Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Not mine but worth reading
11 views
Skip to first unread message
James
May 24, 2012, 11:00:39 PM5/24/12
to
If a Republican doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a Democrat doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for
everyone.
If a Republican is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Democrat is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a Republican is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his
situation.
A Democrat wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Democrats demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a Republican is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A Democrat non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
If a Republican decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for
it,
Or may choose a job that provides it.
A Democrat demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a Democrat doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a Republican is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a Democrat is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for
everyone.
If a Republican is homosexual, he quietly leads his life.
If a Democrat is homosexual, he demands legislated respect.
If a Republican is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his
situation.
A Democrat wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a Republican doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Democrats demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a Republican is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A Democrat non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
If a Republican decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for
it,
Or may choose a job that provides it.
A Democrat demands that the rest of us pay for his.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 25, 2012, 1:48:56 AM5/25/12
to
On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
Ok here we go
#1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
#2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
#3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
#4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
that help the needy.
#5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
people", during a global recession.
Ok here we go
#1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
#2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
#3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
#4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
that help the needy.
#5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
people", during a global recession.
Catoni
May 25, 2012, 4:25:04 AM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 1:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
Hey "columbiaaccidentinvestigation".....you know the difference
between Jame's post and your post ? ? ?
His post is true.....
Your post simply shows that you're a total leftist idiot.
between Jame's post and your post ? ? ?
His post is true.....
Your post simply shows that you're a total leftist idiot.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 25, 2012, 8:23:28 AM5/25/12
to
at the same time maintaing some sort of fake protection against any
kind of riducule, its called THIN SKIN SYNDROME.
Tunderbar
May 25, 2012, 10:18:01 AM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
vegetarian.
> #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
on that issue.
Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
marriage, including adoptions etc..
You are implying that republicans are solely responsible for all the
legal slights that exist against gays, but Democrats haven't exactly
been on the bandwagon historically either. It's more a generational
thing these days.
> #4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
> or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
> that help the needy.
Wha.....? I don't see that anywhere. It's more a matter of republicans
opposing out and out handouts in favour of hand ups. Plus the
corporate bullshit of supporting corporate rights, including corporate
welfare, and opposing individual rights and individual welfare. And
again, it is not necessarily a republican vs democrat thing. Just
because the democrats beat the drum does not mean that the walk the
walk. Corporatism is rife in both parties and supported by both.
> #5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
> people", during a global recession.
cite? Democrat businesspeople will make the same decisions. I'd like
to see an example of a company run by a Democrat that bites the bullet
and refuses to lay people off because of their supposedly more humane
attitudes about helping their fellow man. It doesn't happen. When the
economy shuts down, carrying too many staff can destroy the entire
company. Democrat CEOs will make the same awful decisions to lay off
as any other CEOs.
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> Ok here we go
> #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> Ok here we go
> #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
vegetarian.
> #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
on that issue.
Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
marriage, including adoptions etc..
You are implying that republicans are solely responsible for all the
legal slights that exist against gays, but Democrats haven't exactly
been on the bandwagon historically either. It's more a generational
thing these days.
> #4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
> or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
> that help the needy.
opposing out and out handouts in favour of hand ups. Plus the
corporate bullshit of supporting corporate rights, including corporate
welfare, and opposing individual rights and individual welfare. And
again, it is not necessarily a republican vs democrat thing. Just
because the democrats beat the drum does not mean that the walk the
walk. Corporatism is rife in both parties and supported by both.
> #5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
> people", during a global recession.
to see an example of a company run by a Democrat that bites the bullet
and refuses to lay people off because of their supposedly more humane
attitudes about helping their fellow man. It doesn't happen. When the
economy shuts down, carrying too many staff can destroy the entire
company. Democrat CEOs will make the same awful decisions to lay off
as any other CEOs.
RedAcer
May 25, 2012, 10:30:35 AM5/25/12
to
On 25/05/12 15:18, Tunderbar wrote:
> On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>>
>> Ok here we go
>> #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
>> #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> vegetarian.
>
>> #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
>> means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
>
> How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
> the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
> are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
> on that issue.
>
> Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
> of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
> have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
> marriage, including adoptions etc..
No-one owns the word. Anyone can define it how they want to. If gay
> On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>>
>> Ok here we go
>> #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
>> #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> vegetarian.
>
>> #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
>> means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
>
> How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
> the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
> are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
> on that issue.
