| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/30/2008 12:51:30 PM · #651 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Louis:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Prash:
"..lefty atheist gay Obama supporting socialist" |
Didn't he just mean Louis? ;) |
For some reason I feel obligated to point out that I have overtly described myself with only one of these five adjectives around these parts. Maybe two. |
Well, you live in Canada. I figured that makes you a socialist. ;) |
If only the current government would realize that. :-( |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:02:35 PM · #652 |
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Frankly, if you are driving a Hummer... |
The word ignorance has been bantered about quite freely and applied to me in a couple of posts. Not sure of your implication - but I'll take a stab that you associate this vehicle with high costs. The current lease on H3's is $249/month and if you don't drive much, even the fuel costs are minimal as they get around 15 mpg combined. 1 tank of gas lasts me over 2 weeks. Insurance is no more than any other vehicle I've owned and less than most. Since 2006, H3's have been consistently the most affordable new car lease and since the gas prices hit $4/gallon bargains abound on many SUV vehicles with savings of many thousands of dollars on purchase prices. FYI. Even new Pick up trucks in my area are being offered for under $10,000 and some even under $9K. Reminds me of 1974 when a Chevrolet Caprice was a bargain eventhough it got less mpg, the overall annual costs was cheaper than buying a compact. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:07:18 PM · #653 |
| Flash, here's a pointed question: are you here to genuinely challenge your own principles and engage in mature debate, or are you here, as your quoted post from elsewhere suggests, only to bait people you consider ideologically inferior? In other words, where are you being disingenuous, in your posts here, or at your post there? I ask because I think it's only fair to shed light on your motives, whatever they may be, and have people decide whether it's worth the time engaging you at all. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:10:19 PM · #654 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Flash:
I do know that Obama feels that every citizen deserves a certain standard of living, health care, wages etc. I wonder if his relatives conditions are the standard he wants for all of us. If not, then he should have elevated them - as he is of the class "that can afford it". |
You seem to be repeatedly suggesting handouts– the very thing you rail against- rather than programs to help people help themselves. By trumpeting your charitable contributions and suggesting that Obama should personally give money to poorer relatives, you are advocating wealth distribution and handouts. Not everyone has a rich uncle or a voice for their plight, and it does far more good to provide opportunities and incentives (to discourage freeloaders) to help everyone get on their feet and become productive than limiting aid to relatives and pet projects of the wealthy. That approach came back to bite us pretty hard in Afghanistan. |
1. I am not repeatedly or otherwise suggesting handouts are an answer.
2. I am in no way trumpeting my donations and RARELY even mention it - except to make a very specific point. Scripture is clear on the left hand not knowing what the right hand is giving and I seek ZERO recognition for any donation(s) - even refusing acknowledgement via postings or listings as is common during the Holidays to recognize employee donations. Mine are done in secret.
3. I completely agree with "it does far more good to provide opportunities and incentives (to discourage freeloaders) to help everyone get on their feet and become productive than limiting aid to relatives and pet projects of the wealthy." and has been my position from jump street. My reference to charity is directly aimed at Obama and his platform of "spread the wealth". If he so adamantly beleives that, then it should start with his own. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:20:38 PM · #655 |
Originally posted by Flash:
The word ignorance has been bantered about quite freely and applied to me in a couple of posts. Not sure of your implication - but I'll take a stab that you associate this vehicle with high costs. The current lease on H3's is $249/month and if you don't drive much, even the fuel costs are minimal as they get around 15 mpg combined. 1 tank of gas lasts me over 2 weeks. Insurance is no more than any other vehicle I've owned and less than most. Since 2006, H3's have been consistently the most affordable new car lease and since the gas prices hit $4/gallon bargains abound on many SUV vehicles with savings of many thousands of dollars on purchase prices. FYI. Even new Pick up trucks in my area are being offered for under $10,000 and some even under $9K. Reminds me of 1974 when a Chevrolet Caprice was a bargain eventhough it got less mpg, the overall annual costs was cheaper than buying a compact. |
There is no rational justification for driving an atrocious example of conspicuous, profligate consumerism such as a Hummer. You have every right to earn the money, buy one, and enjoy it to your heart's content, but PLEASE don't think for one second you can justify the pig.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:21:03 PM · #656 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by DrAchoo:
Originally posted by Flash:
Lastly, my preference is for lower taxes not more social support for those that won't help themselves... |
I've always wondered why people, Christians in particular, are so scared of helping someone who doesn't deserve it if it means lots of people who do deserve it get aid? |
