a Right-Wing Credo

146 posts / 0 new
Last post
Art
Art's picture

Thought ist might be instructive to review the thoughts and philosophy of right-wingers. Here's what we have from just one poster on one single thread.

Workingman wrote:
The prisoners should be one step above state slaves doing what ever is needed to pay for their time in jail. when released if the work they performed does not cover the cost than they should have ti continue to pay until their debt is paid. . . 

I pay my taxes And my medical Care And through my taxes i pay for lazy peoples lives as well as prisoners. When can i expect for all those on tge government doll to start paying me back. If the answer is never when can i stop paying. If the answer is never is that fair. . . .

My solution to unwanted kids caused by lack of personal responsibility is very simple. You caused the problem you deal with it And leave me the hell alone. . . .

Crinimals have to be locked up because they havr proven they can not live within the set rules with the rest of us. They should have ti work for everything they are given. what they are given should be food And a bed. No yard time, no weight room, no tv, no library nothing more than survival equires prison is supposed to be bad. . .

You are responsible for you. It is not my respondibility to pay to Care for you. It is not the governments responsibility to force me to Care for anyone for any reason. Its called being free. . . . If you have sex And keep ths kid it is your responsibility to Care for it. If you can not afford to Care for the kid that is a charity issue not a government issue. If you choose to abort it And can not afford it that to is a charity issue not a government issue. . . .Ddc must stand for dumb as dogsh*t conehead I will just call you double d like we called morons in the marines.

Listen you ganja smoking moron, just because you told a quake in your state that you were to scared to go outside unless you are stoned does not make it legal for you to have it. The D.E.A. still says it is a drug and will arrest you for having the ganja if you have a card of not. Obama has busted individuals the D.E.A. busted a friend of my a couple of weeks ago for having plants in his house. . . .It is not un- American to not want to pay for strangers lives your freedom includes my freedom to be free from you. If your life starts to cost me money that is un-American . . .as far as pee test not working there are other tests that you can do besides pee testes didnt your dad tell you not to eat poo.   . . . so again you opinions and observations are so far off base i bet you would forget to wipe your butt if you mom did not tell you to. 

any other questions mouth breather? . . . no welfare for any reason to any one.  if people have kids they can not afford that is a charrity issue.  the state can legally go after dead beat dads to help support their kids. 

no it will not but it might make them think about how they are going to starve their kids to death before they do it. . . . Lets start with this the girl And her doctor decide if the kid lives or dies no need for a law to accomplish the abortion. The federal government should not be paying any form of welfare to anyone for any reason. that includes abortions, food, clothes or homes.

Prisons should be state government run since they provide the police, fire, And courts. They should be run as forced labor camps used to recoup the cost of their inprisonment. No tax payer support at all. Education also falls under the state government not the federal.

The federal government should provide the 18 jobs under the constitution And that is all. anything more than that And you are lising freedoms, by allowing the federal government to pay you allow them to set the rules.

My problem is not poor people my problem is over reaching over controlling government stealing my labor in order to support lazy people that Will not support themselves.

However sinse the government us stealing my labor to pay for other peoples lives when can i expect them to start paying it back? . . .

Comments

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Disgusting, vulger and

Disgusting, vulger and mean-spirited.

A person writing this should be feeling shame when rereading their evil, self-centered thoughts, but narsissitic personality disordered people feel entitlement where a normal person would feel empathy, compassion or in this case, shame.

douglaslee
douglaslee's picture
He would do well on

He would do well on wallstreet. Psychopathic behaviour is the norm there.

bamboo
bamboo's picture
wow! thanks Art. These are

wow! thanks Art. These are the hard cold results of decades of inbreeding. The republican/neocons arrival at (GOP) truth. "i wanna be freeeeee and left alone"

dhavid
Thom framed this well when he

Thom framed this well when he said that we primarily see the world through one of two windows - "me", or "we." Like in "We the people..."

Bottom line is that today's Republicans scream "me," while Democrats plead "we."

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
Pierpont suggested boycotting

Pierpont suggested boycotting trolls in another thread.  Perhaps Art's approach here is even better:

Frame their best pearls of wisdom for posterity and provide a platform for simple commentary that is not caught up in the rhetoric on their terms.

Thanks Art.

drc2
As I pointed out with

As I pointed out with Calperson elsewhere, the value of these posts is in our education into the depth and state of their pathology rather than the hope for an intelligent discussion with those involved in it.  Art has posted a prime example of the emotional consistency and intellectual chaos that characterizes these trolls and ideologues.  We need to appreciate why this stuff sells and how its appeal replaces thinking with believing.  Our strategies and messages have to be aimed to heal rather than "convince."

