Cunning Victory for the Conservatives in NY-23
Aratzio
They have proven that they cannot win without the moderates.
They have taken a district that has been Republican for 157 years and
forced the moderate Republican majority to vote for and elect a
Democrat that will actually represent them.
They have declared a *victory* over the establishment.
Just like Palin, who quit to prove she is not a quitter, the
conservatives prove they are winners by losing.
You wingnuts just keep that up and the USA will be much better for it.
Lookout
wrote:
Ya..I thought the comments on Faux News were hilarious. The claimed it
was a victory because it "purified the party". What good is a pure
party when you can't win in a district you've held for 100+ years?
Mitchell Holman
news:pq94f5tmv03thgt5j...@4ax.com:
>
> They have proven that they cannot win without the moderates.
>
> They have taken a district that has been Republican for 157 years and
> forced the moderate Republican majority to vote for and elect a
> Democrat that will actually represent them.
>
> They have declared a *victory* over the establishment.
>
> Just like Palin, who quit to prove she is not a quitter, the
> conservatives prove they are winners by losing.
>
"That's the worthless, easy path; that's a quitter's way out."
Sarah Palin, July 3, 2009, in speech in which she announced
she was quitting.
XR650L_Dave
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 17:21:28 -0800, Aratzio <a6ahly...@sneakemail.com>
"Purified the Party"?
Holy shit, I'd expect that from communists or Nazis...
That's seriously deranged talk, right there, even for the right-wing
entertainment media.
Dave
Too_Many_Tools
LOL...in the Bizarro World of the Conservative Movement, up is down
and down is up.
Anything justifies the end result in their minds because they are the
Chosen Ones.
And in all seriousness, I do not see any cure for this sad and
dangerous sickness.
TMT
hal
<too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Same "cure" history has always given us: totalitarian fascism and
war.
>
>TMT
Observer
<too_man...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Nov 4, 7:21 pm, Aratzio <a6ahly...@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>> They have proven that they cannot win without the moderates.
>>
>> They have taken a district that has been Republican for 157 years and
>> forced the moderate Republican majority to vote for and elect a
>> Democrat that will actually represent them.
>>
>> They have declared a *victory* over the establishment.
>>
>> Just like Palin, who quit to prove she is not a quitter, the
>> conservatives prove they are winners by losing.
>>
>> You wingnuts just keep that up and the USA will be much better for it.
>
>LOL...in the Bizarro World of the Conservative Movement, up is down
>and down is up.
>
>Anything justifies the end result in their minds because they are the
>Chosen Ones.
Sounds a lot like Gunner. AND a lot like kyou.
>And in all seriousness, I do not see any cure for this sad and
>dangerous sickness.
It's called "Winger's Disease". If you have it, you'll see no cure.
__
The last official act of any government is the looting of the nation.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
Encourage them to "purify the party." Encourage the Republicans to eat
their own. Encourage the Republicans to run Sarah Palin as their
Presidential nominee in 2012.
Those are all most excellent for our nation.
--
Regards, Curly
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Bible: Slavery Good, Gays Bad, Snakes Talk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cavelamb
>
> Encourage them to "purify the party." Encourage the Republicans to eat
> their own. Encourage the Republicans to run Sarah Palin as their
> Presidential nominee in 2012.
>
> Those are all most excellent for our nation.
>
No, Curly, divisiveness is *not* what's good for our nation.
Curly Surmudgeon
wrote:
Normally I'd agree however in this case isolating the fundamentalists
into thier own party of theocracy is a very good thing. Rational people,
economic conservatives and social liberals alike, will create at least
one new party.
Breaking the 2-party monopoly on political office is a very good thing.
Hawke
Why don't you try telling that to the right wing talk radio folks and
the guys on cable TV who have been working to divide the nation for the
last 20 years?
Hawke
Buerste
"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
news:hd08bp$jc0$1...@aioe.org...
The liberal idea of bi-partisanship is total agreement with the liberal
agenda, and anybody that doesn't is a racist obstructionist...among other
things.