If this is referencing me, then you've got this one wrong. As was discussed in another thread a while back, I have given thousands and thousands of dollars to rescue missions in my community. Christian based and donated by CHOICE. Not taken from me by a government that claims to know how to spend my money better than I do. If liberals want to help so many then why don't they donate freely to these causes instead of legislating that others have to foot the bill via higher taxes. When I look at conservatives I see a passionate community that freely donates to charitable causes. When I look at liberals, I see a group that wants my money to spend as they see fit - but won't buck up with their own donations. That is a far different scenario than the one you paint with your post. |
When I look at conservatives I see, above all, selfish meanness. The kind of people who would mortgage the future of their everyone's children and grandchildren to to finance a useless war that really benefits no one save the super-rich and mega corporations. The same people who would subvert the terms "patriot", "liberty" and "freedom" to mean anything but so they could sell their looting of the middle class and the poor to the gullible among the masses that don't know any better. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:22:49 PM · #657 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Flash, here's a pointed question: are you here to genuinely challenge your own principles and engage in mature debate, or are you here, as your quoted post from elsewhere suggests, only to bait people you consider ideologically inferior? In other words, where are you being disingenuous, in your posts here, or at your post there? I ask because I think it's only fair to shed light on your motives, whatever they may be, and have people decide whether it's worth the time engaging you at all. |
Louis......isn't THIS baiting???......8>)
I'm holding my breath for this answer, too......just ask for Blue.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:27:31 PM · #658 |
Originally posted by Flash:
When I look at conservatives I see a passionate community that freely donates to charitable causes. |
PLEASE!!!!
Trust me, from someone who comes from a deep-seated, old money background, the big-time endowments and contributions are carefully structured to allow the donors to achieve the best tax breaks.
The majority of big-time contributors would cease in a heartbeat were the contributions no longer tax deductible.
The altruism is considerably less than the self-serving quest for a tax break.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:28:02 PM · #659 |
What a Hummer says about the driver:
1. I don't give a F about the environment.
2. I squander resources because I can so F you.
3. I don't really give a F about anyone else.
4a. I have "Little Man Disease". Look at my "Big Truck".
4b. I'm empowered. Look at my "Big Truck".
5. Let them eat cake. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:28:21 PM · #660 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
When I look at conservatives I see, above all, selfish meanness. The kind of people who would mortgage the future of their everyone's children and grandchildren to to finance a useless war that really benefits no one save the super-rich and mega corporations. The same people who would subvert the terms "patriot", "liberty" and "freedom" to mean anything but so they could sell their looting of the middle class and the poor to the gullible among the masses that don't know any better. |
Harsh, but not too far from the truth.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:29:00 PM · #661 |
| i swear im gonna get an ulcer from this thread and the election combined. ugh |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:30:53 PM · #662 |
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
What a Hummer says about the driver:
1. I don't give a F about the environment.
2. I squander resources because I can so F you.
3. I don't really give a F about anyone else.
4a. I have "Little Man Disease". Look at my "Big Truck".
4b. I'm empowered. Look at my "Big Truck".
5. Let them eat cake. |
Oh.....and the H3 isn't even a real Hummer.
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:34:39 PM · #663 |
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by Jac:
Oh please Flash, if it were the republicans who were given the millions Obama has they would be pounding the message that Obama is a terrorist on every news channel, every newspaper daily, online, etc to no end. |
If Republicans had the money Obama has, the left would be charging them with "buying the election". |
But they dont have the money. Why? Because people dint support them? Or because they know that even if they went for the public donations, they wont be able to raise as much.
People donated and are donating because they believe its for a good cause.. for 'everyone'... to better 'everyones' lives, not just to help ones own relatives. The fact that you even proposed to help only the ones related to you shows the difference between a conservative and a liberal thinking.
In fact everything thats to be replied to you is a waste of time. You just need attention here... with a tightly closed mind and eyes and ears, all you need to hear is your own beliefs resonating that you couldnt get on other 'righty religious straight you-know-who supporting' forums.
Again and again you are choosing not to respond to the facts when presented about Fox, about what you are doing on DPC with only 10 challenge participations in past 5 years but tons on RANT posts. Doesnt sound like you want a healthy discussion.
I propose to ignore his posts. Or at least take them lightly and in fun.
Message edited by author 2008-10-30 13:36:07. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:35:28 PM · #664 |
Originally posted by Flash:
My reference to charity is directly aimed at Obama and his platform of "spread the wealth". If he so adamantly beleives that, then it should start with his own. |
Everything can be viewed in a different perspective.
