Palin has ideas to steal?

[Capper Al]

Goes to show you that we can't believe what's posted on the Internet.

[HUSKER55]

you are entitled to your opinion

[Capper Al]

you are entitled to your opinion

You have said a lot. Are we getting a little hostile or do you like to state the obvious? Funny the libs don't reply this way. I wonder why?

[HUSKER55]

FIRST OFF: I rarely get hostile.

SECOND OFF: Of coarse I state the obvious. it is early in the day. :D

BTW, I did not mean any offense.

[Capper Al]

FIRST OFF: I rarely get hostile.

SECOND OFF: Of coarse I state the obvious. it is early in the day. :D

BTW, I did not mean any offense.

You know Husker, I believe you. It was early. Have a good rest of the day.

[Tom]

Goes to show you that we can't believe what's posted on the Internet.

Depends on who posts it there.
Like Post #1, for example......

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B6zoi2gCYAAbUoc.jpg:medium

[snickster]

Come on man that is not really something she really said. You really expect me to believe she is that stupid? That is only propaganda for the liberal dumb fks because they are so stupid they will believe anything you tell them if it fits their narrative.

[Clocker]

Come on man that is not really something she really said. You really expect me to believe she is that stupid? That is only propaganda for the liberal dumb fks because they are so stupid they will believe anything you tell them if it fits their narrative.

And then they will post it in a forum someplace. :rolleyes:

Again.

[davew]

Come on man that is not really something she really said. You really expect me to believe she is that stupid? That is only propaganda for the liberal dumb fks because they are so stupid they will believe anything you tell them if it fits their narrative.

or she misspoke, like that great CA representative Pelosi occasionally does

[Clocker]

or she misspoke, like that great CA representative Pelosi occasionally does

Would that be the same Nancy Pelosi that said we would lose 500 million jobs a month if we didn't pass the stimulus bill?

[Tom]

Or ALLFore saying the center of the Earth was millions of degress? :lol:

Hands down the idiots are on the left.
As the resident dumpster-diver of threads has just demonstrated.
The breakdown continues.

[davew]

Would that be the same Nancy Pelosi that said we would lose 500 million jobs a month if we didn't pass the stimulus bill?

did she think the stimulus bill gave out Viagra?

[JustRalph]

That was a piece by a website like the onion

[Clocker]

That was a piece by a website like the onion

Or the equally credible Democratic National Committee. :rolleyes:

[Robert Goren]

There is one universal truth about threads about Sarah Palin. Conservatives will try to shift the focus of the thread away from Palin as fast as possible. They do not want to discuss her because she is an embarrassment to them. If they really want discuss Pelosi etc they would have started a thread about her, but they did not. They just did not want to see another thread about Palin.

[Tom]

Embarrassment?
Not to me.
Compared to Obama, Pelosi, Reid this gal is dyno-mite!
What we get tired of is the libs continual attacks on her for no reason other than libs are generally a holes.

If you guys are not embarrassed by Obama, you must be drunk or high.

When you bring up the topic of stupid women, who else but Pelosi could a rational person think of?

Dirt laughs at her. but I guess in the grand scheme of things, she is far above most of you guys in the intellect department.

[Clocker]

There is one universal truth about threads about Sarah Palin. Conservatives will try to shift the focus of the thread away from Palin as fast as possible. They do not want to discuss her because she is an embarrassment to them.

Embarrassment? :D

You want to see embarrassment? This is her counterpart in the Democratic Party:

http://moonbattery.com/graphics/creepy-joe-biden.gif

[FantasticDan]

Embarrassment? :D You want to see embarrassment? This is her counterpart in the Democratic PartyHey, give Uncle Joe a break.. he had a busy day.. :p

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/politics/biden-swearing-in/

[Clocker]

Hey, give Uncle Joe a break.. he had a busy day.. :p

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/06/politics/biden-swearing-in/

From the link:
Uncle Joe was born for this.

A man's got to know his limitations.

Sarah Palin is certainly not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but Uncle Joe is a blunt instrument.

[MutuelClerk]

My favorite Joe moment when he asked his good friend to stand up and be recognized. Forgetting his "good friend" lost his legs in the war. Genius.

[JustRalph]

Funny how that idiot Palin has been proven right over time....funny how that works

[ArlJim78]

Embarrassment? :D

You want to see embarrassment? This is her counterpart in the Democratic Party:

http://moonbattery.com/graphics/creepy-joe-biden.gif
one of the creepiest things I've ever seen. as soon as the picture snapped he was all over her in what can only be described as an unwelcome sexual advance on a minor. he's not only dumb as a fencepost but a lech as well.

[classhandicapper]

I'm not sure why Palin takes so much heat other than she's conservative, gives good speeches, and was a lot "hotter" than most of the big name liberal women at the time of the convention (which of course got their claws out).

She was inexperienced at the time, but she's not bad. I'd take her over many politicans....and not just because I'm 55 and think she's hot....well maybe that counts a little. ;)

[Clocker]

I'm not sure why Palin takes so much heat other than she's conservative, gives good speeches, and was a lot "hotter" than most of the big name liberal women at the time of the convention (which of course got their claws out).

She was inexperienced at the time, but she's not bad. I'd take her over many politicans....and not just because I'm 55 and think she's hot....well maybe that counts a little. ;)

She is not a polished politician and she doesn't know how to play the game.

Of the four people on the top of the two tickets in 2008, she was the only one I would consider to be a competent administrator with executive experience. And the only one with private sector experience. That gets lost in the battle of images, and certainly no one on the left gives her credit for that. If I ran a company and was looking to hire a manager, she is the only one of that group I would even consider.

As regards policy, she is not a real thinker. Neither are Obama, McCain, or Biden, but they do a better job of pretending to be. Well, maybe not Uncle Joe. Again, it's all about image.

[Tom]

The left doesn't look kindly at people who are smarter than they are and better looking.


Which is why they hate pretty much everyone! :lol::lol::lol:

[classhandicapper]

Again, it's all about image.

Agreed, but why did the left specifically attack her so hard other than the reasons I gave?

She's an attractive conservative woman.

[Clocker]

Agreed, but why did the left specifically attack her so hard other than the reasons I gave?

She's an attractive conservative woman.

McCain was a senior Senator and a military hero, so he was pretty much off limits for personal attacks.

Palin was an easy target because she was young and attractive and had a tendency to blurt out what she was actually thinking. So she was ripe for being painted as a scatter-brained woman. And just like blacks can't be racists, dems can't be sexists, because everyone knows about the GOP war on women. So when the dems attacked her, there was nothing sexist about treating her like a bimbo.

[Tom]

I bet a majority of the dems out there do not know that Sarah and Tine Fey are two different people.....most probably think it is all Sarah! :lol:

[dartman51]

Embarrassment? :D

You want to see embarrassment? This is her counterpart in the Democratic Party:

http://moonbattery.com/graphics/creepy-joe-biden.gif


The look on her face says, "you could use a breath mint." :D

[badcompany]

The look on her face says, "you could use a breath mint." :D

Poor kid is gonna end up on a psychiatrist's couch over this.

[mostpost]

Funny how that idiot Palin has been proven right over time....funny how that works
Right about what? That she can see Russia from her front porch? Seriously; give me some examples of something she has been proven right about.

