I heard a couple times today that 0bama gave a whole 1%.
-- Bruce
"When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual -- because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no such thing as "group" rights."
> I heard a couple times today that 0bama gave a whole 1%.
> -- > Bruce
> "When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One > person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do not > have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a group > greater or more precious than the rights of an individual -- > because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no > such thing as "group" rights."
Well, he's a taker not a giver. Although, he "gives" it to the American people on a daily basis.
> I heard a couple times today that 0bama gave a whole 1%.
> --
> Bruce
It appears that your beliefs agree with the Obamas more than the Romneys. I thought you believed that if people needed any charity, it was always their fault and there is no excuse for needing charity. Which side of your two faces are you talking out of today?
Also, I like the way you post "facts" with your statment above starting with " I heard". You are really something.
>> I heard a couple times today that 0bama gave a whole 1%.
>> Bruce
> It appears that your beliefs agree with the Obamas more than the Romneys. I thought you believed that if people needed any charity, it was always their fault and there is no excuse for needing charity. Which side of your two faces are you talking out of today?
You really are too stupid to be part of any conversation. I have never said that people never find themselves in a situation where they need help - if you can find such a statement, quote it here, or admit that you are a liar.
What I have said many, mamu times is that that help should NEVER come out of tax money - it should come from family, friends, churches, civic groups, and private charities. I realize you are too stupid to understand the difference, but it is not charity for the government to help the needy, it is theft.
> Also, I like the way you post "facts" with your statment above starting with " I heard". You are really something.
> Hank
I never claimed it was a fact - I reported exactly what information I had, and where it came from - I heard it on the radio a couple different times (may have heard it on TV too, can't recall for sure). Again, I never claimed it as anything other than what it was - something I heard on the radio.
And I don't need to hear that you are an idiot, you prove it here every time you post.
-- Bruce
"When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual -- because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no such thing as "group" rights."
> >> I heard a couple times today that 0bama gave a whole 1%.
> >> Bruce
> > It appears that your beliefs agree with the Obamas more than the Romneys. I thought you believed that if people needed any charity, it was always their fault and there is no excuse for needing charity. Which side of your two faces are you talking out of today?
> You really are too stupid to be part of any conversation. I have never
> said that people never find themselves in a situation where they need
> help - if you can find such a statement, quote it here, or admit that
> you are a liar.
> What I have said many, mamu times is that that help should NEVER come
> out of tax money - it should come from family, friends, churches, civic
> groups, and private charities. I realize you are too stupid to
> understand the difference, but it is not charity for the government to
> help the needy, it is theft.
> > Also, I like the way you post "facts" with your statment above starting with " I heard". You are really something.
> > Hank
> I never claimed it was a fact - I reported exactly what information I
> had, and where it came from - I heard it on the radio a couple different
> times (may have heard it on TV too, can't recall for sure). Again, I
> never claimed it as anything other than what it was - something I heard
> on the radio.
> And I don't need to hear that you are an idiot, you prove it here every
> time you post.
> --
> Bruce
> "When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One
> person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do
> not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a
> group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual --
> because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no
> such thing as "group" rights."
It's not worth my time to find your posts, but.....
If Romney felt it was the right thing to do with so much of his own money, think of how much of our money he is going to give away.
I think you should vote for Obama who doesn't give so much of his money because that seems to fit your agenda.
It's gotta be really hard for you to see the world operate 180 degrees from what you want it to and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.
Hank <~~~~~ pictures Bruce sitting around chewing his finger nails all day long
> It's not worth my time to find your posts, but.....>
> If Romney felt it was the right thing to do with so much of his own money, think of how much of our money he is going to give away.>
> I think you should vote for Obama who doesn't give so much of his money because that seems to fit your agenda.>
> It's gotta be really hard for you to see the world operate 180 degrees from what you want it to and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.
> Hank <~~~~~ pictures Bruce sitting around chewing his finger nails all day long
I can't figure out what it is that passes for thought in what passes for a your brain that would make you think that because I oppose government giveaways, I would also oppose private giving.
Are you completely incapable of seeing a difference between having someone steal your money and you deciding to give it away?
Really, just how stupid are you?