Or, those we are convincing are not those making these ideological arguments but those watching the conflict.  We can shame the perpetrators, but don't expect them to get it.  What we can do is isolate them from acceptance and credibility by standing for moral and intellectual integrity instead of getting lost in the deflections.  And, we can remember that they are also human as we appreciate that we are also subject to similar temptations to self-serving ideas.

Art
Art's picture
Quote:we can remember that

Quote:
we can remember that they are also human as we appreciate that we are also subject to similar temptations to self-serving ideas.
Good points. My wife is constantly on my case for spending time on this board. "Why are you wasting your time? (You could be working in the yard).You're not going to change their minds". Of course, she's right. I don't really have a good answer for her. 

It does force me to research stuff I probably wouldn't even consider otherwise. Maybe a good question might be, "What do you get out of this"? (I don't mind if you subvert the original post).

 

workingman
workingman's picture
There is no shame here you

There is no shame here you can repost anything i have posted. Everything i have said is to get the federal government out of our lives. You live your life i Will live mine. If you cant afford to live that is your problem. If i choose to help that is a charity thing.

Art
Art's picture
Quote:There is no shame

Quote:
There is no shame here
Of course not. You seem quite proud of your opinions. I've never heard anybody outright advocating a return to debtor's prisons before.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
They may be human, but they

They may be human, but they believe that they are superior to other people and they have no respect for anyone who has less power than they do. At the very core—they want others subjugated, even killed. They are NOT mentally healthy people.

douglaslee
douglaslee's picture
Live and let live is now live

Live and let live is now live and let die, or with regard to healthcare,  live and kill. To have and have not, is now to have and deny. To deny is to kill. Jesus told the story of the Samaritan. A Jew in trouble in the mountains dividing Judea and a hated [by Judeans] Samarita. Disabled on the trail, and with no cell phone, he sought help from a rabbi passing by, was snubbed. Next try was with a Jewish Bishop figure [ranks within Jewish faith are equivalent to Catholic, but like Navy vs Marines, different titles*] who snubbed him as well. In danger of imminent death from dehydration a passing Samaritan, the dreaded enemy, stopped, rehydrated him, pitched a stretcher carriage to his camel, and saved his life. The Good Samaritan was a better person than his own kind.

The story is a rough version, and the *military comparison was intentional.

drc2
bossman, nobody expects you

bossman, nobody expects you to grow a conscience.  You are posted as a prime example of the pathology, and the shame will be felt by others more than by you, of course.  But, if it helps in the privacy of your "soul," you do help us understand the problem even if only to show others not to go there.  The ugliness of your posts speaks with a moral eloquence that others get even if you are totally oblivioius.  You may save another from following you down that dark hole.

But, if you do find a conscience and get a visit from one of Dicken's ghosts, we will still be here and will be glad to hear from you.  Otherwise, expect to be used for consumer warnings and held in shame.  It is the best we can do with your stuff, sort of like composting it.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
What I am getting out of this

What I am getting out of this right now is that I am able to be involved in a "virtual" political community where there are at least some people with similar views as my own, while at the same time I am very busy 24/7 with my Parkinson's inflicted but still beautiful Mother — and living in a very right-wing town in Indiana, where I never thought that I would be living again for any reason. 

I never allow discussions with people here to go toward politics, economy, or the news........my situation feels crazy enough without even more stress.

workingman
workingman's picture
Art wrote: Quote:There is no

Art wrote:

Quote:
There is no shame here
Of course not. You seem quite proud of your opinions. I've never heard anybody outright advocating a return to debtor's prisons before.

I did not say anything about debtors prison. Just if you are in jail you pay for it..

My outlook is simple you cause it you pay for it.. No federal government handouts to any person for any reason ever, this should include corporations as well.

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
workingman wrote:There is no

workingman wrote:
There is no shame here you can repost anything i have posted. Everything i have said is to get the federal government out of our lives. You live your life i Will live mine. If you cant afford to live that is your problem. If i choose to help that is a charity thing.

If people weren't such animals then there would be no need for any form of government.  If you prefer dictatorship to government then that is your perogative.  I'll take a government for the people by the people that looks out for the best interests of all of it's citizens with no consideration to their stature instead of a small government that gets squashed by the rich plutocracy of private power. 