[Clocker]

Seriously; give me some examples of something she has been proven right about.

Death panels.

Herr Gruber admitted it.

[mostpost]

Death panels.

Herr Gruber admitted it.
Wrong again. Palin said that there would be death panels which would deny elderly persons care. Gruber, who is a moron, may have said something about establishing narrow provider networks to keep costs down. The fact is that nothing in the ACA requires the creation of narrow networks. That is being done by the insurance companies. Try again.

[Clocker]

Gruber, who is a moron, may have said something about establishing narrow provider networks to keep costs down.

This would be the moron Obama paid $400K for advice which he followed?


The fact is that nothing in the ACA requires the creation of narrow networks.

Nothing except the inescapable economic reality dictated by the rules and regulations written by Frau Sebelius.

[JustRalph]

Right about what? That she can see Russia from her front porch? Seriously; give me some examples of something she has been proven right about.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpeck/2014/03/03/sarah-palin-was-right-about-ukraine/

[Robert Goren]

From the link:


A man's got to know his limitations.

Sarah Palin is certainly not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but Uncle Joe is a blunt instrument.Sarah Palin is probably the sharpest knife most drawers. It is just that her political pronouncements are designed to do one thing and one thing only, to put money in her purse. She is very good at doing that. It does not matter if she right or wrong about any issue to her as long as it pays off with more cash. When she made her statement about death panels, the money rolled in. She will continue to say what she needs to say to keep cash flowing. She will continue to have people give her money, but her days as a serious political force are long over. When she decide not to run in 2012, the curtain went down on her. 2012 was changing of guard of conservative movement. New leaders like Ted Cruz took over and Palin left the stage as a serious conservative politician. Notice that nobody is talking about her as serious candidate in 2016. Nobody thinks she could win.

[Tom]

Bobby, you are wrong, but at least she doesn't STEAL it from people like the democrats.

Being a democrat should be cause enough for jail time.

[Clocker]

her days as a serious political force are long over.

Probably. But she still has the right to do and say whatever she wants. And it is greatly entertaining to watch moonbats get their panties in a twist about her. And about Limbaugh and Hannity and Fox News while ignoring the real causes of their problems.

[mostpost]

http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelpeck/2014/03/03/sarah-palin-was-right-about-ukraine/
According to your article, Sarah Palin said in 2008 that Obama's failure to react decisively to Russia's invasion of Georgia, would cause Russia to invade the Ukraine. Russia did-technically-invade the Ukraine six years later. But that had nothing to do with Obama's pronouncements on the subject and everything to do with Russia's perception of its national interests. Furthermore, Obama's statements on Georgia were almost precisely what Bush did.

When we are talking about things that Palin was right about, we should only include what she herself said and figured out on her own, not anything that was spoon fed to her by McCain's handlers. I am certain that she thinks the Georgia which Russia invaded is surrounded by Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina and the Atlantic Ocean and is famous for its peach trees. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

I am certain that she thinks the Georgia which Russia invaded is surrounded by Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina and the Atlantic Ocean and is famous for its peach trees.

No one really gives a F***

[JustRalph]

According to your article, Sarah Palin said in 2008 that Obama's failure to react decisively to Russia's invasion of Georgia, would cause Russia to invade the Ukraine. Russia did-technically-invade the Ukraine six years later. But that had nothing to do with Obama's pronouncements on the subject and everything to do with Russia's perception of its national interests. Furthermore, Obama's statements on Georgia were almost precisely what Bush did.

When we are talking about things that Palin was right about, we should only include what she herself said and figured out on her own, not anything that was spoon fed to her by McCain's handlers. I am certain that she thinks the Georgia which Russia invaded is surrounded by Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina and the Atlantic Ocean and is famous for its peach trees. :rolleyes:

You're lucky we don't hold your tired ass to that same standard

[fast4522]

According to your article, Sarah Palin said in 2008 that Obama's failure to react decisively to Russia's invasion of Georgia, would cause Russia to invade the Ukraine. Russia did-technically-invade the Ukraine six years later. But that had nothing to do with Obama's pronouncements on the subject and everything to do with Russia's perception of its national interests. Furthermore, Obama's statements on Georgia were almost precisely what Bush did.

When we are talking about things that Palin was right about, we should only include what she herself said and figured out on her own, not anything that was spoon fed to her by McCain's handlers. I am certain that she thinks the Georgia which Russia invaded is surrounded by Florida, Alabama, Tennessee, South Carolina and the Atlantic Ocean and is famous for its peach trees. :rolleyes:

Shit, your more challenged than Robert Goren, if elected President a person has to decide what information his or her advisers is relevant and accurate to talk about. As a pair neither of you have much that is both relevant and accurate combined between you.

[wisconsin]

Right about what? That she can see Russia from her front porch? Seriously; give me some examples of something she has been proven right about.

You can't be serious George, Tina Fey said that.

[dartman51]

You can't be serious George, Tina Fey said that.


:D That's the sad part, MoPo doesn't know the difference. That's what the LW idiots say that she said, so it must be true. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

See post #29....... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

No wonder she seems dumb to theses guys.....they don't what smart is all about!

[Clocker]

:D That's the sad part, MoPo doesn't know the difference. That's what the LW idiots say that she said, so it must be true. :rolleyes:

The really sad part is that even if everything the left ever accused Palin of was true, all of it in total did less damage to the country than Obama does in an average day in office. Before lunch.

[FantasticDan]

The really sad part is that even if everything the left ever accused Palin of was true, all of it in total did less damage to the country than Obama does in an average day in office. Before lunch.I heard he accidentally knocked over a tray table last week, spilling some lemonade. And this was around 10:30am, so you may be on to something. :ThmbUp: :rolleyes:

[Clocker]

I heard he accidentally knocked over a tray table last week, spilling some lemonade. And this was around 10:30am, so you may be on to something. :ThmbUp: :rolleyes:

Glad to see that you have a realistic perspective on Palin's relative impact on the country.

It is sad that you don't have an equally realistic perspective on what this administration is doing to the economy of this country, and to the liberty of its citizens.

I eagerly await a Daily Show or Seinfeld video in lieu of an actual serious response. :p

[hcap]

Right ab=out what? That she can see Russia from her front porch? Seriously; give me some examples of something she has been proven right about.
You can't be serious George, Tina Fey said that.

Tina Fey satirized Palin. Fertile ground for satire.
JXL86v8NoGk?

[vegasone]

Idiots still quote that but never really know where it came from.

It was actually comedian Tina Fey, who was impersonating Ms. Palin on Saturday Night Live, who uttered the line that is now widely attributed to the former Alaska governor.

The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."

[Clocker]

Tina Fey satirized Palin. Fertile ground for satire.


Satirizing Sarah Palin is less productive and less relevant than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. The house is on fire and you are whining that the ashes are dirtying the water in the bird feeder.

Sarah Palin is a minor footnote in history, an inconsequential target of distraction while the administration attempts to dismantle the Constitution and the private sector.

[dnlgfnk]

I strongly objected to Palin's statement that waterboarding "is how we baptize terrorists", considering it sacrilegious. I find many of her shoot-from-the-hip statements offered up to merely provocate the Left, while there are several opinions she holds with which I agree.