By the way, the evidence demonstrates that people who believe in giving their own money to charity don't feel compelled to steal other people's money to give it away. That is why conservatives are more charitable than liberals.
-- Bruce
"When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual -- because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no such thing as "group" rights."
Hank wrote:
> On Saturday, September 22, 2012 12:14:42 PM UTC-4, bruce wrote:
>> On 9/22/2012 6:29 AM, Hank wrote:
>>> On Friday, September 21, 2012 9:06:07 PM UTC-4, bruce wrote:
>>>> On 9/21/2012 12:55 PM, George Anthony wrote:
>>>>> How much did Obama take, er, give?
>>>>> http://tinyurl.com/ch5eeof >>>> I heard a couple times today that 0bama gave a whole 1%.
>>>> Bruce
>>> It appears that your beliefs agree with the Obamas more than the Romneys. I thought you believed that if people needed any charity, it was always their fault and there is no excuse for needing charity. Which side of your two faces are you talking out of today?
>> You really are too stupid to be part of any conversation. I have never
>> said that people never find themselves in a situation where they need
>> help - if you can find such a statement, quote it here, or admit that
>> you are a liar.
>> What I have said many, mamu times is that that help should NEVER come
>> out of tax money - it should come from family, friends, churches, civic
>> groups, and private charities. I realize you are too stupid to
>> understand the difference, but it is not charity for the government to
>> help the needy, it is theft.
>>> Also, I like the way you post "facts" with your statment above starting with " I heard". You are really something.
>>> Hank
>> I never claimed it was a fact - I reported exactly what information I
>> had, and where it came from - I heard it on the radio a couple different
>> times (may have heard it on TV too, can't recall for sure). Again, I
>> never claimed it as anything other than what it was - something I heard
>> on the radio.
>> And I don't need to hear that you are an idiot, you prove it here every
>> time you post.
>> --
>> Bruce
>> "When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One
>> person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do
>> not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a
>> group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual --
>> because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no
>> such thing as "group" rights."
> It's not worth my time to find your posts, but.....
> If Romney felt it was the right thing to do with so much of his own money, think of how much of our money he is going to give away.
He gave away HIS money.
> I think you should vote for Obama who doesn't give so much of his money because that seems to fit your agenda.
Obama only gives away other people's money.
> It's gotta be really hard for you to see the world operate 180 degrees from what you want it to and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.
He can vote the socialist out of the White House and elect someone who understands how an economy functions.
Hank <~~~~~ pictures Bruce sitting around chewing his finger nails all day long
Naw. I think he spends his spare time putting photos of Obama in bus station urinals.
LZ
On Saturday, September 22, 2012 6:57:37 PM UTC-4, Lone Haranguer wrote:
> He gave away HIS money.
> Naw. I think he spends his spare time putting photos of Obama in
> bus station urinals.
> LZ
You and other blind RORT conservatives missed my point. My point was... If he gives that much of his own money, think how much he will give away of yours".
I don't know about the Obama photos, but I will agree that Bruce probably does hang around bus station urinals. :-)
>If he gave zero it would be OK with me. If he gives more I hope he is
>careful who he gives it to.
>Liberals are pretty generous with other folks (read taxpayers) money. With >their own dough.... not so much.
>Mike
Not the same thing. Assuming the proper point of view there would be
little need for charity if one just paid their taxes and the
government did it's job of caring for the people.
Thinking about that I wonder if one reason a lot of folks are so
charity oriented beause they like to lord it over folks. I got mine
so I can toss you a crumb.
Then there is the money is power issue. The Mormon Church is big on
tithing because that gives them the resources to do a lot for their
folks. romney tithes and donates a chunk to the Children's hospital
in Boston. If it was not for that he would be the same as Obama.
Hank wrote:
> On Saturday, September 22, 2012 6:57:37 PM UTC-4, Lone Haranguer wrote:
>> He gave away HIS money.
>> Naw. I think he spends his spare time putting photos of Obama in
>> bus station urinals.
>> LZ
> You and other blind RORT conservatives missed my point. My point was... If he gives that much of his own money, think how much he will give away of yours".
But your "logic" is non-existent. Romney has a habit of VOLUNTARILY giving away his money. Obama has a habit of giving away money that he did not earn and belongs to someone else.