You don't even realize it but when wanting a small or no Federal government such as we have you are supporting the same type of life that our forefathers fought and bled and died in order to escape from.

Art
Art's picture
Quote:I never allow

Quote:
I never allow discussions with people here to go toward politics, economy, or the news........my situation feels crazy enough without even more stress.
Going even deeper into the psychometrics, The board is a place where I can release my inner grouch. Believe it or not, I am a very nice person in my off-line life. Here, I don't have to be nice if I don't want to. Sublimating my demons.

drc2
While living in that

While living in that alternative universe called Indiana, I hope you find some reality hits helpful.  If you cannot discuss important stuff with the Hoosiers and are busy in caregiving with a lot of personal stress involved, I hope you can do some of that here as an escape to reality.  Your personal and family reality is not the issue.  How alienated you are and lacking in human conversation about important issues are.

Your mother has raised a fine daughter.  I hope you and she get the help you both need in this hard but beautiful time.  If you didn't feel that your situation was crazy, you would be.

Art
Art's picture
Here, here, (or is it "hear,

Here, here, (or is it "hear, hear")?

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
Bush_Wacker wrote: I'll take

Bush_Wacker wrote:

I'll take a government for the people by the people that looks out for the best interests of all of it's citizens with no consideration to their stature instead of a small government that gets squashed by the rich plutocracy of private power. 

You don't even realize it but when wanting a small or no Federal government such as we have you are supporting the same type of life that our forefathers fought and bled and died in order to escape from.

Well said BW.  That about sums up the totality of the wrongheaded righties.  I just hope enough of them wake up sooner than later to the truth of your statement.

Art
Art's picture
Sometimes, I wish it would

Sometimes, I wish it would all come crashing down that way the righties are fighting for. Just so we can all experience how that would be. They believe that it will be a paradise for them, but they don't realize that only a very select few will join the ranks of the fortunate victors. Think of everything that will be missing. Things that I, personally, have become rather fond of. 401ks, IRAs, living-wage jobs, and on and on. Those retirement accounts with a couple of commas in them will be gone. 

It makes me think of Survivor. (Yes, I enjoy junk-TV). The predominent strategy is to attach yourself to the few who you perceive as the ultimate king-makers, hoping that they will take you into the final three where you have an outside chance at winning the million bucks. What are your odds? Is every right-winger we argue with .1% caliber? They seem to think so.

workingman
workingman's picture
The foundind fathers fought,

The foundind fathers fought, bleed And died to escape a totalitarian government thst the left wants. I want us to go back to the small almost powerless federal government with a stronger state government And a stronger county government And the strongest at the city level. The way the founders wanted it.. That is why the highest elected law enforcement Office is your county sherif.

For the people by the people is fine as long as one group of people is not forcing another group of people to support it.. Pass laws thst help everyone or no one. Welfare helps one at the expense of another.

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
workingman wrote: I want us

workingman wrote:

I want us to go back to the small almost powerless federal government with a stronger state government And a stronger county government And the strongest at the city level. The way the founders wanted it.

Please itemize the wrongs that would be righted and the currently unattainable gains that could be had via these local governments that are stronger than the federal.  In such a place, I envision corporate power and plutocracy beyond our worst nightmares.  I'll be the first to admit that our federal gov't is doing their fair share of helping corporate power and plutocracy, but without that BIG BAD FEDERAL GOV'T, we the people would be far worse off than we already are.  Time to wake up Bossman.

workingman
workingman's picture
You need a business license

You need a business license ti operate in a city/state you get that from the city/state not the federal government. If the corporation starts doing things the people of the city/state do not like you can pull there business license. It is much easier to control your local politicans than the federal ones. With a strong federal government you lose freedoms And control that end in dictatorship. If a city/state wants to legalize anything it is easier to accomplish than with the federal government. it woukd be easier to tell you the bad that would stay instead of the wrongs right.

the added benefit with the state government is if you dont like the state you can move to a new state.where do you go if the federal government gets to big And controling?

Karolina
Karolina's picture
I know what you are doing

I know what you are doing knowingly or unknowingly. You have been sold on bringing the US back to the Dark Ages, when there were small Princedoms all over Europe, which made it impossible for people/serfs to unite and be a force. 

One more divide and conquer plan.

That is definitely NOT what the Founding Fathers were trying to do here. Hence the title—the UNITED States of America. United with a unifying government.

workingman
workingman's picture
No i am not wanting to go

No i am not wanting to go back to the dark ages or princedoms all over the place. Dark ages And princedoms were rulef by totalitarian governments much like what i hear on this page with the call for a big controlling federal government.