But let's not kid ourselves. As a personification of motherhood and anti-radical feminism for a party that has conjured up the term "war on women", who have no issue with 90% of Down's syndrome unborn children being aborted, Palin is hated most for attempting to "conserve" the traditional family model. There is no similar contempt for her and her son as can be found in any "progressive" combox discussing the two.

[hcap]

Let' see the transcript: GIBSON (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/full-transcript-gibson-interviews-sarah-palin/story?id=9159105&page=4) : What insight into Russian actions, particularly in the last couple of weeks, does the proximity of the state give you?

PALIN: They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska.

GIBSON: What insight does that give you into what they're doing in Georgia?

PALIN: Well, I'm giving you that perspective of how small our world is and how important it is that we work with our allies to keep good relation with all of these countries, especially Russia.
"Gee Charlie we are really close"

Neither insightful or relevant. Not the brightest lamp in the street.
The light's on, but nobody's home.

Tina was right on as an impersonator, humorist and satirist.

If McCain and bubbles won the "Titanic" would be sitting now at the bottom of the Bering Strait instead of recovering from iceberg Georgie and his non-domesticated whacko Darko Dick Vader. :eek:

[Robert Goren]

I strongly objected to Palin's statement that waterboarding "is how we baptize terrorists", considering it sacrilegious. I find many of her shoot-from-the-hip statements offered up to merely provocate the Left, while there are several opinions she holds with which I agree.

But let's not kid ourselves. As a personification of motherhood and anti-radical feminism for a party that has conjured up the term "war on women", who have no issue with 90% of Down's syndrome unborn children being aborted, Palin is hated most for attempting to "conserve" the traditional family model. There is no similar contempt for her and her son as can be found in any "progressive" combox discussing the two. My God, you haven't a clue on why the left does not like Sarah Palin.

[Tom]

I don't think you do. :rolleyes:

[jballscalls]

No wonder she seems dumb to theses guys.....they don't what smart is all about!

This assault on the english language was referencing other people not knowing what smart is all about?

Rule #1 on the internet is if you're going to call someone else dumb, don't include misspellings, grammar errors and have words just totally missing.

[fast4522]

A liberal arts degree doesn't go that far with a conservative hiring manager does it?

[Tom]

This assault on the english language was referencing other people not knowing what smart is all about?

Rule #1 on the internet is if you're going to call someone else dumb, don't include misspellings, grammar errors and have words just totally missing.


Look up smart, then look up typing errors.
I hope you are able to read both definitions. And understand them?
But when you have nothing of substance to offer, it is always nice to have speklling fall bak on.

[hcap]

A liberal arts degree doesn't go that far with a conservative hiring manager does it?Ok, so, what might a Conservative Arts curriculum look like?

First and foremost, a conservative arts masterpiece

http://images.complex.com/complex/image/upload/t_article_image/tir7xhgygljlrruekub9.jpg

And a con master at work.....

http://media.tumblr.com/6cd2fe218eaf77507ef1660f431823b3/tumblr_inline_n8h5rdO7zK1rf4wll.jpg


Here are a few courses that would surely pass muster in any
conservative (http://www.scottcawelti.com/home/scott-posts/1996/11/25/degree-in-conservative-arts-at-last) catalog of Important Things:

STASIS 101: The art of inertia. Students will learn to
successfully resist change in all its forms, no matter how at-
tractive and beneficial. Practical experience offered in road
blocking and bottlenecking, not to mention stonewalling.

INTRODUCTION TO PATRIOTISM. Blind loyalty for fun and prof-
it. "My country right or wrong," "Love it or leave it," both
examined as potential national slogans. Daily pledge of alle-
giance required. Prerequisite: ability to sing "Star Spangled
Banner" from memory, but not necessarily in tune. Flag burners
will be identified and humiliated.

GOUGING 101. Theory and practice of all the traffic will
bear. Recent gouging variants, including "Trickle-Down," "Supply
Side" and "Voodoo Economics" examined in detail. Students encour-
aged to read instructor's lips. Special sections offered:
gouging the environment, gouging the government, gouging poor
people, gouging charitable foundations. Not offered: gouging rich
people.

NOSTALGIA 101: Lessons on how to live in the past. Students
learn to get along without the present. Costumes not provided
Old radio and TV programs, movies, and novels read and appreciated
for what they were: a powerful means of avoiding anything
real. Prerequisite: STASIS 101.

FITNESS AND HEALTH: AEROBIC WALKING BACKWARD. Benefits of
backwards walking demonstrated and practiced. Variety of ap-
proaches offered, all of which allow slow forward movement with
eyes firmed fixed on the past. Prerequisite: STASIS 101.

THE GOLDEN AGE OF POLITICS: The Eisenhower, Nixon, and
Reagan eras. Great achievements by the greatest politicians of
the last fifty years. Major speeches and books by Ike, Dick, and
Ron will be studied in detail. Some students may require nausea
medication. Prerequisite: GOUGING 101.

THE GOLDEN AGE OF ART AND POETRY: Norman Rockwell and Joyce
Kilmer. Appreciating paintings and poems that tell us what we
want to see and hear. Emphasis on perfect families, perfect
trees, (Kilmer's "Trees" a primary text) and perfect people.

THE GOLDEN AGE OF FAMILIES: In-depth studies of Ozzie and
Harriet Nelson, Cleaver, and Father Knows Best families. For
perspective, contrasting families briefly examined: the Bunkers
(Archie and Edith) and the Connors (Rosie and Dan). Prerequisite:
NOSTALGIA 101.

THE GOLDEN AGE OF CORPORATIONS: Standard Oil, U.S. Steel,
AT&Tk, examined in detail for how they operated before unions and
anti-trust laws wrecked them. Prerequisite: GOUGING 101.

INTRODUCTION TO CORPORATE WELFARE: How to incorporate in order in order to receive free government benefits. Examination of major corporations' methods of finding and using tax loopholes. Prerequisite: GOUGING 101.

INTRODUCTION TO CENSORSHIP: Studies in how to impose morality on others without applying it to oneself. Great censorship cases examined for how they worked to raise the comfort level of conservatives. Prerequisite: STASIS 101.

THE MAGIC OF WEAPONRY: Explorations of favorite weapons systems with emphasis on Star Wars, the B-1, and other assorted Pentagon gems. Special section on methods of marketing various weapons to third world countries. Prerequisite: GOUGING 101.

INTRODUCTION TO WELFARE FRAUD INVESTIGATION. Study of proper use of stereotypes, labels, and easy answers. Includes field trips to welfare queens' homes, interviews with freeloaders, and methods of spotting people not paying their fair share.

[dnlgfnk]

hcap said:

Ok, so, what might a Conservative Arts curriculum look like?

"STASIS 101: The art of inertia. Students will learn to
successfully resist change in all its forms, no matter how at-
tractive and beneficial. Practical experience offered in road
blocking and bottlenecking, not to mention stonewalling"...

Conservatives reject new ways of implementing eternal truths. Progressives reject the eternal truths. To be constantly changing is to be doing the same thing. To measure progress, one needs a standard, which the conservative wants to "conserve" and hand on. In that sense a conservative believes in the democracy of the dead--that our ancestors get a vote. It is generational arrogance to state that "we are the ones we've been waiting for".