>
> Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
> of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
> have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
> marriage, including adoptions etc..
people or anyone else says they are married what are you going to do
about it ?
>
> You are implying that republicans are solely responsible for all the
> legal slights that exist against gays, but Democrats haven't exactly
> been on the bandwagon historically either. It's more a generational
> thing these days.
>
>> #4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
>> or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
>> that help the needy.
>
> Wha.....? I don't see that anywhere. It's more a matter of republicans
> opposing out and out handouts in favour of hand ups. Plus the
> corporate bullshit of supporting corporate rights, including corporate
> welfare, and opposing individual rights and individual welfare. And
> again, it is not necessarily a republican vs democrat thing. Just
> because the democrats beat the drum does not mean that the walk the
> walk. Corporatism is rife in both parties and supported by both.
>
>
>> #5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
>> people", during a global recession.
>
> cite? Democrat businesspeople will make the same decisions. I'd like
> to see an example of a company run by a Democrat that bites the bullet
> and refuses to lay people off because of their supposedly more humane
> attitudes about helping their fellow man. It doesn't happen. When the
> economy shuts down, carrying too many staff can destroy the entire
> company. Democrat CEOs will make the same awful decisions to lay off
> as any other CEOs.
Sir, I have found you an argument; but I am not obliged to find you an
understanding ... Samuel Johnson
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 25, 2012, 11:16:02 AM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 7:18 am, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> > Ok here we go
> > #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> > #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> vegetarian.
>
nope, just pointing out making fun of people like you.
> On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> > Ok here we go
> > #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> > #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> vegetarian.
>
> > #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> > means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
>
> How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
> the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
> are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
> on that issue.
>
> Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
> of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
> have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
> marriage, including adoptions etc..
family, and should not define equality. Example (A sterile man cannot
procreate, but yet that person is allowed to marry a woman)
>
> You are implying that republicans are solely responsible for all the
> legal slights that exist against gays, but Democrats haven't exactly
> been on the bandwagon historically either. It's more a generational
> thing these days.
>
> > #4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
> > or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
> > that help the needy.
>
> Wha.....? I don't see that anywhere. It's more a matter of republicans
> opposing out and out handouts in favour of hand ups. Plus the
> corporate bullshit of supporting corporate rights, including corporate
> welfare, and opposing individual rights and individual welfare. And
> again, it is not necessarily a republican vs democrat thing. Just
> because the democrats beat the drum does not mean that the walk the
> walk. Corporatism is rife in both parties and supported by both.
>
> > #5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
> > people", during a global recession.
>
> cite? Democrat businesspeople will make the same decisions. I'd like
> to see an example of a company run by a Democrat that bites the bullet
> and refuses to lay people off because of their supposedly more humane
> attitudes about helping their fellow man. It doesn't happen. When the
> economy shuts down, carrying too many staff can destroy the entire
> company. Democrat CEOs will make the same awful decisions to lay off
> as any other CEOs.
statement, look it up. You and yoru fellow comrades just cant take
what you dish out, and now you are whining like a baby.
Tunderbar
May 25, 2012, 11:31:14 AM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 9:30 am, RedAcer <red...@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> On 25/05/12 15:18, Tunderbar wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> > <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> >> Ok here we go
> >> #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> >> #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> > Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> > vegetarian.
>
> >> #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> >> means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
>
> > How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
> > the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
> > are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
> > on that issue.
>
> > Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
> > of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
> > have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
> > marriage, including adoptions etc..
>
> No-one owns the word. Anyone can define it how they want to. If gay
> people or anyone else says they are married what are you going to do
> about it ?
That's right. No one owns the word. But that means the opposite of
> On 25/05/12 15:18, Tunderbar wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> > <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> >> Ok here we go
> >> #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> >> #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> > Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> > vegetarian.
>
> >> #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> >> means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
>
> > How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
> > the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
> > are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
> > on that issue.
>
> > Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
> > of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
> > have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
> > marriage, including adoptions etc..
>
> No-one owns the word. Anyone can define it how they want to. If gay
> people or anyone else says they are married what are you going to do
> about it ?
what you claim. No one can arbitrarily re-define it. It is what it is,
what it was, and what it will continue to be.
They can say that they are married. No problem. But that actually
means that they are in a civil union that confers upon them the same
legal rights and responsibilities as a marriage. Strictly legally and
linguistically speaking though, it is not a marriage.