The founding fathers said that all politics starts out local And the closer you are to the people the more powerful it should be.

The fought against totalitarian governments why are so many pushing for there return

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
workingman wrote:You need a

workingman wrote:
You need a business license ti operate in a city/state you get that from the city/state not the federal government. If the corporation starts doing things the people of the city/state do not like you can pull there business license. It is much easier to control your local politicans than the federal ones. With a strong federal government you lose freedoms And control that end in dictatorship. If a city/state wants to legalize anything it is easier to accomplish than with the federal government. it woukd be easier to tell you the bad that would stay instead of the wrongs right. the added benefit with the state government is if you dont like the state you can move to a new state.where do you go if the federal government gets to big And controling?

For a "workingman" you sure are fu*@#ng lazy.  Here, I'll help:

List #1: gains to be had from a local gov't stronger than federal ......

List #2: wrongs that are NOT righted when the local gov't is weaker than federal ......

Karolina
Karolina's picture
And it's not the first time

And it's not the first time that type of divide and conquer plan is in our history—the British government had a big investment in having the Southern States leave the Union.

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
Karolina wrote: And it's not

Karolina wrote:

And it's not the first time that type of divide and conquer plan is in our history—the British government had a big investment in having the Southern States leave the Union.

And that big bully Abe (Republican) wouldn't let them.  Go figure.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Notice he was assasinted

Notice he was assasinted ASAP.

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
Bossman: Where do you stand

Bossman:

Where do you stand on Lincoln usurping state's rights?  Those states could have achieved large economic gain via the "peculiar institution" of slavery.  Perhaps you're more of a John Wilkes Booth kind of guy?

workingman
workingman's picture
Laborisgood

Laborisgood wrote:

Bossman:

Where do you stand on Lincoln usurping state's rights?  Those states could have achieved large economic gain via the "peculiar institution" of slavery.  Perhaps you're more of a John Wilkes Booth kind of guy?

So now you are trying to say i am a racist because i believe in a small federal government. Slavery is wrong on multiple levels. However to the question lincoln should have done nothing slavery was dieing out. Follow the constitution. As states past anti slavery laws it would have spread out. Except for the democrat party trying to keep it..

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Gentlemen, we are being

Gentlemen, we are being targetted to get a new idea across here. I invite you to the Dennins Kucinich thread that I started this morning. I just went there to check it and almost fell down.

http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2012/05/dennis-kucinich-nato#new

delete jan in iowa
workingman wrote:The foundind

workingman wrote:
The foundind fathers fought, bleed And died to escape a totalitarian government thst the left wants.

Besides being unable to spell..... the Founding Fathers did NOT fight against a totalitarian government.  It was a monarchy and if you bothered to READ a history book now and then you would know the difference.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Hey Jan!

Hey Jan!

delete jan in iowa
Hey Karolina......... the

Hey Karolina......... the battle doesn't seem to have changed much..... You and Art are still holding down the fort!

delete jan in iowa
ART..... good thread!

ART..... good thread!

Karolina
Karolina's picture
One thing though Jan—it WAS a

One thing though Jan—it WAS a totalitarian government that the founding Fathers were fighting against.

TOTALITARIAN 1a : of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy : authoritarian, dictatorial; especially : despotic  b : of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures (as censorship and terrorism)

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
Karolina wrote: I invite you

Karolina wrote:

I invite you to the Dennins Kucinich thread that I started this morning. I just went there to check it and almost fell down.

I saw that and was beyond words ...... which is not easy for me.

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
Karolina wrote: One thing

Karolina wrote:

One thing though Jan—it WAS a totalitarian government that the founding Fathers were fighting against.

TOTALITARIAN 1a : of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy : authoritarian, dictatorial; especially : despotic  b : of or relating to a political regime based on subordination of the individual to the state and strict control of all aspects of the life and productive capacity of the nation especially by coercive measures (as censorship and terrorism)

Yes and that's the exact opposite of what we have now.  That description is what it will look like if we allow the US government to be shelved by the "International" corporatists who are gaining more and more control of our country.  It's not even plutocratic Americans that are systematically eroding our democratic process.  It's a bevy of international, world dominators who are pushing the koolaid to those like workingman in order to gain complete control.  Our government needs to evolve with world around it if it's going to uphold our Democracy.  Instead, libertarians are demanding smaller government that will not have a prayer of surviving if allowed to lose what little power it has.  Remember that our government is of the people for the people.  A plutocracy will be a government of the elite for the elite.