Tradition asks us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our father.” --G.K. Chesterton

[horses4courses]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B7GzrX2CcAEAUGU.jpg:medium

[fast4522]

Heck, your still kicking. You should have posted something good.

[hcap]

Conservatives reject new ways of implementing eternal truths. Progressives reject the eternal truths. To be constantly changing is to be doing the same thing. To measure progress, one needs a standard, which the conservative wants to "conserve" and hand on. In that sense a conservative believes in the democracy of the dead--that our ancestors get a vote. It is generational arrogance to state that "we are the ones we've been waiting for".

Tradition asks us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our father.” --G.K. ChestertonProgressives reject the eternal truths.? A bit presumptuous to say the least. Do you buy into all of boxcars' "eternal truths"? I think not.

One man's "eternal truths" can be arrived at as in many many different ways. As far as I know conservatives do not get to define eternal truth or what my or another liberals' "eternal truths" are.

[dnlgfnk]

Progressives reject the eternal truths.? A bit presumptuous to say the least. Do you buy into all of boxcars' "eternal truths"? I think not.

One man's "eternal truths" can be arrived at as in many many different ways. As far as I know conservatives do not get to define eternal truth or what my or another liberals' "eternal truths" are.

Can we all agree that our collective standard at least begin with, say, natural law?

[hcap]

Can we all agree that our collective standard at least begin with, say, natural law?Define natural law.

[Clocker]

As far as I know conservatives do not get to define eternal truth or what my or another liberals' "eternal truths" are.

I don't think that true conservatives claim to define eternal truths. They do believe that this is a nation of laws, and that the founders wrote the laws based on the truth as they saw it. The people that don't agree with those laws, or the principles behind them, should follow the legal procedures to change the laws.

[Tom]

Save your $9.95......I'll tell you what the cost of ignorance is.......

[dnlgfnk]

Define natural law.

Along the lines of Clocker's statement, we probably won't get anywhere. You would have to agree that within the very foundation of the government you live under...

..."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"...

the "blue" statements are theological. Materialists can see that all men are not created equal,.i.e., Aaron Rodgers vis-a-vis Jay Cutler, Stephen Hawking vs. Usain Bolt, Stephen Hawking vs. your view of Sarah Palin, etc.

So I'll redirect to:

Why do atheistic materialists complain about Sarah Palin, or anything else which infers a standard is not being met? When terrorists fly planes into buildings and kill 2996 individuals, is it an immoral act, or just a different one?

[snickster]

Define natural law.

Define eternal truth.

[dnlgfnk]

Along the lines of Clocker's statement, we probably won't get anywhere. You would have to agree that within the very foundation of the government you live under...

..."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"...

the "blue" statements are theological. Materialists can see that all men are not created equal,.i.e., Aaron Rodgers vis-a-vis Jay Cutler, Stephen Hawking vs. Usain Bolt, Stephen Hawking vs. your view of Sarah Palin, etc.

So I'll redirect to:

Why do atheistic materialists complain about Sarah Palin, or anything else which infers a standard is not being met? When terrorists fly planes into buildings and kill 2996 individuals, is it an immoral act, or just a different one?

After reading my own post (in red), I realize that there is no inequality without a standard, as well. There's simply nothing with which to judge "progress".

Those stodgy conservatives at PETA won't embrace change, either. For as soon as Trig stepped on the family dog, Sarah was judged against their immutable truth that "a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy".

[snickster]

After reading my own post (in red), I realize that there is no inequality without a standard, as well. There's simply nothing with which to judge "progress".

Those stodgy conservatives at PETA won't embrace change, either. For as soon as Trig stepped on the family dog, Sarah was judged against their immutable truth that "a rat is a pig is a dog is a boy".

I think the founding fathers meant that - all men are created equal under God - meaning that as far as God is concerned all men are created of equal in importance. Of course men differ in attributes and talents.

[snickster]

I think the founding fathers meant that - all men are created equal under God - meaning that as far as God is concerned all men are created of equal in importance. Of course men differ in attributes and talents.

Except todays liberals who are born brain dead. lol.

[dnlgfnk]

I think the founding fathers meant that - all men are created equal under God - meaning that as far as God is concerned all men are created of equal in importance. Of course men differ in attributes and talents.

Understood, Snickster. That's why I described it as a theological statement.

[Clocker]

I think the founding fathers meant that - all men are created equal under God - meaning that as far as God is concerned all men are created of equal in importance. Of course men differ in attributes and talents.

They certainly meant that all men are equal under the law. The difference in philosophy is that conservatives think in terms of equal opportunity while liberals focus on equal outcomes.

[Robert Goren]

Along the lines of Clocker's statement, we probably won't get anywhere. You would have to agree that within the very foundation of the government you live under...

..."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"...

the "blue" statements are theological. Materialists can see that all men are not created equal,.i.e., Aaron Rodgers vis-a-vis Jay Cutler, Stephen Hawking vs. Usain Bolt, Stephen Hawking vs. your view of Sarah Palin, etc.

So I'll redirect to:

Why do atheistic materialists complain about Sarah Palin, or anything else which infers a standard is not being met? When terrorists fly planes into buildings and kill 2996 individuals, is it an immoral act, or just a different one?You realize that most of the atheists and agnostics who post here are conservatives. So are most of the die hard materialists. While Palin is not an Atheist, she is the biggest materialist this side of Al Sharpton.
I think most people, Believer, Atheist or Agnostic, would agree that 9/11 was an immoral act. It was an act of war against the US and we should have gone after the people behind it with every resource of our country had. Too bad the president at the time had other priorities.

[JustRalph]

Flying planes into buildings is activism, haven't you heard?

[hcap]

Define eternal truth.I am not the one that claimed conservatives live by "eternal truths" and progressives do not. That's why I objected to conservatives claiming to have a monopoly on eternal truth and then using "natural law" as a modern day conservative political basis for the establishment of the American union. The founders benefited from a new philosophy, and it certainly was not trickle down voodoo economics or the selfishness of Objectivism.

The Enlightenment was the backdrop of the American Revolution and the formation of guidelines for the union moved away from specific religious manifestations in government. It was the continuation of the Age Of Reason.
The Enlightenment was the age of the triumph of science (Newton, Leibniz, Bacon) and of philosophy (Descartes, Locke, Spinoza, Kant, Voltaire, Diderot, Montesquieu). Unlike the Renaissance philosophers, they no longer sought validation in the texts of the Greco-Roman philosophers, but were predicated more solidly on rationalism and empiricism. There were atheists among them, and devout Christians, but if there was a common belief about the divine among Enlightenment philosophers, it was probably deism.

The political philosophy of the Enlightenment is the unambiguous antecedent of modern Western liberalism: secular, pluralistic, rule-of-law-based, with an emphasis on individual rights and freedoms. Note that none of this was really present in the Renaissance, when it was still widely assumed that kings were essentially ordained by God, that monarchy was the natural order of things and that monarchs were not subject to the laws of ordinary men, and that the ruled were not citizens but subjects.