Hawke
>>>> Those are all most excellent for our nation.
>>>>
>>> No, Curly, divisiveness is *not* what's good for our nation.
>>>
>>
>> Why don't you try telling that to the right wing talk radio folks and the
>> guys on cable TV who have been working to divide the nation for the last
>> 20 years?
>>
>>
>> Hawke
>
> The liberal idea of bi-partisanship is total agreement with the liberal
> agenda, and anybody that doesn't is a racist obstructionist...among other
> things.
You dodged the question so I'll ask it again. Do you not think the right
wing talkers on AM radio and the TV guys like Beck, Hannity, and
O'Reilly divide the country rather than bring us together?
Hawke
Buerste
Most people consider them entertainers, only the left fringe gets
frothed-up. So, if you count dividing the left fringe from the rest of the
country, they are dividers. (And, those people SHOULD be separated out,
along with all the other fringe weirdoes.) Do they froth you up?
Hawke
>>> The liberal idea of bi-partisanship is total agreement with the liberal
>>> agenda, and anybody that doesn't is a racist obstructionist...among other
>>> things.
>>
>> You dodged the question so I'll ask it again. Do you not think the right
>> wing talkers on AM radio and the TV guys like Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly
>> divide the country rather than bring us together?
>>
>>
>> Hawke
>
> Most people consider them entertainers, only the left fringe gets
> frothed-up. So, if you count dividing the left fringe from the rest of the
> country, they are dividers. (And, those people SHOULD be separated out,
> along with all the other fringe weirdoes.) Do they froth you up?
No. But since I know the facts, the way they twist everything to suit
their agenda has no effect on me. But I do see what they do to the
ignorant. Unfortunately, many people who listen to them regularly use
them as their main source for information. This means they are
misinformed and the "entertainers" do froth them up. If you didn't know
what was really going on they would get you mad. Bottom line is this;
whatever you want to blame it on, the fact is they do the opposite of
bringing Americans together. They do divide people. I think that is a
bad thing and causes problems when we could be working together to fix
things. The only good they are out to accomplish is to make themselves
and the companies they work for lots of money. Usually a motive like
that doesn't help anyone else. So as I said all along. They are divisive
and hurt the country. They need to have someone like Garret Morris from
SNL come on right after the "entertainers" say something biased and yell
out the truth.
Hawke
Ed Huntress
"Buerste" <bue...@wowway.com> wrote in message
news:ua2Jm.3996$%j4....@newsfe18.iad...
Baloney. No one in their right mind sees them as "entertainers." What they
do is to stroke peoples' desire to dehumanize and mortify the political
opposition, so those people with puny minds and little character can feel
superior, if only for an hour or so, to the "others."
Anyone who finds that entertaining doesn't have the guts to take on those
"others" themselves. They need a surrogate who will do it for them --
someone with more wit, or with an even fouler mouth or mind, who are happy
to do their dirty work. Such people are now available in ready supply, which
corresponds to the debasement of politics in general.
In other words, it isn't entertainment. It just bucks up weak and resentful
people so they feel better about themselves. From what we've seen over the
last few years, there are plenty of people out there who really need the
support.
--
Ed Huntress
Buerste
Do you include Keith Olbermann in the group? Or is he the bringer of truth
and unity?
Buerste
"Ed Huntress" <hunt...@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4af50dbf$0$31259$607e...@cv.net...
Sounds like they froth you up pretty good Ed. Hmmmm.what does THAT say?
Buerste
Also, I find it interesting that since you have a known propensity to make
assumptions and then build layer upon layer on those assumptions without
qualifying them...well, let's just say I assume that what ever YOU say may
have a faulty base assumption. And I qualify my assumptions to a much
higher degree than you do. Would you like references? No, I didn't think
so. Have a nice day!
Ed Huntress
It says you don't know what you're talking about. <g>
The people who "froth me up" are the ignorant rednecks who cheered for Huey
Long, Father Coughlin, and Glenn Beck. They're the same kinds of people --
weak and lazy minds, no dignity, and no character. They're a scourge.
