straightUp Loc: California

Loki is one example. Later today I will be playing music with some people three of whom are conservatives who are on food stamps. Sorry I don't have the time to compile a list of every single conservative I know that dips into welfare. But I was responding to this...



You didn't say anything about 40%. You implied the ridiculousness of saying conservatives dip into welfare and I don't have a shred of evidence. Well I gave you a shred of evidence that at least one has - you blinked and then come back with... yeah, well uh, ahem, uh - that doesn't make it 40%...(mumble mumble)

Whatever dude.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

Please tell us to whom you are speaking. As you are new, you probably don't know about what NONE of us knew about when we first came here. So that everyone knows to whom you are responding, click on "Quote reply". That will join the two comments and all will know to whom you are addressing. Welcome to 1PP! Here you will find THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY. Hope you stay with us for a long time!

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

VladimirPee

You used a broad brush to say conservatives dip into welfare. You provided evidence that a single conservative may have. ONE PERSON. Laughable

straightUp Loc: California

Have any proof or are you just talking out of your ass again?


You probably do, you just don't realize it. Like I said, the partisan lines melt away when everyone is working on a common cause. I found that to be the case with the United Way project I worked on last year and I KNOW there were a lot of liberals there. The only reason why I knew there were liberals in the Redondo Beach SA is because I knew them personally. The Salvation Army just isn't the kind of place that encourages people to confront each other's politics.


awesome.


But not ALL the people in need. Like I said they do the best they can with what they have.


No it's not - sorry. You might be getting confused with the fact that Democrats will often position themselves as the only electoral choice that continues to support welfare, but that doesn't mean the system is designed to keep people in need. I already laid out the whole point of the welfare system if you chose to ignore it that your own problem. I can't help you understand things of you think you already do or if you just hate liberals so much you don't WANT to accept anything they say.


How is that a surprise? There's been decades of conservative policies since then. Drrr...

bylm1-Bernie

Thanks for the tip. I was actually referring to the nice person who was telling us all the nice things he/she had done. i.e. Salvation Army etc. I believe it was straight something.

I will try to obey the rules and there will be no swearing. Thanks.

VladimirPee

Salvation Army is as right wing conservative as they come. They are the extreme of bible thumpers. Stop making shit up. Its obvious when you do.

Decades of Conservative policies? Last GOP Mayor of New Orleans 1898 Detroit 1963, St. Louis 1943, Chicago 1933. And so on. Obama's career was basically 20 years as organizer and local state senator in a Neighborhood. And the Southside of Chicago has seen no Change and has little Hope any will come from Democrats.

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

:D :D :thumbup: :thumbup:

Loki Loc: Georgia

Since you wish to comment on education:

"First, you need to look up the difference...". That is different from the "you need to..." that you are so fond of using exactly how?

"You can't even spell and you're telling ME that I'm uneducated?"

is look up the difference *in* a Republic.
Asterisks do not belong there. Try italics or quotation marks.

However, I *do*. See above.

Gun control advocates just want the sale of arms to be recorded, weapons registered and some of the more dangerous weapons off the market. We do the same damned thing for cars. Does that mean all drivers are being judged by the actions of a few lunatics? Jesus, you're one of those whiny-asses aren't you. I currently own two guns, both of them registered and I have ZERO problems with that. But I refuse to associate myself with the cry-baby NRA because I know they're entire purpose on the political forum is to keep the sale of arms unregulated AND because I can't stand their constant bitchy whining about how victimized they are. Biggest sissies on the planet, I swear.

One of my favorite Liberal fairy tales. Name one government that has instituted registration that has not been followed, sooner or later, to some degree or another, by some type of confiscation, or confiscatory "buy back" program.

Which most dangerous weapons, slick? Those nasty old "assault rifles," which accounted for around 200 of the 9000 odd firearms murders last year? Those same evil guns that accounted for less murders than knives, or clubs, or bare hands? THOSE nasty old "more dangerous" weapons?

Can your unusually (well, perhaps not for a Liberal ), wrinkle-free cortex comprehend the following? In the past 20 years, in spite of a large increase in population, a huge increase in the number of privately owned, UNREGISTERED firearms, and the issuance of more than eleven million concealed carry permits, firearms murders have decreased by 50%. That's total number, not per capita. While there have been mass shootings, they are the exception, not the rule, and the US murder rate is currently 4.1 per 100,000. This is less than any other country in the Western Hemisphere, with the exception of Canada, which I will address directly in a manner guaranteed to boil your progressive blood.
Jamaica, where civilian firearms ownership is forbidden, and even the possession of a single round of ammo without the requisite firearm is an automatic prison term, has a murder rate of 39.4 per 100,000, very nearly ten times our own.
You should Google the Royal Canadian Mounted Police crime stats. They're quite informative: Did you know that in spite of Canada's far more restrictive gun laws, the overall murder rate in Canada among non-Hipanic whites and that of the same demographic in the US are nearly identical? The same statistics also apply to the UK, and Germany, and the Scandinavian countries. Once is an anomaly. This is not.
Here in my own state of "Gun Goober" Georgia, one of the most heavily armed states in the Union, the same holds true. The murder rate among non-Hispanic whites is nearly identical to Canada, and Germany.