It was the Enlightenment, and thinkers who embodied its ideas, like Voltaire and Benjamin Franklin (I think it was Eugen Weber once described the sage of Philadelphia as the epitome of the Enlightenment thinker), who were the intellectual force behind the American Revolution and the French Revolution, and who really inspired the ideas behind the great political documents of the age like the American Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen.

[classhandicapper]

One man's "eternal truths" can be arrived at as in many many different ways. As far as I know conservatives do not get to define eternal truth or what my or another liberals' "eternal truths" are.

IMO, this attitude is contributing to the downfall of the country.

When you leave ordinary people to decide for themselves what is right/wrong, good/bad, ethical/unethical, moral/immoral, superior/inferior etc... you are going to wind up with all sorts of beliefs and behaviors that produce terrible results for individuals and society.

It's fine if people want to reject the opinion of religious leaders, conservatives, philosophers, or whoever else they want to reject, but there are clear cut different results from various choices that can be measured and analyzed. From that data we CAN tell what works best for individuals and society in general as a whole.

That is not to say we need laws that force people to behave the right way in all cases (I would be very strongly opposed to that), but we can have a society that encourages objectively measured SUPERIOR behavior and get away from the moral relativism that is ruining the country.

[classhandicapper]

They certainly meant that all men are equal under the law. The difference in philosophy is that conservatives think in terms of equal opportunity while liberals focus on equal outcomes.

Exactly correct.

Next time I take my 5' 5" 145 pound body to the basketball court I'll demand to get paid as much as Lebron James. :rolleyes:

[Tom]

As far as I know conservatives do not get to define eternal truth or what my or another liberals' "eternal truths" are.

1. It is Bush's fault
2. Raise taxes
3. FOX is terrible
4. Romney is bad because he has money.
5. It's getting warm outside

Pretty much covers it all......

[hcap]

It's fine if people want to reject the opinion of religious leaders, conservatives, philosophers, or whoever else they want to reject, but there are clear cut different results from various choices that can be measured and analyzed. From that data we CAN tell what works best for individuals and society in general as a whole.
I agree. However.......

From Wki.
Reality-based community is an informal term in the United States. In the fall of 2004, the phrase "proud member of the reality-based community" was first used to suggest the commentator's opinions are based more on observation than on faith, assumption, or ideology.

.....The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, "Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush," quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove[1]):

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."[2]
The conservative take here is often not based on or easily discerned fro the evidence, but rather a belief that they are correct no matter the evidence. I suspect they are still stuck believing the crapola left over from Rove and friends.

Conservatism is not a "given". As it is bandied about here with such fervor as tho' they are indeed "eternal truth" or Natural Law.

[Robert Goren]

They certainly meant that all men are equal under the law. The difference in philosophy is that conservatives think in terms of equal opportunity while liberals focus on equal outcomes. No they didn't. It took the fourteenth amendment, a civil war and the civil rights acts to get to even close to that idea. We still have a ways to go. A rich man and a poor man are still not equal under the law. Even if a rich man somehow ends up in prison, it is a far different prison than the poor man goes to.

[mostpost]

They certainly meant that all men are equal under the law. The difference in philosophy is that conservatives think in terms of equal opportunity while liberals focus on equal outcomes.
You are wrong on both ends of that statement. Conservative think in terms of superior opportunity for themselves. If they thought in terms of equal opportunity for everyone, they would not oppose programs like head start; they would not object to wealthier school districts sharing resources with poorer district; and they would not object to EEO and affirmative action laws. They would also not be so virulently anti-union.

Then you got the part about liberals wrong. I am a liberal. :eek: I do not expect equal outcomes. I expect fair outcomes. When an executive makes 100 times what one of his workers makes, that is not a fair outcome. A kid who goes through grammar school and high school in an even moderately upscale suburb such as I live in has a better chance to get in to college than a kid who lives in the Englewood neighborhood of Chicago. And that same kid has a better chance to do well in college and to get a better job when he graduates.

Opportunities now are more equal than the were years ago but they are still not equal enough and the progress we have made was no thanks to any conservatives.

[Clocker]

You are wrong on both ends of that statement. Conservative think in terms of superior opportunity for themselves. If they thought in terms of equal opportunity for everyone, they would not oppose programs like head start; they would not object to wealthier school districts sharing resources with poorer district; and they would not object to EEO and affirmative action laws. They would also not be so virulently anti-union.

Oh good, another straw man set up and attacked. You blithely call yourself a liberal. Most thinking people I know don't label themselves because their views vary on different issues. I can't speak for "conservatives" because I don't know what they are. I often use the term here as shorthand for people who are not moonbats.

As for myself, I believe education is a local issue, and the federal government has no business interfering. I have no problem with EEO. I am firmly against affirmative action because it is racist and discriminatory. I am not virulently anti-union. I am pro-choice on that issue, a concept libs think they have a monopoly on.

[Robert Goren]

Oh good, another straw man set up and attacked. You blithely call yourself a liberal. Most thinking people I know don't label themselves because their views vary on different issues. I can't speak for "conservatives" because I don't know what they are. I often use the term here as shorthand for people who are not moonbats.

As for myself, I believe education is a local issue, and the federal government has no business interfering. I have no problem with EEO. I am firmly against affirmative action because it is racist and discriminatory. I am not virulently anti-union. I am pro-choice on that issue, a concept libs think they have a monopoly on.I am assuming you believe that education should be a local issue because the locals have done such a great job in teaching our kids.

[newtothegame]

You are wrong on both ends of that statement. Conservative think in terms of superior opportunity for themselves. If they thought in terms of equal opportunity for everyone, they would not oppose programs like head start; they would not object to wealthier school districts sharing resources with poorer district; and they would not object to EEO and affirmative action laws. They would also not be so virulently anti-union.

Then you got the part about liberals wrong. I am a liberal. :eek: I do not expect equal outcomes. I expect fair outcomes. When an executive makes 100 times what one of his workers makes, that is not a fair outcome. A kid who goes through grammar school and high school in an even moderately upscale suburb such as I live in has a better chance to get in to college than a kid who lives in the Englewood neighborhood of Chicago. And that same kid has a better chance to do well in college and to get a better job when he graduates.

Opportunities now are more equal than the were years ago but they are still not equal enough and the progress we have made was no thanks to any conservatives.
Nope, wrong again mosty! Speaking for myself ( as a conservative), I do not think of myself as superior or wanting superior opportunities. At 46, I have obtained my bachelors as of last summer. Currently working on my masters. Guess how much money in grants and tuition assistance I have gotten?
Next, I can assure you it was and is not an Ivy League school. So where am I expecting or wanting something superior???
As to schools and objecting to poor schools reaping benefits from some non poor school, do you know where that comes from?
I have busted my ass to get to where I am. Because of that effort and hard work, I have been able to pay for my grand daughter to go to a catholic high school (where again, I pay through the nose). I also donate time and money (extra) to the school. Why should that school have to give anything to another school? You see, the school is reaping the benefits of that which they provide. In turn, the parents give back. By the way, less fortunate kids are able to attend this school on something similar to a voucher system. Am I upset about that? Not in the least! The only thing the school requires is PARENT INVOLVEMENT. Which brings me to the arguments real issue....it's not the school!!!