--
Ed Huntress
Ed Huntress
And you have a known propensity to talk through your hat -- not to mention
that you're a hobby troller who sometimes says what he thinks, and other
times is just satisfying an itch to stir things up.
> And I qualify my assumptions to a much higher degree than you do. Would
> you like references? No, I didn't think so. Have a nice day!
Sure. And then I'll drag out a dozen or two off-the-wall, unqualified
nonsense posts of yours. Is it a deal?
--
Ed Huntress
Buerste
I'll agree, we are BOTH full of shit! (but you more so)
HH&C
> "Buerste" <buer...@wowway.com> wrote in message
>
> news:ua2Jm.3996$%j4....@newsfe18.iad...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Hawke" <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
> >news:hd20gv$ke4$2...@aioe.org...
>
> >>>>>> Those are all most excellent for our nation.
>
> >>>>> No, Curly, divisiveness is *not* what's good for our nation.
>
> >>>> Why don't you try telling that to the right wing talk radio folks and
> >>>> the guys on cable TV who have been working to divide the nation for the
> >>>> last 20 years?
>
> >>>> Hawke
>
> >>> The liberal idea of bi-partisanship is total agreement with the liberal
> >>> agenda, and anybody that doesn't is a racist obstructionist...among
> >>> other things.
>
> >> You dodged the question so I'll ask it again. Do you not think the right
> >> wing talkers on AM radio and the TV guys like Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly
> >> divide the country rather than bring us together?
>
> >> Hawke
>
> > Most people consider them entertainers, only the left fringe gets
> > frothed-up. So, if you count dividing the left fringe from the rest of
> > the country, they are dividers. (And, those people SHOULD be separated
> > out, along with all the other fringe weirdoes.) Do they froth you up?
>
> Baloney. No one in their right mind sees them as "entertainers." What they
> do is to stroke peoples' desire to dehumanize and mortify the political
> opposition, so those people with puny minds and little character can feel
> superior, if only for an hour or so, to the "others."
I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
school children.
Ed Huntress
"HH&C" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c7182e86-ae6f-4545...@h34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Well, hell, they *do*. <g>
All of that stuff should be called out and the perpetrators should be
humiliated, no matter which side it comes from. It's evidence of a serious
character flaw.
--
Ed Huntress
Buerste
"HH&C" <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:c7182e86-ae6f-4545...@h34g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
****************************
And, a big bunch of stupid libtards believe it.
Gunner Asch
And throw granny out on the street to die in the snow.
Oddly enough..thats whats happening with the Democrats in charge.....
Odd how that happens, isnt it?
Gunner
"IMHO, some people here give Jeff far more attention than he deserves,
but obviously craves. The most appropriate response, and perhaps the
cruelest, IMO, is to simply killfile and ignore him. An alternative, if
you must, would be to post the same standard reply to his every post,
listing the manifold reasons why he ought to be ignored. Just my $0.02
worth."
pyotr filipivich
or about Sun, 08 Nov 2009 11:11:04 -0800 did write/type or cause to
appear in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:[snip]
>>> >>> The liberal idea of bi-partisanship is total agreement with the liberal
>>> >>> agenda, and anybody that doesn't is a racist obstructionist...among
>>> >>> other things.
>>>
>>> >> You dodged the question so I'll ask it again. Do you not think the right
>>> >> wing talkers on AM radio and the TV guys like Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly
>>> >> divide the country rather than bring us together?
>>>
>>> > frothed-up. �So, if you count dividing the left fringe from the rest of
>>> > the country, they are dividers. �(And, those people SHOULD be separated
>>> > out, along with all the other fringe weirdoes.) �Do they froth you up?
>>>
>>> Baloney. No one in their right mind sees them as "entertainers." What they
>>> do is to stroke peoples' desire to dehumanize and mortify the political
>>> opposition, so those people with puny minds and little character can feel
>>> superior, if only for an hour or so, to the "others."
>>
>>I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
>>school children.