The legal and historical term "marriage" is explicitly two of the
opposite sex. Period.
And I want to make this perfectly clear. I support gays in their
pursuit of happiness. I have absolutely no objection to them wanting
and getting into a civil union with the same rights and
responsibilities of a marriage.
It is just not a marriage, it is a civil union.
Although there's the joke about how gays should all have to marry, why
should heterosexuals be the only ones having to suffer that indignity.
Tunderbar
May 25, 2012, 11:32:02 AM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 10:16 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 25, 7:18 am, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> > <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> > > Ok here we go
> > > #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> > > #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> > Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> > vegetarian.
>
> nope, just pointing out making fun of people like you.
>
> > > #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> > > means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
>
> > How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
> > the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
> > are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
> > on that issue.
>
> > Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
> > of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
> > have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
> > marriage, including adoptions etc..
>
> false premise as the ability to procreate does not define a loving
> family, and should not define equality. Example (A sterile man cannot
> procreate, but yet that person is allowed to marry a woman)
Check the dictionary.
> On May 25, 7:18 am, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> > <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> > > Ok here we go
> > > #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> > > #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> > Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> > vegetarian.
>
> nope, just pointing out making fun of people like you.
>
> > > #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> > > means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
>
> > How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
> > the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
> > are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
> > on that issue.
>
> > Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
> > of procreation. Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
> > have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
> > marriage, including adoptions etc..
>
> false premise as the ability to procreate does not define a loving
> family, and should not define equality. Example (A sterile man cannot
> procreate, but yet that person is allowed to marry a woman)
erschro...@gmail.com
May 25, 2012, 11:42:38 AM5/25/12
to
erschro...@gmail.com
May 25, 2012, 11:38:24 AM5/25/12
to
ban abortions.
If a Republican wants his child to pray in school, he demands the
school lead all children in prayer.
If a Republican wants his child to attend private school, he demands
the taxpayers provide a voucher for him.
If a Republican doesn't want to buy alcohol on Sunday, he wants to ban
the sale of alcohol on Sunday.
If a Republican doesn't want to marry a person of the same sex, he
wants to ban same sex marriages.
erschro...@gmail.com
May 25, 2012, 11:41:52 AM5/25/12
to
On May 25, 10:18 am, Tunderbar <tdcom...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> > Ok here we go
> > #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> > #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> vegetarian.
No, Reagan's administration tried to declare ketchup a vegetable to
> On May 25, 12:48 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
>
> <columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On May 24, 8:00 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:""
>
> > Ok here we go
> > #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> > #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
>
> Ad hominem. You are implying that a republican is too stupid to be a
> vegetarian.
have it count in school lunch programs.
>
> > #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> > means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
>
> How so? If this is a shot at the gay marriage issue, you have missed
> the mark entirely. Gays can have their love. Fewer and fewer people
> are objecting to that as time goes by, the US population is maturing
> on that issue.
>
> Marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman for the purpose
> of procreation.
>Gays will never have that, by definition. They will
> have civil unions that gives them all the same legal rights as in a
> marriage, including adoptions etc..
>
> You are implying that republicans are solely responsible for all the
> legal slights that exist against gays, but Democrats haven't exactly
> been on the bandwagon historically either. It's more a generational
> thing these days.
>
> > #4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
> > or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
> > that help the needy.
>
> Wha.....? I don't see that anywhere. It's more a matter of republicans
> opposing out and out handouts in favour of hand ups.
defense spending.
> Plus the
> corporate bullshit of supporting corporate rights, including corporate
> welfare, and opposing individual rights and individual welfare. And
> again, it is not necessarily a republican vs democrat thing. Just
> because the democrats beat the drum does not mean that the walk the
> walk. Corporatism is rife in both parties and supported by both.
the "Citizens United" decision? Which one proposed removing the tax
breaks the oil industry gets, and which party blocked it?
>
> > #5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
> > people", during a global recession.
>
> cite? Democrat businesspeople will make the same decisions. I'd like
> to see an example of a company run by a Democrat that bites the bullet
> and refuses to lay people off because of their supposedly more humane
> attitudes about helping their fellow man. It doesn't happen. When the
> economy shuts down, carrying too many staff can destroy the entire
> company. Democrat CEOs will make the same awful decisions to lay off
> as any other CEOs.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 25, 2012, 12:42:23 PM5/25/12
to
cite a dictionary source that states the marriage is for the "purpose
of procreation only, otherwise just shut up and quit your whining
gordo
May 25, 2012, 2:12:23 PM5/25/12
to
expressed. This is what is so fascinating about deniers. They seem
normal or even bright in so many ways that no one would suspect that
they reject accepted science in the face of overwhelming evidence and
would do harm to total strangers who are leaders in the science.