I know, in your Progressive little heart of hearts, you are busily composing your scathing, incisive reply to such an obvious racist, who quotes such racist organizations as the US DOJ, Canada's RCMP, and the UK's Scotland Yard, but you will never admit the truth; so-called "gun control," in Liberalspeak, whether it is your PERSONAL belief or not, is aimed at gutting the Second Amendment, and complete disarming of "politically unreliable" people, the theory being that such paragons of honesty as the same police who shoot unarmed suspects, (I do not refer to Ferguson, MO, here ), and those pillars of honesty and competence in the BATFE are the only people who should be allowed to carry firearms. Don't try to get away with such obvious obfuscations as "we only want to get a few of the more dangerous guns off the street," when the ones you are trying to ban are used in about 1% of crimes. We only want to "register" your guns. "I have two, both registered and I don't have a problem with it," the obvious intimation that anyone who does is some sort of whack job for disagreeing with you. The only cry-babies I have seen are on your side of the discussion.

SS is basically a trust fund that politicians, most notably George Jr. couldn't keep their hands out of.

You apparently missed LBJ, and his Democrat controlled House and Senate, who placed SS in the General Fund and spent it. All. Of. It. Vietnam, (A Democrat war ), and LBJ's "Great Society" had to be paid for somehow. At least some of our current economic problems stem from the sixties. They did not begin, as many Liberals assert, with Reagan.

Illegal aliens get all sorts of benefits. Legally or not. Perhaps you were unaware of the story carried by all the major networks not long ago, detailing how our wonderful IRS sent several million dollars worth of tax refunds to the same address in Atlanta, GA, which was collected and cashed by Illegals? There was a sting done here in which US citizens, (Latinas ) posed as unmarried wetbacks, with one illegal child, and qualified for more than $30,000 per year in benefits? Admittedly, they scammed the system for all it was worth, but the point is, at no time were their bona fides verified. Scamming Uncle Sugar is a major industry with Illegals. With the typical brainless bureaucratic apparatchik who does the day-to-day, it seems to be a very lucrative industry, with small chance of being caught.

1). Many of the people on welfare actually DID work for it.
2). You know - you really are a jerk.

1). Many of them didn't.
2). So are you.

Personally, I think benefits for "soldiers" that never actually see combat (which accounts for most of the armed services) should have their benefits cut and the money saved should go to increasing the benefits for the soldiers that HAVE seen combat, especially if they were injured. It should work like hazard pay. I've worked with a LOT of ex-military folks that spent their time typing on keyboards why should they get the same treatment that the front line soldier gets?

It is soldier, not "soldier," asswipe. Since you have obviously never served, let me clue you in: I could not do my job without support personnel. Do you actually think that ammo, food, water, medical supplies, and for that matter, clean underwear (an underrated commodity if there ever was one ), just magically "appear" when and where they are most needed? Who the fuck do you think makes sure the logistics works? Dilletantes like yourself talk about "combat troops." Most troops are never in actual combat, even it they are in a combat zone. It may surprise you to know that there are a number of National Guard Units who have seen far more combat days than many regular Army Units. Point being those "soldiers" you enquote like they are somehow insignificant, MAKE IT POSSIBLE. Perhaps you should put on a uniform, like so many of us did, and show us how it SHOULD be done?

One last thing: While prating about someone else's lack of education, and making your sad excuse for sarcastic commentary about that lack, you failed to notice the eight grammatical mistakes you made in your little misguided missive. I mean, other than the ones I pointed out. Can you find them? A reasonably precocious 6th grader could. (As a matter of fact, one did just that for me; I wanted to be certain I hadn't placed the bar too high for you ).

straightUp Loc: California

No... They are good Christians trying to help people... Not Bible thumpers or right wingers... There is a difference. Or did you even know that? I'm starting to think you're lying about even being involved in the SA.


OK... here's a lesson, since you obviously don't know the first thing about how this stuff works.

Almost all cities are subsidized to some degree by the state. Many states are subsidized to some extent by the Federal government. Cities across the nation are currently slashing budgets BECAUSE of cutbacks coming from the state and federal level.

This stuff is more integrated than you think. The shit from conservatives in Washington often rolls downhill to the city level. Also, the companies and the people that support local economies can likewise be affected by state and federal policies.