>
>And throw granny out on the street to die in the snow.
>
>Oddly enough..thats whats happening with the Democrats in charge.....
>
>Odd how that happens, isnt it?
I've found it interesting, over the years, the reactions of
Democrats, progressives and other "reality based" sorts, to any
proposal to cut taxes, reduce government spending, or otherwise
curtain government control over the lives of citizens. It is always
the libraries, the schools, the fire department and the Police
department which will have to be cut first, not to mention the closing
of parks, all the "free clinics", and turning off the street lights.
Hmmm, cutting government administrator salaries and perks never
seems to be on the list.
-
pyotr filipivich
We will drink no whiskey before its nine.
It's eight fifty eight. Close enough!
Hawke
> I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
> school children.
It's not that they specifically want to starve little children. It's
just that if they can get ahead or money can be made and little children
get starved in the process that's fine with them.
Hawke
Hawke
>>> Most people consider them entertainers, only the left fringe gets
>>> frothed-up. So, if you count dividing the left fringe from the rest of
>>> the country, they are dividers. (And, those people SHOULD be separated
>>> out, along with all the other fringe weirdoes.) Do they froth you up?
>> No. But since I know the facts, the way they twist everything to suit
>> their agenda has no effect on me. But I do see what they do to the
>> ignorant. Unfortunately, many people who listen to them regularly use them
>> as their main source for information. This means they are misinformed and
>> the "entertainers" do froth them up. If you didn't know what was really
>> going on they would get you mad. Bottom line is this; whatever you want to
>> blame it on, the fact is they do the opposite of bringing Americans
>> together. They do divide people. I think that is a bad thing and causes
>> problems when we could be working together to fix things. The only good
>> they are out to accomplish is to make themselves and the companies they
>> work for lots of money. Usually a motive like that doesn't help anyone
>> else. So as I said all along. They are divisive and hurt the country. They
>> need to have someone like Garret Morris from SNL come on right after the
>> "entertainers" say something biased and yell out the truth.
>>
>> Hawke
>
> Do you include Keith Olbermann in the group? Or is he the bringer of truth
> and unity?
No, but he's different. He's biased. There is no doubt of that. But he's
way more honest than the right wingers. And the right wing
"entertainers" goal seems to be to divide the people on the right from
the rest of the country. Olbermann seems mainly to be going specifically
after the right wing talk show hosts themselves.
Hawke
Buerste
I'd bet anything that mean 'ol Republicans have fed a whole bunch more
hungry people that you have.
pyotr filipivich
<bue...@wowway.com> reported Elvis on Mon, 9 Nov 2009 05:08:01 -0500
in misc.survivalism:
>"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
>news:hd8hid$9bm$3...@aioe.org...
>>> I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
>>> school children.
>> It's not that they specifically want to starve little children. It's just
>> that if they can get ahead or money can be made and little children get
>> starved in the process that's fine with them.
>hungry people that you have.
I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
tschus
pyotr
-
pyotr filipivich.
Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
Hawke
> I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
> say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
> Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
> conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
> Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
> Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
> it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
> house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
> a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
>
Go down to any homeless center, food bank, or charity that cares for the
poor and you'll find Democrats and liberals helping them. You won't find
republicans doing that. You will find republicans who want to cut the
money that helps them though. And when was the last time you heard
republicans talk or do anything about helping the downtrodden? They
don't ever do that.
Hawke
Gunner Asch
<ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that "Buerste"
><bue...@wowway.com> reported Elvis on Mon, 9 Nov 2009 05:08:01 -0500
>in misc.survivalism:
>>"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
>>news:hd8hid$9bm$3...@aioe.org...
>>>> I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
>>>> school children.
>>> It's not that they specifically want to starve little children. It's just
>>> that if they can get ahead or money can be made and little children get
>>> starved in the process that's fine with them.
>>I'd bet anything that mean 'ol Republicans have fed a whole bunch more
>>hungry people that you have.