Speedbump
May 25, 2012, 2:24:12 PM5/25/12
to
Catoni
May 25, 2012, 5:12:51 PM5/25/12
to
>
> > > Ok here we go
> > > #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> > > #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
> > > #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> > > means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
> > > #4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
> > > or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
> > > that help the needy.
> > > #5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
> > > people", during a global recession.
>
> > Hey "columbiaaccidentinvestigation".....you know the difference
> > between Jame's post and your post ? ? ?
>
> > His post is true.....
>
> > Your post simply shows that you're a total leftist idiot.
>
> #6 a republican thinks the have a right to make fun of others, while
> at the same time maintaing some sort of fake protection against any
> kind of riducule, its called THIN SKIN SYNDROME.- Hide quoted text -
> > > Ok here we go
> > > #1 A republican thinks an AR-15 is meant for hunting vermin.
> > > #2 A republican thinks that ketchup is a vegtable.
> > > #3 A republican claims they value love, marriage and family, which
> > > means they limit others ability access to have the same thing.
> > > #4 A republican thinks that as long at they claim to be a christian,
> > > or a person of faith, they feel its ok to cut spending on programs
> > > that help the needy.
> > > #5 A republican makes statements like "I like being able to fire
> > > people", during a global recession.
>
> > Hey "columbiaaccidentinvestigation".....you know the difference
> > between Jame's post and your post ? ? ?
>
> > His post is true.....
>
> > Your post simply shows that you're a total leftist idiot.
>
> #6 a republican thinks the have a right to make fun of others, while
> at the same time maintaing some sort of fake protection against any
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha...... making fun of others.... what do you call
your reply post to James.... :)
Pot... kettle.... black....
What a tool you are erschroedinger... ha, ha, ha...
Catoni
May 25, 2012, 5:19:26 PM5/25/12
to
RedAcer posted:
>"No-one owns the word. Anyone can define it how they want to. If gay
Homosexuals and heterosexuals and everyone else... are
perfectly free to define and say whatever they wish.... such as
claiming the moon is made of green cheese....
Doesn't make it true....
>"No-one owns the word. Anyone can define it how they want to. If gay
>eople or anyone else says they are married what are you going to do
>bout it ? "
Homosexuals and heterosexuals and everyone else... are
perfectly free to define and say whatever they wish.... such as
claiming the moon is made of green cheese....
Doesn't make it true....
James
May 25, 2012, 6:32:17 PM5/25/12
to
"Speedbump" <travelin...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b9b77c63-9cea-4121...@googlegroups.com...
James
May 25, 2012, 6:39:23 PM5/25/12
to
<erschro...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:896ea221-be09-4a1b...@j25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Catoni
May 25, 2012, 5:41:47 PM5/25/12
to
spending on what programs for the needy? Government spending of
taxpayers dollars.... absolutely...yes... cut it.
Does that mean that we want no spending on the needy. Absolutely
not....
It's as if you were to say that we don't want people to eat,
because we do not want to state to do the farming.
It's claims such as you make that show the Socialists of the far
left and far right to be total idiots.
Libertarians and fiscal conservative want government spending cut,,,
yes... but we fully believe that those who are better off are morally
obligated to contribute to private charities, and help create and
support private charities voluntarily. NOT BY FORCE OF GOVERNMENT.
We do believe in helping the poor... OUT OF OUR OWN POCKETS, with
REAL charity. Not with government confiscation of our tax money,
which first fills the pockets of politicians and bureaucrats and gets
spent of foolish programs like studies of tree frog reproduction in
Central America, and grants to AGW Alarmist groups like the Suzuki
Foundation.
Example..... I support the Red Cross, the Salvation Army, and an
orphanage. By MY OWN CHOICE. I would give even more....I did so in
the past, but these days my taxes are much higher... so I'm unable to
give as much as in the past.
These days..... many of the charities of the past no longer exist...
thanks to government growth and leftist socialist influence..... these
days... much more money goes to support much bigger government and
bloated bureaucracies as well.....
What a waste......... thanks socialism......idiots..