I too donate thousands every year to what I consider worthy causes, and do so without seeking any form or recognition. I am certain that there are a few people in DPC that could attest to the fact that I love to provide assistance and do so incognito. My tax dollars are in some part also directed toward the welfare of nameless individuals and I have no problems with that either.
"Start with his own " is something you have bandied about as a demonstration of one's belief in charity. Not unlike Mr. Obama, I too have blood relatives with which I have crossed paths fleetingly, and I can assure you that the mere fact that we are associated by blood in no way impacts the way I feel towards them. I am not apt to help them any more than I would a stranger and truly cannot in good conscience consider them as "one of my own" for they truly are not.
Perhaps more important to this scenario is the impact that Mr. Obama will have on the well being of the poor disenfranchised masses of society, much more than he would have by taking care of one distant aunt. The greatness of the person is not necessarily measured by what he has, but rather what he left behind... and that Sir will hopefully be demonstrated in the years to come.
Ray |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:35:35 PM · #665 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Spazmo99:
What a Hummer says about the driver:
1. I don't give a F about the environment.
2. I squander resources because I can so F you.
3. I don't really give a F about anyone else.
4a. I have "Little Man Disease". Look at my "Big Truck".
4b. I'm empowered. Look at my "Big Truck".
5. Let them eat cake. |
Oh.....and the H3 isn't even a real Hummer. |
True.
IMO, the only real Hummer is the HMMWV |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:35:42 PM · #666 |
Originally posted by Louis:
Flash, here's a pointed question: are you here to genuinely challenge your own principles and engage in mature debate, or are you here, as your quoted post from elsewhere suggests, only to bait people you consider ideologically inferior? In other words, where are you being disingenuous, in your posts here, or at your post there? I ask because I think it's only fair to shed light on your motives, whatever they may be, and have people decide whether it's worth the time engaging you at all. |
Louis - that is a fair question. As you rightly know, I have avoided answering any of your posts for some time. Our past discussions on religion were particulary aggravating but certainly not limited to those. In one discussion on gays and guns I specifically offered you an opportunity to promote 2nd amendment ideals in Canada and I would promote gay rights here in the states. You flat rejected any notion of such and retreated to tired old disproven gun grabber arguments and individual exceptions to support your position. Fine. But it seems to me that every argument I get into, you won't even budge a mm (except for the one time you almost agreed with me but slammed me to prove that you didn't). Now for me, to even post anything in here, I know from the start that it will be inciteful and swarms of opposition will attack. These threads are full of examples. Therefore regardless if I define it as stirring the pot on another site or not, that is the reality - even if that might not be the original intent at the time of the post. However, I freely admit, that sometimes I am so convinced of the incindiery nature of a post that the very posting of it will stir the pot. That does not in my view mean the topic should not be discussed, just that I know up front that the nature of many posters here in Rant. Therefore, for me to even show up - requires a thick skin in my opinion. Honestly, I believe I was accurate in both locations and not disengenious at all. If you were to post in a consistently conservative thread (as I have here for months upon months), and get the attitudes and comments I received, then you would know exactly how I feel. My reason for returning after various self imposed exiles or work related departures, is regardless of how much I disagree with many here, I feel strongly that someone must present this side of the argument. I only wish I had the skills of a Rob B - but sadly they elude me. It is said that the strongest swords are the ones beaten the most times and what doesn't kill you only makes you stronger. I see this Rant forum as my furnace. Lord knows I get beaten enough. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:43:54 PM · #667 |
Originally posted by Flash:
My point is simply that the liberal platform is to take money from others to pay for their causes while the conservative platform is for each to support the causes of their choice. To me, I prefer the later. I think it is the better formula. |
I didn't want my tax dollars to support the war in Iraq because I didn't feel it was ethical, but I didn't get a choice. If everyone in this country had their choice for their tax dollars to support only the causes they believe in, that war would have been over years ago because it would have been defunded. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:44:34 PM · #668 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by Louis:
Flash, here's a pointed question: are you here to genuinely challenge your own principles and engage in mature debate, or are you here, as your quoted post from elsewhere suggests, only to bait people you consider ideologically inferior? In other words, where are you being disingenuous, in your posts here, or at your post there? I ask because I think it's only fair to shed light on your motives, whatever they may be, and have people decide whether it's worth the time engaging you at all. |
Louis......isn't THIS baiting???......8>)
I'm holding my breath for this answer, too......just ask for Blue. |
Please continue to hold your breath. Keep holding. Keep holding. Keep holding. Keep holding. Not yet. Keep holding. In fact why breathe at all? Your snide comments are beginning to wear thin. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:46:23 PM · #669 |
Originally posted by Flash:
You flat rejected any notion of such and retreated to tired old disproven gun grabber arguments and individual exceptions to support your position. |
Oh, THAT'S Louis for sure!