>
> I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
>say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
>Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
>conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
>Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
> Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
>it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
>house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
>a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
>
And they only use other peoples money on the rare times that they
actually do stuff for the poor. Never their own. They steal it from
others, often times at gunpoint, and pass it out like candy.
>
>tschus
>pyotr
>-
>pyotr filipivich.
>Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
>you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
"IMHO, some people here give Jeff far more attention than he deserves,
pyotr filipivich
<gun...@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> reported Elvis on Mon, 09 Nov 2009
16:21:45 -0800 in misc.survivalism:
>On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:59:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that "Buerste"
>><bue...@wowway.com> reported Elvis on Mon, 9 Nov 2009 05:08:01 -0500
>>in misc.survivalism:
>>>"Hawke" <davesm...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
>>>>> I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
>>>>> school children.
>>>> It's not that they specifically want to starve little children. It's just
>>>> that if they can get ahead or money can be made and little children get
>>>> starved in the process that's fine with them.
>>>I'd bet anything that mean 'ol Republicans have fed a whole bunch more
>>>hungry people that you have.
>>
>> I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
>>say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
>>Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
>>conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
>>Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
>> Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
>>it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
>>house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
>>a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
>>
>
>And they only use other peoples money on the rare times that they
>actually do stuff for the poor. Never their own. They steal it from
>others, often times at gunpoint, and pass it out like candy.
Moses Maim�nides did say that one of the higher forms of charity
was for the giver to not know who the recipient was, nor the recipient
to know who the giver was. But that is not the same as government
taxing money from the "giver" to buy the favor of the receiver.
Maim�nides did say that the best form of charity was to put the
recipient in the way of business, that he might not have to beg at
all. easier said than done, but that is the ideal way.
Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
>>>>> Those are all most excellent for our nation.
>>>>>
>>>> No, Curly, divisiveness is *not* what's good for our nation.
>>>>
>>> Why don't you try telling that to the right wing talk radio folks and
>>> the guys on cable TV who have been working to divide the nation for the
>>> last 20 years?
>>
>> agenda, and anybody that doesn't is a racist obstructionist...among
>> other things.
>
> You dodged the question so I'll ask it again. Do you not think the right
> wing talkers on AM radio and the TV guys like Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly
> divide the country rather than bring us together?
>
merely notice it and report it; a necessary job since the rest of the
media is nothing but a cheerleader for the socialist agenda.
Thanks,
Rich
Observer
You need to move to a more seasonal area, Grammy Gump.
__
The last official act of any government is the looting of the nation.
Hawke
>>>
>>>> Why don't you try telling that to the right wing talk radio folks and
>>>> the guys on cable TV who have been working to divide the nation for the
>>>> last 20 years?
>>> The liberal idea of bi-partisanship is total agreement with the liberal
>>> agenda, and anybody that doesn't is a racist obstructionist...among
>>> other things.
>> You dodged the question so I'll ask it again. Do you not think the right
>> wing talkers on AM radio and the TV guys like Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly
>> divide the country rather than bring us together?
>>
> Not at all. The left wing is tearing the country apart - the commentators
> merely notice it and report it; a necessary job since the rest of the
> media is nothing but a cheerleader for the socialist agenda.
>
> Thanks,
> Rich
>
And of course you never noticed that Foxnews is trying to advance any
agenda at all. It's completely neutral, is that right? Not cheerleading
for anything, huh? At least have the gumption to admit that Fox is no
different from the liberal media in advancing a particular point of
view. If you can't see Fox is pushing the conservative point of view you
are blind as a bat. Which would make you one of those who only sees what
he wants to see. I would respect your view if you just said, yeah Fox is
right wing and be done with it. But to deny it has an agenda really
identifies you as an ignorant drone.
Hawke
HH&C
> I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that "Buerste"
> in misc.survivalism:
>
> >"Hawke" <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
> >news:hd8hid$9bm$3...@aioe.org...
> >>> I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
> >>> school children.
> >> It's not that they specifically want to starve little children. It's just
> >> that if they can get ahead or money can be made and little children get
> >> starved in the process that's fine with them.