James
May 25, 2012, 9:15:14 PM5/25/12
to
"Catoni" <cato...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:7ff60992-5d46-4d95...@r3g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
I think his memory chip is overloaded. He'll eventually come around with
a link to www.nasa.gov or something similar.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 26, 2012, 12:25:58 AM5/26/12
to
On May 25, 6:15 pm, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:
> "Catoni" <caton...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
You made a stupid post, and i had fun with it, and you cant deal.
> "Catoni" <caton...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 26, 2012, 12:35:16 AM5/26/12
to
>
> We do believe in helping the poor... OUT OF OUR OWN POCKETS, with
> REAL charity.
have no poor?
> Not with government confiscation of our tax money,
> which first fills the pockets of politicians and bureaucrats and gets
> spent of foolish programs like studies of tree frog reproduction in
> Central America, and grants to AGW Alarmist groups like the Suzuki
> Foundation.
under what administration was that LARGE expansion of government? Im
sure you think every DARPA project is worth the investment.
>
> Example..... I support the Red Cross, the Salvation Army, and an
> orphanage. By MY OWN CHOICE. I would give even more....I did so in
> the past, but these days my taxes are much higher... so I'm unable to
> give as much as in the past.
>
> These days..... many of the charities of the past no longer exist...
> thanks to government growth and leftist socialist influence..... these
> days... much more money goes to support much bigger government and
> bloated bureaucracies as well.....
> What a waste......... thanks socialism......idiots..
Catoni
May 26, 2012, 11:14:25 PM5/26/12
to
On May 26, 12:35 am, columbiaaccidentinvestigation
> You are a reactionary, an extreme right wing idiot.- Hide quoted text -
> "You are a reactionary, an extreme right wing idiot."
"...reactionary,..." nice Marxist pejorative adjective there
comrade...
How are your communist cell meetings going lately comrade ? ?
You really don't get it do you? ? "..extreme right
wing..." ? ? ? ? Seriously ? ? Your moronic tendencies are very
exposed.... lol... I hate the far right as much as I hate the far
left. They both push for big totalitarian government.
Extreme left Communist... extreme right Facsist..... It makes
little difference to the man in the street that has lost his freedom
and has his life now controlled by dictatorship.
I'm a Libertarian you idiot.
>
> - Show quoted text -
"columbiaaccidentinvestigation" posted:
> - Show quoted text -
> "You are a reactionary, an extreme right wing idiot."
comrade...
How are your communist cell meetings going lately comrade ? ?
You really don't get it do you? ? "..extreme right
wing..." ? ? ? ? Seriously ? ? Your moronic tendencies are very
exposed.... lol... I hate the far right as much as I hate the far
left. They both push for big totalitarian government.
Extreme left Communist... extreme right Facsist..... It makes
little difference to the man in the street that has lost his freedom
and has his life now controlled by dictatorship.
I'm a Libertarian you idiot.
Catoni
May 26, 2012, 11:33:31 PM5/26/12
to
"columbiaaccidentinvestigation: posted:
>" false premise, are you claiming that if taxation were zero, we would
>have no poor?"
No comrade... that is not what I am claiming.
There will always be poor people that we are morally obligated to help
by free choice our of our own pockets if we are well off. There are
poor people in every country... including in communist "worker's
paradise" countries like Cuba and North Korea. Eastern Europe and the
people's wonderful paradisde of the Soviet Union were full of people
so poor that they starved to death.. especially in Ukraine during the
'30's.
We should be taxed a reasonable amount... perhaps 10%
total..maybe a little less, a little more.... not like the approx. 48%
that I pay today in taxes of all kind. The protection of individual
rights is the only proper purpose of government. Defense of country,
defense of the people against crime such as theft and assault etc.
Government must be constitutionally limited so as to prevent the
infringement of individual rights by the government itself.
There are people that say the the percentage of tax you pay is
directly related to the amount of freedom you have.....
Going by that yardstick.... I am now only 52% free. The total tax
bill, including all types of taxes, of the average Canadian family has
increased by 1738 percent since 1961. The average Canadian family now
spends more of its income on taxes than it does on basic necessities
such as food, shelter, and clothing. In 2011, 41.5 percent of the
average family’s income went to pay taxes while it spent 33.6 percent
of its income on food,
shelter, and clothing. In comparison, in 1961 the average family spent
56.5 percent of its income on basic necessities, while only 33.5
percent of the family’s income went to taxes.