>> If he gave zero it would be OK with me. If he gives more I hope he
>> is careful who he gives it to.
>> Liberals are pretty generous with other folks (read taxpayers)
>> money. With their own dough.... not so much.
>> Mike
> Not the same thing. Assuming the proper point of view there would be
> little need for charity if one just paid their taxes and the
> government did it's job of caring for the people.
Where is it written that government's job is caring for the people?
> Thinking about that I wonder if one reason a lot of folks are so
> charity oriented beause they like to lord it over folks. I got mine
> so I can toss you a crumb.
Well isn't that charitable of you!
> Then there is the money is power issue. The Mormon Church is big on
> tithing because that gives them the resources to do a lot for their
> folks. romney tithes and donates a chunk to the Children's hospital
> in Boston. If it was not for that he would be the same as Obama.
But he does do it! That's what matters, not some hypothetical imaginary wishful thinking "stream of conscience" by a 14 year bubble gumming, schooled by "keeping up with the Kardasions," twittering airhead.
Hank wrote:
> On Saturday, September 22, 2012 6:57:37 PM UTC-4, Lone Haranguer
> wrote:
>> He gave away HIS money.
>> Naw. I think he spends his spare time putting photos of Obama in
>> bus station urinals.
>> LZ
> You and other blind RORT conservatives missed my point. My point
> was... If he gives that much of his own money, think how much he will
> give away of yours".
> Hank
Maybe none as Romney understands private property rights verses Obama's philosophy of taxing the rich in order to fund the poor.
That said I don't understand what the correlation is between the two actions you described. Do you have any evidence that lead you to your conclusion?
> On Saturday, September 22, 2012 6:26:19 PM UTC-4, bruce wrote:
>> On 9/22/2012 2:49 PM, Hank wrote:
>>> It's not worth my time to find your posts, but.....>
>>> If Romney felt it was the right thing to do with so much of his own money, think of how much of our money he is going to give away.>
>>> I think you should vote for Obama who doesn't give so much of his money because that seems to fit your agenda.>
>>> It's gotta be really hard for you to see the world operate 180 degrees from what you want it to and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.
>>> Hank <~~~~~ pictures Bruce sitting around chewing his finger nails all day long
>> I can't figure out what it is that passes for thought in what passes for
>> a your brain that would make you think that because I oppose government
>> giveaways, I would also oppose private giving.
>> Are you completely incapable of seeing a difference between having
>> someone steal your money and you deciding to give it away?
>> Really, just how stupid are you?
>> By the way, the evidence demonstrates that people who believe in giving
>> their own money to charity don't feel compelled to steal other people's
>> money to give it away. That is why conservatives are more charitable
>> than liberals.
>> --
>> Bruce
>> "When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One
>> person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do
>> not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a
>> group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual --
>> because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no
>> such thing as "group" rights."
> Whoose! Right over your head.
> Hank
No, I understood the point you thought you were making - you were just completely wrong. You are too stupid to figure out that people who give their own money don't feel it is necessary to steal from others and give their money too. You are easily the stupidest person posting here.
-- Bruce
"When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual -- because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no such thing as "group" rights."
On Sunday, September 23, 2012 11:58:34 AM UTC-4, bruce wrote:
> On 9/23/2012 5:29 AM, Hank wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 22, 2012 6:26:19 PM UTC-4, bruce wrote:
> >> On 9/22/2012 2:49 PM, Hank wrote:
> >>> It's not worth my time to find your posts, but.....>
> >>> If Romney felt it was the right thing to do with so much of his own money, think of how much of our money he is going to give away.>
> >>> I think you should vote for Obama who doesn't give so much of his money because that seems to fit your agenda.>
> >>> It's gotta be really hard for you to see the world operate 180 degrees from what you want it to and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.
> >>> Hank <~~~~~ pictures Bruce sitting around chewing his finger nails all day long
> >> I can't figure out what it is that passes for thought in what passes for
> >> a your brain that would make you think that because I oppose government
> >> giveaways, I would also oppose private giving.
> >> Are you completely incapable of seeing a difference between having
> >> someone steal your money and you deciding to give it away?