You pick out four cities in a nation of 350+ million people that haven't had a GOP mayor in a long time... As if that has ANYTHING to do with ANYTHING.

You just aren't very good at this.

VladimirPee

Yes and in fact cities like the ones I mentioned GET MORE FEDERAL AID dollars to begin with so your argument is nonsense.

Basically your argument is a generic GOP did it. You aren't very good at this.

VladimirPee

Since 1955 Democrats have controlled Congress 44 of 59 years. They have controlled US Senate 47 of 59 years and they have controlled the White House 34 years.

I only posted a few cities because the list is so extensive. Want more?

Compton- Last GOP mayor 1963
Baltimore 1967
Atlanta 1942

I can post these for hours. Moral of the story? Deliver poverty, high crime, poor schools and despair for decade after decade and Blacks will vote for you 95%.

acitizen Loc: Cowboys never die... but they can be mounted.

Your first sentence is so narcissistically arrogant it boggles the mind... "Maybe if you actually understood it"

WOW!!! Really think a lot of yourself doncha?

Is your mothers basement getting cramped with all of your welfare babies you got down there? Smelly? Probable the methane gas from all of the babies. That could damage your liberal brain cells.

You are way to late to use the old I'm smarter than you are routine to summarily "try" to intellectually, laugh, laugh, denounce me line by line. You are trying so hard to get these people here to not only believe you, but try so, so, hard to get them to believe you are an intellect with soooo much more knowledge and education than me. To start with, education wise I doubt that. One of my minors was American History so "trying" to correct me on the difference between a republic, democracy, is so....cute.

Republic V Democracy

>Constraints on the government......
DEMOCRACY: No; the majority can impose its will on the minority.
REPUBLIC: Yes; the majority cannot take away certain inalienable rights.
>Definition......
DEMOCRACY: is ruled by the omnipotent majority.(this was Thomas Jefferson's fear)In a Democracy, an individual, and any group of individuals composing any minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of the majority. It is a case of Majority-over-Man. This is what Harry "little hitler" Reid is doing by not allowing any of the House passed bills to go to committee in the Senate. "Only" democrat sponsored bills get voted on.
REPUBLIC: a constitutionally limited government, of the representative type, created by a written Constitution--adopted by the people and changeable by them only by its amendment--with its powers divided between three separate branches of government. The president can not make law like Barry has over and over again. Only the Congress can legistrate law.
>Sovereignty is held by
DEMOCRACY: the whole population (as a group)
REPUBLIC: the people (individuals)
>Famous Examples
DEMOCRACY: Classical Greece, Rome
REPUBLIC: United States Of America
>Common confusion in the USA
DEMOCRACY: People commonly confuse direct democracy with representative democracy. The US officially has a representative style, though many have suggested the US is closer to an oligarchy or plutocracy.
REPUBLIC: The US is actually a Republic. It is governed by rule of law. The elected is supposed to be bound by oath to the written governing limits (ie constitution) yet vote "together" and create laws to address concerns of the represented in a democratic way.

This is the summary version. You should go look up the detailed version to educate yourself on what James Madison had in mind when he and others formed a "Republic" not a democracy. Why do you think their Party was call "Republican"? DUH.......

For someone to "act" like they are smart by summarily trying to correct my post line by line, Oh by the way that was so cute, you leave yourself very venerable to summarily, line by line, show you the error of your ways. But not this time, I did that for you once before and you came back and showed all of us just how uneducated and phlegmatic you are.

So no more trying reason with truth with you again. You are to far liberal thus will not listen to nor hear the truth anymore.

So maj 'oyH

4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory

Excellent post acitizen :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Tasine Loc: Southwest US

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
I love your comment. I am in total harmony with your thinking and haven't a thing to argue about with you. I do, however, have a comment about one thing you wrote that I think is not totally true. Your description of republic is exactly right on the mark; however, because of incompetence and usurpation of power (massive corruption within government), your definition, which IS correct, isn't actually true - we are losing freedoms daily and if we continue the current path, the end result will be the loss of EVERY God given freedom we are born with, but which many in government are determined to negate.

Our freedoms were not granted to us by government, and government has no TRUE power to take them away, but it has all the FORCE needed to take them away, and as the Bill of Rights is mostly to protect us AGAINST an oppressive government, government would LIKE to see the Bill of Rights burn brightly in flames, never to be resurrected.

ALL OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENTS DISALLOW RIGHTS, FREEDOMS THAT GIVE THE CITIZEN ANY EDGE WHATSOEVER. It is easier to dictate to totally helpless citizens than to those who are armed with weapons, words, media of their making, honesty and integrity. The government which can control EVERY one of those things, will have total control of the citizens who will have no recourse except violence and death.