance and responsibility" in the context of social welfare, you mean "have no social welfare", and let the poor starve to death if they won't work. Your solution would be the Third World.
#61. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
Because here we are, in the middle of a thread created by the site master specifically to attack me, both as a person (delusional, liar, etc.) and my ideas.
#62. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
and nobody has stood on my side, which is the side of reason, compassion and, frankly, Christ.
#63. To: vicomte13 (#59)
#64. To: IbJensen (#0)
#65. To: A K A Stone (#59)
(Edited)
What I am saying is you are full of shit until you give up most of your wealth. Comprende hypocrite?
#66. To: A K A Stone (#62)
Actually you said you don't believe in Christ or his Bible. You worship a man who calls himself holy father pope. An asshole fake and a liar who perverts Gods word. God said in the Bible if you don't work you don't eat.
#67. To: Vicomte13 (#66)
equates the Bible to God
#68. To: Vicomte13 (#66)
I do not worship the Pope.
#69. To: Vicomte13 (#66)
God never said that. Paul said that
#70. To: Vicomte13 (#65)
Trying to call me out on financial matters is funny, because you are so far off the mark it reveals more of your own guilty conscience than mine.
#71. To: A K A Stone (#69)
#72. To: Vicomte13 (#71)
#73. To: A K A Stone (#70)
You are the one who bragged you were in the top 1 percent and we could learn from you.
#74. To: Vicomte13 (#73)
#75. To: CZ82 (#49)
They want to be free to be a lazy POS and not be held responsible/accountable for their actions.
#76. To: Vicomte13 (#50)
(Edited)
I don't want it "Both" ways, and I'm not confused. I want it MY way. But I recognize that's not going to happen in any pure sense....I look at what is reasonably possible and practical in the real world, and try to stick within that bandwidth.
#77. To: CZ82, Vicomte13 (#41)
The point is there are "some" people who don't deserve to be on it [the Realm of Freedom] because they don't want to be responsible.
(CZ) So what does the Bible say about stealing? Lets see: A man’s negligence which results in a loss to his neighbor. Exodus chapter 22 (verses 1-15) describes several acts of negligence which deprive a neighbor of his property, and which thus require restitution.
CZ:Why not embrace his [Trump's] concept of creating jobs so that everybody who should be working, is capable of working or wants to work can provide for themselves and their families?? (He seems to want them to have the opportunity to be all they can be, don't you)?
CZ: How many people have died at the governments hands over the countless millennia thanks to your “perfect” system of [Socialist] government? (Which allows the crooked politicians to get richer and everybody else suffer because the politicians always morph it into full blown authoritarian/dictatorial/monarchial governments).
CZ:
CZ: But sooner or later it will all cave in on itself (it always does/has) and there will be nothing to give those people you claim to want to help and they will die a slow, horrible, painful death. (You should be very proud of yourself)!! Now maybe you can see why I say your way is faux empathy but for some reason I doubt you will.
#78. To: Liberator (#77)
Either one supports Trump's core policies
#79. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
Grinding poverty does NOT, in fact, act as a spur for people to climb out. It simply acts as a life-shortening, riot-provoking decay - the sprawling slums of India and the Third World.
#80. To: CZ82 (#79)
So I'm curious as to how different the sprawling Leftard Ghettos of this country with all of your social programs are compared to those in the Third World countries that don't have those programs??
#81. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
That is the difference between us - your lip is curled with hatred and disgust for the poor and the unambitious. You see them as worthy of experiencing extreme suffering and early death, and do not want to provide them ANY support, as that will make them lazy.
#82. To: Vicomte13 (#80)
#83. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
#84. To: CZ82 (#82)
So what is the life expectancy in the Chicago ghettos of those you haven't aborted??
#85. To: Liberator (#77)
"Workfare" is a common sense solution/resolution that helps otherwise idle healthy men and women EARN a living, which does a man's body AND soul good.
#86. To: CZ82 (#83)
although you do well at the copy/paste type and making it look like your own words
#87. To: Vicomte13 (#84)
Abortion
#88. To: Vicomte13 (#86)
The way you guys attack me is just crazy. Babies I've aborted? I've been opposed to abortion since 9th grade.
#89. To: Vicomte13 (#86)
(Edited)
#90. To: CZ82 (#87)
Isn't that the way you claimed we need to control crime?? (On another thread)
#91. To: CZ82 (#89)
I see you've skipped over natural selection and letting God decide, I wonder why??
#92. To: CZ82 (#88)
Attacked? If you can't stand the heat then maybe the kitchen isn't the best place for you.
#93. To: A K A Stone (#74)
I have nothing against anyone going to the Olympics or helping their children. Except for you because you could spend that money feeding the poor.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]