Why Conservative Christians and Liberals do so? Well, because higher
up in their hierarchy --the clever foxes-- have determined that's the
easy way to get souls and adepts for their cause...
So here I am, the Wise Tibetan Monkey from the Jungle, saying that the
solution is to have those in need pay back to the Jungle, ie. the
community that needs so many things. Those in need must pick litter or
do some kind of volunteer work before they are given the fish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
"Never feed the wildlife because it creates a dependency and it makes
the vermin multiply"
Why Conservative Christians and Liberals do so? Well, because higher
up in their hierarchy --the clever foxes-- have determined that's the
easy way to get souls and adepts for their cause...
So here I am, the Wise Tibetan Monkey from the Jungle, saying that the
solution is to have those in need pay back to the Jungle, ie. the
community that needs so many things. Those in need must pick litter or
do some kind of volunteer work before they are given the fish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
"Never feed the wildlife because it creates a dependency and it makes
the sheep and vermin multiply"
Well, I got my own two feet to take me out of the cage, but a bicycle
could take me 10 times longer, and there's much room for biking when
most people just ride on the sidewalks. That's common place in
America, except for a few privileged areas (where the lions live).
But most people are even worst, where the conditions for walking are
even harsher.
I've even tried race walking, so I love it. But beyond 5 miles can get
kind of boring. That's why I wanted to ride a bike around, and I do
have the bikes, but I'm not riding bike on sidewalks. Too much
stress.
So the easy path is just to be in the cage. Cozy cage I got though.
"Tibetan Monkey, please PM me when you see this as I need to
understand why your posting like this? It's rather confusing for new
members and mentioning Religion in several posts and references to
race and nationality might actually offend some."
***
Then I reply:
These debates are often coming from Atheism vs. Religion groups, where
I make the point that the indifference of the "sheep" makes all this
"jungle" possible. We are supposed to live in democracy where there's
debate, but when people look the other way, I crank up the heat to
make them react.
It may look like Religion and Democracy are fairy tales. ;)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE WISE TIBETAN MONKEY SAYS
"See the truth, hear the truth, speak the truth"
> > Those wars were fought on borrowed money from future generations, but
> > short term political goals were met: GET RICH AT WHATEVER COST!- Hide quoted text -
> money that could have been used for the upcoming funding problems in
> social security and medicare.-
Exactly, and then they blame the Democrats for waste. Hey, they do
waste, but that's because the "jungle" swallows all the money they
throw at it.
I quote from the Sun Sentinel newspaper (Ft. Lauderdale, FL)...
"Stimulus brings a sidewalk to nowhere"
Tax and Spend Democrats, Borrow and Spend Republicans.
Gee, which one do I choose?
No place to hide? ;)
Mindlessly silly. It avoids another great depression or worse, stupid.
I also got here a mixed path facility that goes NOWHERE. Couldn't they
at least connect all the paths?
Running programs costs even more money in itself.... -And government
bureaucrats who are paid to give away other people's money aren't
usually inclined to resist giving away other people's money--that's what
they're getting paid to do. If anything, they will argue that they need
even MORE of other people's money to give away.
--------
How about just cutting welfare 20% per year over the next five years?
Anyone "dependent" upon it now would have plenty of time to get their
shit together.
Social welfare isn't vastly expensive but it is morally objectionable.
At least, for most people who have ever worked for a living.
~
I agree we should cut corporate welfare by 20% or more per year.
> Social welfare isn't vastly expensive but it is morally objectionable.
> At least, for most people who have ever worked for a living.
>
Socializing risk of rich investors, while allowing them to privatize
profit, is indeed morally objectionable.
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
This country is falling apart. People are dying. Despair is
settled upon the land. These clowns [Congress] are frigging
around for no purpose better than the enrichment of Wall
Street bankers and Connecticut insurance tycoons. There has
been no change. There is no hope. - Christopher Cooper
The real problem is that they changed the name to "Welfare" from
"Relief".
Relief was originally designed to provide TEMPORARY relief to people
in a
tough time due to job loss, death of bread winner, etc. This was
NEVER
intended to be a multi-generational "family" business for unwed
teenage
breeders. And it used to be that you had to pay back every dime you
got. I'm
sure that's gone the way of the Dodo. If you can't feed'em, don't
breed'em.
If you have NO PROSPECTS to EVER be able to care for them, let someone
else
adopt them AT BIRTH. Guess what, a 15 year old girl and a newborn DOES
NOT A
"FAMILY" MAKE. Why doesn't Social Services get this?
Nope, you monkeys are sposed be able to work that stuff outs, tsutpid.
And they act like they can push around the very people that give them
a salary.
I proposed a program to have the homeless work for shelter, and the
program director dismissed me right there. They rather give everything
to the homeless --and pocket a big chunk. ;)
We monkeys are supposed to be running this show called 'DEMOCRACY,'
aren't we?
>> Nope, you monkeys are sposed be able to work that stuff outs, stupid.
> We monkeys are supposed to be running this show called 'DEMOCRACY,' aren't we?
Nope, thats just the line we feed you to stop you getting too uppity, stupid.
Oh, we are not the actors of the show, just the spectators.
Can we call democracy a "spectator sport"?
Just how many of you are there between those ears ?
> Can we call democracy a "spectator sport"?
You can call it rumplestiltskin if you like.
It is the duty of a monkey forced into a cage (ie. unable to ride
bike) to throw shit at the system that ignores him. "Making noise" is
a well proven strategy for survival among monkeys and gays. Yes, even
gays have more rights than us.
All the monkeys riding on sidewalks are with me. Plus the ones that
never dare ride a bike.
>
> > Can we call democracy a "spectator sport"?
>
> You can call it rumplestiltskin if you like.
I like to watch the show with popcorn and beer.