> >I'd bet anything that mean 'ol Republicans have fed a whole bunch more
> >hungry people that you have.
>
> I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
> say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
> Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
> conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
> Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
> Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
> it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
> house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
> a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
>
> tschus
> pyotr
> -
> pyotr filipivich.
> Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
> you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
I take money out of my own pocket and donate directly to the people
charities that help... people. Democrats want a government takeover
of charities, and want to tax me to to pay for the "charity" that they
think is important, like planned parenthood. NO THANKS.
HH&C
> "Hawke" <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
Libs are stingy with their own money. They're always looking for a
gov't solution.
HH&C
> > I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
> > say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
> > Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
> > conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
> > Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
> > Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
> > it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
> > house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
> > a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
>
> Go down to any homeless center, food bank, or charity that cares for the
> poor and you'll find Democrats and liberals helping them.
You just think they're democrats. Did you ask them when you held your
plate out?
HH&C
> On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:21:45 -0800, Gunner Asch
>
>
>
>
>
> <gun...@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> wrote:
> >On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:59:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich
> ><ph...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >>I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that "Buerste"
> >>in misc.survivalism:
> >>>"Hawke" <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote in message
> >>>news:hd8hid$9bm$3...@aioe.org...
> >>>>> I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
> >>>>> school children.
> >>>> It's not that they specifically want to starve little children. It's just
> >>>> that if they can get ahead or money can be made and little children get
> >>>> starved in the process that's fine with them.
> >>>I'd bet anything that mean 'ol Republicans have fed a whole bunch more
> >>>hungry people that you have.
>
> >> I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
> >>say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
> >>Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
> >>conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
> >>Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
> >> Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
> >>it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
> >>house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
> >>a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
>
> >And they only use other peoples money on the rare times that they
> >actually do stuff for the poor. Never their own. They steal it from
> >others, often times at gunpoint, and pass it out like candy.
>
> between my money going to feed poor people trying to get out of the
> poverty or killing of people in foreign lands, I'd feed the poor.
I'll assume for a moment that you have an income. You're free to
donate as much as you can to your favorite charities.
Defending America (making war) is a constitutional activity and a
legitimate use for tax money.
Pacifism, appeasement, and political correctness have killed more
people than you'd like to admit.
HH&C
> I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that Gunner Asch
> <gun...@NOSPAMlightspeed.net> reported Elvis on Mon, 09 Nov 2009
> 16:21:45 -0800 in misc.survivalism:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Mon, 09 Nov 2009 11:59:52 -0800, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> >>I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that "Buerste"
> >>in misc.survivalism:
> >>>"Hawke" <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
> >>>>> I recall the democrats saying that republicans wanted to starve little
> >>>>> school children.
> >>>> It's not that they specifically want to starve little children. It's just
> >>>> that if they can get ahead or money can be made and little children get
> >>>> starved in the process that's fine with them.
> >>>I'd bet anything that mean 'ol Republicans have fed a whole bunch more
> >>>hungry people that you have.
>
> >> I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
> >>say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
> >>Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
> >>conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
> >>Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
> >> Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
> >>it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
> >>house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
> >>a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
>
> >And they only use other peoples money on the rare times that they
> >actually do stuff for the poor. Never their own. They steal it from
> >others, often times at gunpoint, and pass it out like candy.
>
> was for the giver to not know who the recipient was, nor the recipient
> to know who the giver was. But that is not the same as government
> taxing money from the "giver" to buy the favor of the receiver.
>
> recipient in the way of business, that he might not have to beg at
> all. easier said than done, but that is the ideal way.
That's why I offered TMT some work for the dollar that he otherwise
would have tried to take by knife point. He could walk away with
dignity. Or he could walk away.
pyotr filipivich
<hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> reported Elvis on Tue, 10 Nov 2009
20:40:57 -0800 (PST) in misc.survivalism:
>> was for the giver to not know who the recipient was, nor the recipient
>> to know who the giver was. �But that is not the same as government
>> taxing money from the "giver" to buy the favor of the receiver.