> >> Really, just how stupid are you?
> >> By the way, the evidence demonstrates that people who believe in giving
> >> their own money to charity don't feel compelled to steal other people's
> >> money to give it away. That is why conservatives are more charitable
> >> than liberals.
> >> --
> >> Bruce
> >> "When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One
> >> person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do
> >> not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a
> >> group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual --
> >> because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no
> >> such thing as "group" rights."
> > Whoose! Right over your head.
> > Hank
> No, I understood the point you thought you were making - you were just
> completely wrong. You are too stupid to figure out that people who give
> their own money don't feel it is necessary to steal from others and give
> their money too. You are easily the stupidest person posting here.
> --
> Bruce
Whereas, you and your Libertarian views are so far out of touch with the real world of today, you are a complete and total dumbass that can't seem to get a grip on society.
Also, I don't call people names just because they don't agree with me.
>>> If he gave zero it would be OK with me. If he gives more I hope he
>>> is careful who he gives it to.
>>> Liberals are pretty generous with other folks (read taxpayers)
>>> money. With their own dough.... not so much.
>>> Mike
>> Not the same thing. Assuming the proper point of view there would be
>> little need for charity if one just paid their taxes and the
>> government did it's job of caring for the people.
>Where is it written that government's job is caring for the people?
>> Thinking about that I wonder if one reason a lot of folks are so
>> charity oriented beause they like to lord it over folks. I got mine
>> so I can toss you a crumb.
>Well isn't that charitable of you!
>> Then there is the money is power issue. The Mormon Church is big on
>> tithing because that gives them the resources to do a lot for their
>> folks. romney tithes and donates a chunk to the Children's hospital
>> in Boston. If it was not for that he would be the same as Obama.
>But he does do it! That's what matters, not some hypothetical imaginary >wishful thinking "stream of conscience" by a 14 year bubble gumming, >schooled by "keeping up with the Kardasions," twittering airhead.
He does it and so does every other person in good standing with a
Church that pushes tithing. It's about like brushing teeth.
Who are the Kardasions and why would anyone care about them?
On 9/23/2012 12:31 PM, Hank wrote:n't seem to get a grip on society.
> Also, I don't call people names just because they don't agree with me.
> Hank
I don't call you names just because you don't agree with me, I call you stupid because you are stupid.
-- Bruce
"When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual -- because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no such thing as "group" rights."
> On 9/23/2012 12:31 PM, Hank wrote:n't seem to get a grip on society.
> > Also, I don't call people names just because they don't agree with me.
> > Hank
> I don't call you names just because you don't agree with me, I call you
> stupid because you are stupid.
> --
> Bruce
> "When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One
> person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do
> not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a
> group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual --
> because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no
> such thing as "group" rights."
Poor old Juicy Brucie must really be unhappy with his new home, and
his lot in life? Over the past several months he's became the
nastiest poster on RORT! I'll bet he's getting fat, which is common
in people suffering from depression as well? What's worse, there's
no indication that anything will change to cheer him up? HawHawHaw!
> On Sep 23, 2:20 pm, Bruce S <bruce.sn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/23/2012 12:31 PM, Hank wrote:n't seem to get a grip on society.
>>> Also, I don't call people names just because they don't agree with me.
>>> Hank
>> I don't call you names just because you don't agree with me, I call you
>> stupid because you are stupid.
>> --
>> Bruce
>> "When it comes to individual rights, no number is greater than one. One
>> person, one hundred people, one thousand people, one million people do
>> not have any more rights than the individual. Nor are the rights of a
>> group greater or more precious than the rights of an individual --
>> because they don't exist. All rights are individual rights. There is no
>> such thing as "group" rights."
> Poor old Juicy Brucie must really be unhappy with his new home, and
> his lot in life? Over the past several months he's became the
> nastiest poster on RORT! I'll bet he's getting fat, which is common
> in people suffering from depression as well? What's worse, there's
> no indication that anything will change to cheer him up? HawHawHaw!
Whenever we break a pool toy, there are strong plastic stickers which
fix up holes or rips.... if you have a hole or rip, you can get some
of these at most stores... I live in australia, so we get ours from
Kmart.