>" false premise, are you claiming that if taxation were zero, we would
>have no poor?"
There will always be poor people that we are morally obligated to help
by free choice our of our own pockets if we are well off. There are
poor people in every country... including in communist "worker's
paradise" countries like Cuba and North Korea. Eastern Europe and the
people's wonderful paradisde of the Soviet Union were full of people
so poor that they starved to death.. especially in Ukraine during the
'30's.
We should be taxed a reasonable amount... perhaps 10%
total..maybe a little less, a little more.... not like the approx. 48%
that I pay today in taxes of all kind. The protection of individual
rights is the only proper purpose of government. Defense of country,
defense of the people against crime such as theft and assault etc.
Government must be constitutionally limited so as to prevent the
infringement of individual rights by the government itself.
There are people that say the the percentage of tax you pay is
directly related to the amount of freedom you have.....
Going by that yardstick.... I am now only 52% free. The total tax
bill, including all types of taxes, of the average Canadian family has
increased by 1738 percent since 1961. The average Canadian family now
spends more of its income on taxes than it does on basic necessities
such as food, shelter, and clothing. In 2011, 41.5 percent of the
average family’s income went to pay taxes while it spent 33.6 percent
of its income on food,
shelter, and clothing. In comparison, in 1961 the average family spent
56.5 percent of its income on basic necessities, while only 33.5
percent of the family’s income went to taxes.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 27, 2012, 9:24:34 AM5/27/12
to
claim that freedom equals money, which is false. Freedom is not coin,
and equality is not a tax on others freedom, you are venturing into
the absurd.
We have working poor, who in harder times need the same if not more
support than when times were good. The federal government as an
entity in times of disaster or hardship can aid states in ways the
indvidual cannot. Therefore your tax dollars help regional planners
assist others in regions who may not have as many resources as others
in different locations. A tax proposition 13 in california has
created the problem of keeping money in certain locations, which means
schools in poor neighborhoods recieved less tax dollars. During the
times of the bush tax cuts did not cause people to increase charitable
contributions to the point where it compensated for the upcoming
global recession. In fact in hard economic times the losses may have
caused the more wealthy to give less to charity. So that would mean
you during times when charitable donations are down, you want to
shrink governments ability to help the poor based on the convoluted
concept that money = freedom.
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 27, 2012, 9:25:31 AM5/27/12
to
RedAcer
May 27, 2012, 9:38:05 AM5/27/12
to
matter of definition. This is false, as it can be determined by experiment.
James
May 27, 2012, 11:28:16 AM5/27/12
to
<erschro...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:152cd0b4-061c-4939...@j25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com
Concubines
news:152cd0b4-061c-4939...@j25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com
James
May 27, 2012, 11:34:46 AM5/27/12
to
<erschro...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:91073622-ac93-4067...@f7g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
You seem to be the 'National Enquirer' of this NG.
BTW I don't think that there is a plank in the Dem platform on gays. It
may come though.
news:91073622-ac93-4067...@f7g2000yqh.googlegroups.com
BTW I don't think that there is a plank in the Dem platform on gays. It
may come though.
James
May 27, 2012, 11:40:53 AM5/27/12
to
"columbiaaccidentinvestigation"
<columbiaaccide...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9f8d4c73-affa-4bf8...@n9g2000pbi.googlegroups.com
--
If you put equality above freedom, you get neither. - Milton Friedman
<columbiaaccide...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9f8d4c73-affa-4bf8...@n9g2000pbi.googlegroups.com
If you put equality above freedom, you get neither. - Milton Friedman
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 27, 2012, 12:31:37 PM5/27/12
to
On May 27, 8:40 am, "James" <kingk...@iglou.com> wrote:
> "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
“The Chicago School bears the blame for providing a seeming
intellectual foundation for the idea that markets are self- adjusting
and the best role for government is to do nothing,” Joseph Stiglitz
> "columbiaaccidentinvestigation"<columbiaaccidentinvestigat...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
intellectual foundation for the idea that markets are self- adjusting
and the best role for government is to do nothing,” Joseph Stiglitz
James
May 27, 2012, 9:51:10 PM5/27/12
to
columbiaaccidentinvestigation
May 27, 2012, 11:43:15 PM5/27/12
to
illogical premise that freedom equals money. The quote i cited was to
show good ole freidman was wrong.
0 new messages