workingman
workingman's picture
douglaslee wrote: Live and

douglaslee wrote:

Live and let live is now live and let die, or with regard to healthcare,  live and kill. To have and have not, is now to have and deny. To deny is to kill. Jesus told the story of the Samaritan. A Jew in trouble in the mountains dividing Judea and a hated [by Judeans] Samarita. Disabled on the trail, and with no cell phone, he sought help from a rabbi passing by, was snubbed. Next try was with a Jewish Bishop figure [ranks within Jewish faith are equivalent to Catholic, but like Navy vs Marines, different titles*] who snubbed him as well. In danger of imminent death from dehydration a passing Samaritan, the dreaded enemy, stopped, rehydrated him, pitched a stretcher carriage to his camel, and saved his life. The Good Samaritan was a better person than his own kind.

The story is a rough version, and the *military comparison was intentional.

Did the government force him to save his hated enemy? The government is forcing the tax payer to others.

Laborisgood
Laborisgood's picture
workingman wrote: douglaslee

workingman wrote:

douglaslee wrote:

Live and let live is now live and let die, or with regard to healthcare,  live and kill. To have and have not, is now to have and deny. To deny is to kill. Jesus told the story of the Samaritan. A Jew in trouble in the mountains dividing Judea and a hated [by Judeans] Samarita. Disabled on the trail, and with no cell phone, he sought help from a rabbi passing by, was snubbed. Next try was with a Jewish Bishop figure [ranks within Jewish faith are equivalent to Catholic, but like Navy vs Marines, different titles*] who snubbed him as well. In danger of imminent death from dehydration a passing Samaritan, the dreaded enemy, stopped, rehydrated him, pitched a stretcher carriage to his camel, and saved his life. The Good Samaritan was a better person than his own kind.

The story is a rough version, and the *military comparison was intentional.

Did the government force him to save his hated enemy? The government is forcing the tax payer to others.

I believe the point is we shouldn't have to be coerced into helping others, but with people like Bossman, it is essential because the "Bossmans" of the world prefer to leave others on the side of the road.

Karolina
Karolina's picture
Bush_Wacker wrote:Yes and

Bush_Wacker wrote:
Yes and that's the exact opposite of what we have now.  That description is what it will look like if we allow the US government to be shelved by the "International" corporatists who are gaining more and more control of our country.  It's not even plutocratic Americans that are systematically eroding our democratic process.  It's a bevy of international, world dominators who are pushing the koolaid to those like workingman in order to gain complete control.  Our government needs to evolve with world around it if it's going to uphold our Democracy.  Instead, libertarians are demanding smaller government that will not have a prayer of surviving if allowed to lose what little power it has.  Remember that our government is of the people for the people.  A plutocracy will be a government of the elite for the elite.

Can you put something like that down under the shellac post on the Kucinich thread? People reading here should see an answer to the stealthy bullshit, and I am too fucking freaked out at the moment to be able to write a logical paragraph.

workingman
workingman's picture
drc2 wrote: bossman, nobody

drc2 wrote:

bossman, nobody expects you to grow a conscience.  You are posted as a prime example of the pathology, and the shame will be felt by others more than by you, of course.  But, if it helps in the privacy of your "soul," you do help us understand the problem even if only to show others not to go there.  The ugliness of your posts speaks with a moral eloquence that others get even if you are totally oblivioius.  You may save another from following you down that dark hole.

But, if you do find a conscience and get a visit from one of Dicken's ghosts, we will still be here and will be glad to hear from you.  Otherwise, expect to be used for consumer warnings and held in shame.  It is the best we can do with your stuff, sort of like composting it.

I have a conscience And dickens ghosts Will not visit me because i give to charities to help those in need. My problem is the government forcing me to support the undeserving.

workingman
workingman's picture
jan in iowa wrote: workingman

jan in iowa wrote:

workingman wrote:
The foundind fathers fought, bleed And died to escape a totalitarian government thst the left wants.

Besides being unable to spell..... the Founding Fathers did NOT fight against a totalitarian government.  It was a monarchy and if you bothered to READ a history book now and then you would know the difference.

I fully admit that i have typos in my posts when i post from my phone which is 95 percent of the time. the monarchy is the ultamite is totalitarian government everything in the kingdom is owned by the King you could not pick your ass with out permission from the crown.

chilidog
Art wrote: Here, here, (or is

Art wrote:

Here, here, (or is it "hear, hear")?