As to this " all men are created equal". Libs love to attempt to use this as a springboard to talk about equality in jobs, etc etc. did someone forget the "created" word??? I take it to say that at birth, we are all the same in the lords eyes. We are also all the same when we make our way to those gates. But in the middle, you will always have those that strive to get ahead if you will. Hell, look at your messiah....he made it to the highest public office in the world! Do I sit here and harbor I'll feelings because he "made it"? Not in the least. Even if I do think he is doing a terrible job.
I think it's hillarious you always talk about executives and their pay. What about pro athletes? I am sure Lebron makes plenty more then the average basketball player. I am also sure he works his butt off to play. According to you, he is not entitled to his earnings...right? He should share with all of his peers.
You can take that to any level you wish....you make more then a friend of mine (who I mentioned several times before). By the way, I am still waiting on his share from you.
Unions.....I may seem anti Union but reality is I am against Union leadership. I am against negotiating with those who have no stake involved and pinning the bill on tax payers to fund pensions when they (the tax payer) reaps nothing in return. It's nothing more then redistribution.
Here is a story that was on our local news tonight. Lady on news screaming, crying cause her car caught on fire. They actually showed it burning. She is going on and on about how it was her only transportation and now she doesn't know what she will do. Then I thought wait a minute....if my car or truck caught on fire....I would be calling my insurance agent. Hmmmm guess where this is going......
Yes, I have to pay more for people like her who have no insurance. My rates are higher for uninsured motorist. And now, you probably think we should give her more in the form of more transportation. Well guess what....we have public transportation!
In the end, I will tell you I have nothing against anyone who makes it and does well for themselves. Hell, I am trying to get their addresses so I can send my resume lol. But I also don't think they owe me a damn thing!
My parents grew up in a little town near Gary Indiana. I vividly remember sleeping on church pews as a very young child. I went to those same public poor schools you are talking about. I seem to have done ok for myself...or so I think.
p.s when can I expect that check for my friend????????????

[classhandicapper]

The conservative take here is often not based on or easily discerned from the evidence, but rather a belief that they are correct no matter the evidence. I suspect they are still stuck believing the crapola left over from Rove and friends.



The liberal take is that is no one's values are superior to anyone else's. Then they use societal pressure and the law where possible to try protect their own behaviors despite measurable negative repercussions for individuals and society. Then in the very next breath they attack the values and behaviors they don't approve of and try to use laws to end them.

Liberal philosophy is very unprincipled and very damaging.

[horses4courses]

Liberal philosophy is very unprincipled and very damaging.

Only to the ego of a conservative.

[Clocker]

I do not expect equal outcomes. I expect fair outcomes.

A matter of semantics or degree. You are still concerned with outcomes rather than opportunity or achievement.

What is a fair outcome? Where in the Constitution do you see the word "fair"? Where is "fair" defined in the laws of this country?

When you say you want fair outcomes, you are saying that you know how things "should" be. And once again, you are saying that you know what is best for other people. Because the rest of us are too stupid to know how things "should" be.

[RunForTheRoses]

Lookie here I got a timely email pic for those who like pictures:

[snickster]

A matter of semantics or degree. You are still concerned with outcomes rather than opportunity or achievement.

What is a fair outcome? Where in the Constitution do you see the word "fair"? Where is "fair" defined in the laws of this country?

When you say you want fair outcomes, you are saying that you know how things "should" be. And once again, you are saying that you know what is best for other people. Because the rest of us are too stupid to know how things "should" be.

The only way that everything can be totally equal in outcomes to all people is that all people have equally very little, and that very little is equally distributed in a very controlled manner to everyone by an absolute elite oppressing authority. That is what is call COMMUNISM. It has been tried before. This is nothing new. The ultimate end of todays liberal democrats ideology is PURE COMMUNISM PERIOD. I don't think most conservatives have a problem with the altruistic ideals of the liberals - we just know what the ultimate results are. That is the difference between a liberal and a conservative. A conservative wants the same things as liberals for all people but are not stupid enough to destroy all liberties and economic stability for it as then everyone loses in the end.

[RunForTheRoses]

You are wrong on both ends of that statement. Conservative think in terms of superior opportunity for themselves. If they thought in terms of equal opportunity for everyone, they would not oppose programs like head start; they would not object to wealthier school districts sharing resources with poorer district; and they would not object to EEO and affirmative action laws. They would also not be so virulently anti-union.

Then you got the part about liberals wrong. I am a liberal. :eek: I do not expect equal outcomes. I expect fair outcomes. When an executive makes 100 times what one of his workers makes, that is not a fair outcome. A kid who goes through grammar school and high school in an even moderately upscale suburb such as I live in has a better chance to get in to college than a kid who lives in the Englewood neighborhood of Chicago. And that same kid has a better chance to do well in college and to get a better job when he graduates.

Opportunities now are more equal than the were years ago but they are still not equal enough and the progress we have made was no thanks to any conservatives.

Here, ya might learn something, thank me later:

http://www.freetochoose.tv/program.php?id=testing_milton_friedman_1&series=tmf

[Clocker]

Lookie here I got a timely email pic for those who like pictures:

Do you have an email pic of "fair" for these poor libs who yearn for it but just can't seem to articulate what it is?

I think it kind of looks like this, but the libs say that ain't quite it.

http://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/unicorn-vulnerability.jpg

[RunForTheRoses]

Do you have an email pic of "fair" for these poor libs who yearn for it but just can't seem to articulate what it is?

I think it kind of looks like this, but the libs say that ain't quite it.

http://securityaffairs.co/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/unicorn-vulnerability.jpg.


Nice sorta Roan horsey. Here's Sowell on fairness

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2014/02/25/the-fairness-fraud-n1799865/page/full

[hcap]

A matter of semantics or degree. You are still concerned with outcomes rather than opportunity or achievement.

What is a fair outcome? Where in the Constitution do you see the word "fair"? Where is "fair" defined in the laws of this country?

When you say you want fair outcomes, you are saying that you know how things "should" be. And once again, you are saying that you know what is best for other people. Because the rest of us are too stupid to know how things "should" be.Absolute BS. Fairness is an essential principle at the root of our legal system. The ethics of Justice are part an parcel of concepts of fairness.

In the 1800s, thinkers including John Stuart Mill argued that justice is what has the best consequences.....Egalitarians argued that justice can only exist within the coordinates of equality. John Rawls in his A Theory of Justice . used a social contract argument to show that justice, and especially distributive justice, is a form of fairness.

And "Due Process" is guaranteed by the Constitution.
At a basic level, procedural due process is essentially based on the concept of "fundamental fairness." For example, in 1934, the United States Supreme Court held that due process is violated "if a practice or rule offends some principle of justice so rooted in the traditions and conscience of our people as to be ranked as fundamental."[15] As construed by the courts, it includes an individual's right to be adequately notified of charges or proceedings, the opportunity to be heard at these proceedings, and that the person or panel making the final decision over the proceedings be impartial in regards to the matter before them.[16]....Fairness is what justice really is.
Potter Stewart

Today's Constitution is a realistic document of freedom only because of several corrective amendments. Those amendments speak to a sense of decency and fairness that I and other Blacks cherish.
Thurgood Marshall

And....