>>
>> recipient in the way of business, that he might not have to beg at
>> all. �easier said than done, but that is the ideal way.
>
>That's why I offered TMT some work for the dollar that he otherwise
>would have tried to take by knife point. He could walk away with
>dignity. Or he could walk away.
Such a mensch you are. Such a mitvah!
Michael A. Terrell
HH&C wrote:
>
> On Nov 9, 6:27 pm, Hawke <davesmith...@digitalpath.net> wrote:
> > > I've been on both sides of the food line. Yeah, the liberals will
> > > say good things, and occasional even show up to perform a Community
> > > Service. But it is the conservatives, especially the religiously
> > > conservatives, who does go to not feed The Hungry(tm), but to see that
> > > Joe, or Fred, or Jose, or Chuan, gets something to eat.
> > > Liberals are like Linus van Pelt who would say: I love Humanity,
> > > it is people I can't stand! Libs will feed The Hungry, they will
> > > house The Homeless, They will Care about the Downtrodden - but that's
> > > a general, nebulous statement. Who have they fed, housed, or helped?
> >
> > Go down to any homeless center, food bank, or charity that cares for the
> > poor and you'll find Democrats and liberals helping them.
>
> You just think they're democrats. Did you ask them when you held your
> plate out?
He's right. They have to work off those community service hours
somewhere. A friend of mine ran a non profit thrift store where 75%+ of
the work was done by people working off their community service hours.
As stupid as they were, they HAD to be Democrats. One was so stupid he
had trouble opening the dumpster.
All of the food banks around here are run by churches.
--
The movie 'Deliverance' isn't a documentary!
HH&C
wrote:
Churches. My, my. What will they think of next?
So Alberto Curmudgeon and TMT wouldn't support the willing donation
feeding of the poor and hungry unless they took money at gun point and
created a government program to do so.
HH&C
> I missed the Staff Meeting but the Minutes record that "HH&C"
> <hot-ham-and-che...@hotmail.com> reported Elvis on Tue, 10 Nov 2009
> >> was for the giver to not know who the recipient was, nor the recipient
> >> to know who the giver was. But that is not the same as government
> >> taxing money from the "giver" to buy the favor of the receiver.
>
> >> recipient in the way of business, that he might not have to beg at
> >> all. easier said than done, but that is the ideal way.
>
> >That's why I offered TMT some work for the dollar that he otherwise
> >would have tried to take by knife point. He could walk away with
> >dignity. Or he could walk away.
>
> Such a mensch you are. Such a mitvah!
Efxaristo.
HH&C
> Richard the Dreaded Libertarian wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>>> Why don't you try telling that to the right wing talk radio folks and
> >>>> the guys on cable TV who have been working to divide the nation for the
> >>>> last 20 years?
> >>> The liberal idea of bi-partisanship is total agreement with the liberal
> >>> agenda, and anybody that doesn't is a racist obstructionist...among
> >>> other things.
> >> You dodged the question so I'll ask it again. Do you not think the right
> >> wing talkers on AM radio and the TV guys like Beck, Hannity, and O'Reilly
> >> divide the country rather than bring us together?
>
> > Not at all. The left wing is tearing the country apart - the commentators
> > merely notice it and report it; a necessary job since the rest of the
> > media is nothing but a cheerleader for the socialist agenda.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Rich
>
> And of course you never noticed that Foxnews is trying to advance any
> agenda at all. It's completely neutral, is that right?
So you have a problem with the disenfranchised finally having a more
neutral news outlet than the MSM?
Michael A. Terrell
That would depend on how hungry they get. Its amazing how humble some
loudmouth gets when he hasn't eaten in days and knows that they will be
kicked out if they are disruptive. One large local church runs a thrift
store and food bank in the same building. I go there about once a week
to see if they have any used computer equipment for my disabled Veterans
project. They might make a snide comment at the far end of the parking
lot, but they even make their kids behave while waiting to see if they
can get free food. They have discovered that people who try to deceive
them are quickly known all over the county at other food banks.