Tired rhetoric, semantics, and disproven arguments.
Gotta give ya credit, Flash, you're a funny guy!
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:47:10 PM · #670 |
Originally posted by bmartuch:
Originally posted by Flash:
My point is simply that the liberal platform is to take money from others to pay for their causes while the conservative platform is for each to support the causes of their choice. To me, I prefer the later. I think it is the better formula. |
I didn't want my tax dollars to support the war in Iraq because I didn't feel it was ethical, but I didn't get a choice. If everyone in this country had their choice for their tax dollars to support only the causes they believe in, that war would have been over years ago because it would have been defunded. |
Please keep my posts in context. The point was referring to charitable donations. Not funding enterprises required by the constitution - such as national defense. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:47:16 PM · #671 |
Originally posted by Prash:
Originally posted by Flash:
Originally posted by Jac:
Oh please Flash, if it were the republicans who were given the millions Obama has they would be pounding the message that Obama is a terrorist on every news channel, every newspaper daily, online, etc to no end. |
If Republicans had the money Obama has, the left would be charging them with "buying the election". |
But they dont have the money. Why? Because people dint support them? Or because they know that even if they went for the public donations, they wont be able to raise as much.
People donated and are donating because they believe its for a good cause.. for 'everyone'... to better 'everyones' lives, not just to help ones own relatives. The fact that you even proposed to help only the ones related to you shows the difference between a conservative and a liberal thinking.
In fact everything thats to be replied to you is a waste of time. You just need attention here... with a tightly closed mind and eyes and ears, all you need to hear is your own beliefs resonating that you couldnt get on other 'righty religious straight you-know-who supporting' forums.
Again and again you are choosing not to respond to the facts when presented about Fox, about what you are doing on DPC with only 10 challenge participations in past 5 years but tons on RANT posts. Doesnt sound like you want a healthy discussion.
I propose to ignore his posts. Or at least take them lightly and in fun. |
So Flash, do you agree?
- helping ones own family is a selfish cause
- helping many many instead is a more worthy cause
|
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:47:56 PM · #672 |
| I'm not particularly nationalistic, but here's why I love living in Canada. So I'm off to the Horton's for a round of coffees for the guys in the office. (You see, I'm the world's greatest boss.) Who should be coming down University Avenue in the opposite direction? None other than Jack Layton. Alone, no handlers, no security detail, no entourage, just the leader of the NDP, the man holding the balance of power with the Bloc in the Canadian parliament to take down the current government. "Hey, Jack," someone says walking past, and he gives a smile and nod. Yep, Canada's the place for me. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:49:56 PM · #673 |
| I will say that simply demonizing the Right, as has been done in the last dozen posts, is no more productive than the Right demonizing the Left. I saw some blanket statements up above and I think they are frankly pretty silly. |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:50:39 PM · #674 |
Originally posted by Louis:
I'm not particularly nationalistic, but here's why I love living in Canada. So I'm off to the Horton's for a round of coffees for the guys in the office. (You see, I'm the world's greatest boss.) Who should be coming down University Avenue in the opposite direction? None other than Jack Layton. Alone, no handlers, no security detail, no entourage, just the leader of the NDP, the man holding the balance of power with the Bloc in the Canadian parliament to take down the current government. "Hey, Jack," someone says walking past, and he gives a smile and nod. Yep, Canada's the place for me. |
I'll admit that is some sweet action! |
|
|
|
10/30/2008 01:51:40 PM · #675 |
Originally posted by Louis:
I'm not particularly nationalistic, but here's why I love living in Canada. So I'm off to the Horton's for a round of coffees for the guys in the office. (You see, I'm the world's greatest boss.) Who should be coming down University Avenue in the opposite direction? None other than Jack Layton. Alone, no handlers, no security detail, no entourage, just the leader of the NDP, the man holding the balance of power with the Bloc in the Canadian parliament to take down the current government. "Hey, Jack," someone says walking past, and he gives a smile and nod. Yep, Canada's the place for me. |
Got that beat hands down... I have attended social functions with the likes of Trudeau, Mulroney, Jean Chretien and others and was within arms length of them.
Oh wait, I was on the security detail... does that still count? :O)
Ray |
|