A primary justification for the growth of government in our country – far beyond what the founders envisioned for us – is to promote fairness and justice, And indeed, fairness and justice is a worthy goal but we might ask what is fairness and justice.
Dr. Walter E. Williams

[Tom]

SO if someone has to fork over part of money HE earned to someone who refuses to carry his own water, how is that fair?

Allowing sloths and anchors to starve to death is absolutely fair.

[hcap]

SO if someone has to fork over part of money HE earned to someone who refuses to carry his own water, how is that fair?

Allowing sloths and anchors to starve to death is absolutely fair.
Typical Tom view of fairness and justice replaced with a very narrow blinkers on philosophy. The Tom B. Anchor Theory Of Everything.

[Tom]

Nature is not fair.
Survival is blind.

[hcap]

Nature is not fair.
Survival is blind.The founders of our country were advocates of both justice and fairness. Your continuing interpretation of Americans on SS, disability an social programs as anchors is a crock and cannot be compared to eternal truths and natural law.

....Fairness is what justice really is.
Potter Stewart

[Tom]

The founders of our country were advocates of both justice and fairness. Your continuing interpretation of Americans on SS, disability an social programs as anchors is a crock and cannot be compared to eternal truths and natural law.

....Fairness is what justice really is.
Potter Stewart


Your post is one big lie and you know it.
I have stated numerous times that I am OT talking about SS, or legitimate disability, but you keep lying to make your point. Is your position that tenuous that it cannot stand on its own?

I have posted many times that people who legitimately need help are being short-changed by anchors, yet you continue to lie about it. Your are being just as phony as when you used the phrase "tax cuts for the wealthy" over and over knowing full well the cuts were for everyone.

You and your ilk's constant "tax the wealthy" mantra is wearing thin - it exposes you for the shallow, empty suits that you are. You guys have no solutions to anything, just tired old sound bytes void of substance.

[Clocker]

And indeed, fairness and justice is a worthy goal but we might ask what is fairness...
Dr. Walter E. Williams

That was my question. And still is.

[mostpost]

Nope, wrong again mosty! Speaking for myself ( as a conservative), I do not think of myself as superior or wanting superior opportunities. At 46, I have obtained my bachelors as of last summer. Currently working on my masters. Guess how much money in grants and tuition assistance I have gotten?
I'm guessing none since otherwise you would not have brought it up! The question is why? Not smart enough to qualify for a merit scholarship? RELAX! I'm pulling your chain. The obvious reason you did not get tuition assistance is that your financial situation does not qualify you for it. You have a high enough income or sufficient resources to pay for your own education. Good for you. There are many who work just as hard as you do and due to circumstances beyond their control do not have as good a job as you do. They do not have equal opportunities.
Next, I can assure you it was and is not an Ivy League school. So where am I expecting or wanting something superior???
Of course it's not. It's in freakin' Louisiana.
As to schools and objecting to poor schools reaping benefits from some non poor school, do you know where that comes from?
I have busted my ass to get to where I am. Because of that effort and hard work, I have been able to pay for my grand daughter to go to a catholic high school (where again, I pay through the nose). I also donate time and money (extra) to the school. Why should that school have to give anything to another school? You see, the school is reaping the benefits of that which they provide. In turn, the parents give back. By the way, less fortunate kids are able to attend this school on something similar to a voucher system. Am I upset about that? Not in the least! The only thing the school requires is PARENT INVOLVEMENT. Which brings me to the arguments real issue....it's not the school!!!
I'm not talking about your Catholic High School giving any money to any Public school. I am talking about basing the funding for public schools on something other than the immediate neighborhood around the school. Otherwise some schools will never be successful. At the very least, don't criticize a school when the problem may be economics not incompetence.


As to this " all men are created equal". Libs love to attempt to use this as a springboard to talk about equality in jobs, etc etc. did someone forget the "created" word??? I take it to say that at birth, we are all the same in the lords eyes. We are also all the same when we make our way to those gates. But in the middle, you will always have those that strive to get ahead if you will. Hell, look at your messiah....he made it to the highest public office in the world! Do I sit here and harbor I'll feelings because he "made it"? Not in the least. Even if I do think he is doing a terrible job.
I don't have a Messiah, except for that fella who died on the cross to pay for my sins. I never thought of that as the highest public office in the world. anyway, I think the ruler of Tibet holds the highest public office in the world.
I think it's hillarious you always talk about executives and their pay. What about pro athletes? I am sure Lebron makes plenty more then the average basketball player. I am also sure he works his butt off to play. According to you, he is not entitled to his earnings...right? He should share with all of his peers.
Lebron is a worker. He is not an executive. By virtue of his immense talent, Lebron has more leverage than the typical player in negotiating his salary, but any proathlete has more leverage than your typical worker. Despite what you think, I don't feel that the kid who buses your table should get paid the same as the chef; nor should the chef make as much money as the owner of the restaurant.
You can take that to any level you wish....you make more then a friend of mine (who I mentioned several times before). By the way, I am still waiting on his share from you.
Keep dreaming.
Unions.....I may seem anti Union but reality is I am against Union leadership. I am against negotiating with those who have no stake involved and pinning the bill on tax payers to fund pensions when they (the tax payer) reaps nothing in return. It's nothing more then redistribution.

The tax payer reaps a functioning community; from police and fire services to snow removal, to sanitation, to zoning laws and enforcement, to liquor licencing to dozens of other services that keep the community a place you want to live.
Here is a story that was on our local news tonight. Lady on news screaming, crying cause her car caught on fire. They actually showed it burning. She is going on and on about how it was her only transportation and now she doesn't know what she will do. Then I thought wait a minute....if my car or truck caught on fire....I would be calling my insurance agent. Hmmmm guess where this is going......
Yes, I have to pay more for people like her who have no insurance. My rates are higher for uninsured motorist. And now, you probably think we should give her more in the form of more transportation. Well guess what....we have public transportation!

Do we know for a fact that she does not have insurance. If she doesn't than I have no sympathy for her either. Just because there is public transportation in your area does not mean it is available to this woman in terms of where she lives, where she needs to go and what time she needs to be there.

When I was working, just for the heck of it I researched taking public transportation to work. By car it is about six miles and takes fifteen to twenty minutes. By bus, I would have to take three different buses then walk almost a mile. It would take over two and a half hours.
In the end, I will tell you I have nothing against anyone who makes it and does well for themselves. Hell, I am trying to get their addresses so I can send my resume lol. But I also don't think they owe me a damn thing!
My parents grew up in a little town near Gary Indiana. I vividly remember sleeping on church pews as a very young child. I went to those same public poor schools you are talking about. I seem to have done ok for myself...or so I think.
There is your problem. Instead of sleeping, you should have been listening to the sermons about doing unto others, and feeding the hungry and clothing the naked-unless the naked is a famous super model or the like.
p.s when can I expect that check for my friend????????????
Wake up Newt, you're still dreaming.

[fast4522]

Your post is one big lie and you know it.
I have stated numerous times that I am OT talking about SS, or legitimate disability, but you keep lying to make your point. Is your position that tenuous that it cannot stand on its own?

I have posted many times that people who legitimately need help are being short-changed by anchors, yet you continue to lie about it. Your are being just as phony as when you used the phrase "tax cuts for the wealthy" over and over knowing full well the cuts were for everyone.