It is "Hear! Hear!"

In the U.K. Parliament they use the Latin "Oye! Oye!"

I actually notice that more people on the web are using the proper spelling in this regard.

Now "lose" and "loose" is another matter altogether.  It makes my head explode when I read it.

workingman
workingman's picture
Laborisgood wrote: workingman

Laborisgood wrote:

workingman wrote:

douglaslee wrote:

Live and let live is now live and let die, or with regard to healthcare,  live and kill. To have and have not, is now to have and deny. To deny is to kill. Jesus told the story of the Samaritan. A Jew in trouble in the mountains dividing Judea and a hated [by Judeans] Samarita. Disabled on the trail, and with no cell phone, he sought help from a rabbi passing by, was snubbed. Next try was with a Jewish Bishop figure [ranks within Jewish faith are equivalent to Catholic, but like Navy vs Marines, different titles*] who snubbed him as well. In danger of imminent death from dehydration a passing Samaritan, the dreaded enemy, stopped, rehydrated him, pitched a stretcher carriage to his camel, and saved his life. The Good Samaritan was a better person than his own kind.

The story is a rough version, and the *military comparison was intentional.

Did the government force him to save his hated enemy? The government is forcing the tax payer to others.

I believe the point is we shouldn't have to be coerced into helping others, but with people like Bossman, it is essential because the "Bossmans" of the world prefer to leave others on the side of the road.

In my world you would be free to help him if you choose to. In liberal land the government is forcing you to if he deserves it or not

Bush_Wacker
Bush_Wacker's picture
workingman wrote: Laborisgood

workingman wrote:

Laborisgood wrote:

workingman wrote:

douglaslee wrote:

Live and let live is now live and let die, or with regard to healthcare,  live and kill. To have and have not, is now to have and deny. To deny is to kill. Jesus told the story of the Samaritan. A Jew in trouble in the mountains dividing Judea and a hated [by Judeans] Samarita. Disabled on the trail, and with no cell phone, he sought help from a rabbi passing by, was snubbed. Next try was with a Jewish Bishop figure [ranks within Jewish faith are equivalent to Catholic, but like Navy vs Marines, different titles*] who snubbed him as well. In danger of imminent death from dehydration a passing Samaritan, the dreaded enemy, stopped, rehydrated him, pitched a stretcher carriage to his camel, and saved his life. The Good Samaritan was a better person than his own kind.

The story is a rough version, and the *military comparison was intentional.

Did the government force him to save his hated enemy? The government is forcing the tax payer to others.

I believe the point is we shouldn't have to be coerced into helping others, but with people like Bossman, it is essential because the "Bossmans" of the world prefer to leave others on the side of the road.

In my world you would be free to help him if you choose to. In liberal land the government is forcing you to if he deserves it or not

You act as if paying taxes is a huge, monumental task at which the taxpayer is so unfairly supressed.  Our tax rates are nothing compared to most of the world.  On top of that you have the most beautiful and sought out country in the world from which to live in.  You are living the American dream that billions savour.  You pay such a small price for the priviledge and yet you constantly complain about taxes and what they are used for.  You demand your cake and eat it too.  Why must you judge the poor and downtrodden while idolising the rich and arrogant?  You demonize union workers because they make "too much money" for what they do but constantly complain that you don't have enough.  Conservatives make no sense to me.

Art
Art's picture
Quote:In my world you would

Quote:
In my world you would be free to help him if you choose to. In liberal land the government is forcing you to if he deserves it or not
Pretty off the mark. In America, even Doctors are not required to offer assistance in a situation like this. But, if nobody is, then at least they are not left to die. I personally think I like it that way. 

workingman
workingman's picture
Art wrote: Quote:In my world

Art wrote:

Quote:
In my world you would be free to help him if you choose to. In liberal land the government is forcing you to if he deserves it or not
Pretty off the mark. In America, even Doctors are not required to offer assistance in a situation like this. But, if nobody is, then at least they are not left to die. I personally think I like it that way. 

If the government does not force people to assist others what do you call welfare?

Art
Art's picture
Quote:If the government does

Quote:
If the government does not force people to assist others what do you call welfare?
Uhh, I think it's called "welfare". Perhaps "public assistance" sometimes. The only thing Government forces you to do is to pay your taxes. You don't get to decide which of your tax dollars go to who except when you cast your vote. Please tell me that you already understand this.