You and your ilk's constant "tax the wealthy" mantra is wearing thin - it exposes you for the shallow, empty suits that you are. You guys have no solutions to anything, just tired old sound bytes void of substance.

At what point will those on the dole outnumber us and what will it look like?

[JustRalph]

Back to the subject of the thread

Seems to me that "Drill Baby Drill"

Worked out

[horses4courses]

At what point will those on the dole outnumber us and what will it look like?

Yes, I imagine that does keep you awake at night.

[newtothegame]

Wake up Newt, you're still dreaming.

Lmao...mosty mosty mosty......
You didn't address the real issues....
Schools.... (let me spell it out for you)....Its not about neighborhoods or locations. Its not even about the best of equipment or books. It's about PARENTAL INVOLVEMENT in the childs life. Guess you just wished to overlook that part in my post.

As to the check I am awaiting from you......I knew you wouldn't then, wont now, or wont ever. Point there was its always easy for a lib to give away someone else's money as long as its not theirs!!!

Unions......Ok, I understand I reap some benefits from union crews who work fire, roads, etc etc. So, put raises on the ballots!!! Let the people who reap the benefits also be the ones who vote on it. I have mentioned before that here in Louisiana, we vote on what are called millages. It's a tax increase for fire, roads, waste, etc etc which also supports unions. They always seem to get what they need...amazing how that works!

As to my education and, of course its not an ivy league school because I live in Louisiana...are you really that dense??? Guess you have never heard of the amazing thing your leader wishes to control. Internet maybe???? You know you can go to ONLINE schools. So my geographic location has nothing to do with where I attend!

[hcap]

Your post is one big lie and you know it.
I have stated numerous times that I am OT talking about SS, or legitimate disability, but you keep lying to make your point. Is your position that tenuous that it cannot stand on its own?

I have posted many times that people who legitimately need help are being short-changed by anchors, yet you continue to lie about it. Your are being just as phony as when you used the phrase "tax cuts for the wealthy" over and over knowing full well the cuts were for everyone.

You and your ilk's constant "tax the wealthy" mantra is wearing thin - it exposes you for the shallow, empty suits that you are. You guys have no solutions to anything, just tired old sound bytes void of substance.
Much adop about nothing and why Mittens lost.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3677

Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/2-10-12bud-f1.jpg

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms//2-10-12bud-f3.jpg



https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/report/2011/12/16/10767/the-facts-about-americans-who-receive-public-benefits/

http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2011/12/img/public_benefits_chart2.jpg

http://cdn.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2011/12/img/public_benefits_chart3.jpg

[davew]

drill baby drill -> oh no, we are about out of oil... $2 gas is a pipe dream

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=seXMIHgMFj8

[Tom]

Nice reply, hcap - had nothing at all to do with my post.
But hey, at least you tried.
That is all that matters in today's educational system.

[hcap]

Nice reply, hcap - had nothing at all to do with my post.
But hey, at least you tried.
That is all that matters in today's educational system.Your "anchor" theory of everything has little to do with anything of consequence.

[fast4522]

Guess what Hcrap, your data sucks because the founding fathers never intended for the middle class to pick up the tab. The United States Constitution is not about economics at all, before President Franklin D. Roosevelt the church was the main help for the poor. Your revisionist garbage you can take with you because Tom is quite correct in his terminology.

[hcap]

Guess what slow minded slow ass4522 , you are wrong as usual.

"I hope that we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."
— Thomas Jefferson.

"The power of all corporations ought to be limited, [...] the growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses."
— James Madison

To create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property:
.....Thomas Paine

There has been a sharp division between natural law versus social justice: Since the age of reason and the French and American revolutions the permanent conflict of modern democracy has been exactly what happens on these debates here. Conservatism versus Liberalism.

Our modern world has grown into a variable stew of mixed economies. To continue to argue that one side only is and must be the solution is bull. The real debate is how much of mix is to be. No one wants the abuses of the free reign of the robber barons of child labor and workers dying on the unregulated assembly lines as well as the tyrant of an unregulated communist state. Both extremes of the economic spectrum have demonstrably failed.

[fast4522]

Words of men out of context mean nothing, just as you and your words mean nothing. You are facing an eternity of nothing where there is no communism or capitalism. Half of our country does not believe in your views, and your copy and paste will have no effect on that.

[Tom]

If hcap wants to talk about nature's laws, then we need to address the 47% I call anchors. In natures, the fit survive. There is no natural reason to support he 47% as they hold back the 53% from achieving more.

Slow Elk endanger the herd. SEEKTH!

[hcap]

Both of you should get a room and high five each other and make nicey poo.(not that there's anything wrong with that)

Fast calls me Hcrap and Monkey man complains about my avatar.

Later

[horses4courses]

To continue to argue that one side only is and must be the solution is bull. The real debate is how much of mix is to be.

Amen to that....and the Right never listens to compromise.
It's simply a word that isn't in their vocabulary.

[Clocker]

Amen to that....and the Right never listens to compromise.
It's simply a word that isn't in their vocabulary.

You mean like when Harry Reid brought all those bills that the House passed to the floor of the Senate, and the GOP Senators refused to discuss them? :D

[Tom]

Monkey man complains about my avatar.

Gee, I wonder why he would do that!

[Tom]

You mean like when Harry Reid brought all those bills that the House passed to the floor of the Senate, and the GOP Senators refused to discuss them? :D

300 bills in his desk drawer.
Only an idiot would suggest the repubs were not trying to compromise.
Obama, even before sitting down to discuss common ground, is threatening to use his veto pen. Good way to start a dialog.

Look, dems are far too limited mentally to negotiate - their small brains can only handle thought at a time - you need to do at least two in order to compromise.

Before the two years are over, enough dems are going to realize they HAVE to compromise and help over-turn vetoes if they are have any shot of getting re-elected.

[Clocker]

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms//2-10-12bud-f3.jpg


From the Ministry of Truth comes the shocking revelation that not only are the Top 1% getting a hugely unfair share of the income, they are also getting benefits from the government. And a hugely disproportionate share at that.

And what are those benefits and entitlements those evil bastages are getting? Tax expenditure entitlements! For those not familiar with "progressive logic", tax expenditure entitlements are Newspeak for what used to be know as legitimate tax deductions. Deduct your charitable contributions from your income taxes? The reduction in taxes due is a tax expenditure by the government. It is their money, but they are spending it by letting you keep it. In the logic of Big Brother, all your money is belong to us. If you get to keep your money, that is an expenditure by the government.

https://odessablog.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/minstry.jpg

[HUSKER55]

300 bills in his desk drawer.
Only an idiot would suggest the repubs were not trying to compromise.
Obama, even before sitting down to discuss common ground, is threatening to use his veto pen. Good way to start a dialog.

Look, dems are far too limited mentally to negotiate - their small brains can only handle thought at a time - you need to do at least two in order to compromise.

Before the two years are over, enough dems are going to realize they HAVE to compromise and help over-turn vetoes if they are have any shot of getting re-elected.



ummmmm......Tom, ......Pelosi wanted to pass obamacare so she could see what was in it....

[Tom]

Trivia question....
Do you know how many times Pelosi has pulled Dingy Harry's finger?