At what point in your life did you decide it is ok to steal money from complete strangers?

I ask this because it seems to me that you require complete strangers to fund your lives. It has become your expectation of those people who have studied in school, worked hard, taken risks, and become successful.

We need welfare or they'll start taking the money themselves (i.e. robberies) more than they already do. You think if we just cut the gravy train off they'd all suddenly want to get jobs and become upstanding citizens?

Prozactly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We need welfare or they'll start taking the money
> themselves (i.e. robberies) more than they already
> do. You think if we just cut the gravy train off
> they'd all suddenly want to get jobs and become
> upstanding citizens?


True, but that's where my 2nd Amendment rights would be exercised and I defend my home because I felt like the safety of my family was in jeopardy.

gimme mo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At what point in your life did you decide it is ok
> to steal money from complete strangers?
>
> I ask this because it seems to me that you require
> complete strangers to fund your lives. It has
> become your expectation of those people who have
> studied in school, worked hard, taken risks, and
> become successful.

I pretty sure it was right after you started raping animals and children before killing them. Your parents would be so proud if your father had not killed and eaten your mother before being executed by the state.

gimme mo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At what point in your life did you decide it is ok
> to steal money from complete strangers?
>
> I ask this because it seems to me that you require
> complete strangers to fund your lives. It has
> become your expectation of those people who have
> studied in school, worked hard, taken risks, and
> become successful.


So how much did the last president cut the debt?

gimme mo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At what point in your life did you decide it is ok
> to steal money from complete strangers?
>
> I ask this because it seems to me that you require
> complete strangers to fund your lives. It has
> become your expectation of those people who have
> studied in school, worked hard, taken risks, and
> become successful.


So you ant NO taxes?
Anything less would be stealing right?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Did gimme mo say they wanted no taxes? No, they didn't. You misrepresent their argument, so you can attack the straw man you've created.

There's a difference between taxing to pay for things like the common defense or roads and taxing to take money from some people to fund the lives of other people. Our system is predicated on the former, and is being destroyed by the latter.

Honestly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Did gimme mo say they wanted no taxes? No, they
> didn't. You misrepresent their argument, so you
> can attack the straw man you've created.
>
> There's a difference between taxing to pay for
> things like the common defense or roads and taxing
> to take money from some people to fund the lives
> of other people. Our system is predicated on the
> former, and is being destroyed by the latter.

Do any government programs make your life better / easier?
If so would those programs be the latter as well
My point is that people like gov spending that helps them, other folks not so much
At least be honest

Honestly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Did gimme mo say they wanted no taxes? No, they
> didn't. You misrepresent their argument, so you
> can attack the straw man you've created.
>
> There's a difference between taxing to pay for
> things like the common defense or roads and taxing
> to take money from some people to fund the lives
> of other people. Our system is predicated on the
> former, and is being destroyed by the latter.

So RepubliTerds would support cutting $3 Billion in annual US Tax payer funded aid to fund the lives of Israelis stealing land from poor Palestinians, killing their children, and sucking the marrow from the bones of their dead babies?

gimme mo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At what point in your life did you decide it is ok
> to steal money from complete strangers?
>
> I ask this because it seems to me that you require
> complete strangers to fund your lives. It has
> become your expectation of those people who have
> studied in school, worked hard, taken risks, and
> become successful.

Thats funny. I'm an electrical engineer and my wife is a published bio-med researcher in the field of muscle regeneration via nanotech. We both vote democrat. Last I checked all the red retard states in the south are the ones with the worst poverty and welfare. Feel free to go there and join your brethren.

Me mofo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Honestly Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Did gimme mo say they wanted no taxes? No, they
> > didn't. You misrepresent their argument, so you
> > can attack the straw man you've created.
> >
> > There's a difference between taxing to pay for
> > things like the common defense or roads and
> taxing
> > to take money from some people to fund the
> lives
> > of other people. Our system is predicated on
> the
> > former, and is being destroyed by the latter.
>
> Do any government programs make your life better /
> easier?
> If so would those programs be the latter as well
> My point is that people like gov spending that
> helps them, other folks not so much
> At least be honest

No answer?

yes, it happened.
Attachments:

Think before you vote next time.
Attachments:

Your answer is..... libs hate America.
libs are not American.
Hillary said it best. Businesses don't create jobs.
What does? This is America. Nothing else than businesses are supposed to create jobs.

Free market and fuck you libs!

Jobs predate taxes, thats it, I Win. Govt. and taxes dont create jobs, they kill empires, kinda like Obama.

True The Vote ! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jobs predate taxes, thats it, I Win.

Thank you for totally undermining Trickle Down Economic theory in one sentence.
No need to reduce taxes - because job creation predates taxes.

No need for corporate welfare, corporate subsidies, or corporate tax breaks - because job creation predates taxes.

Proof: The decade of Bush temporary tax cuts for the wealthy predated the Great Republican Recession in which millions of jobs were lost. After the temporary Bush cuts were canceled millions of jobs were created.

True the Vote places in Nobel Prize contest.
Attachments:

Not a legitimate question. Simply a rant against the idea that government should play a role in providing a safety net.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not a legitimate question. Simply a rant against
> the idea that government should play a role in
> providing a safety net.

Not true.

It was asking at what point Libturdz on here decided to drink the "you owe me" kool-aid

lsdfjhfjh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not true.
>
> It was asking at what point Libturdz on here
> decided to drink the "you owe me" kool-aid

I think it's more about Christian Values - believing in, and being willing to, fund a Government safety net for those less fortunate. Like the collection plate, food drives, and charity drives we have at our Church.

I guess if you don't believe in God, or Jesus, or helping your fellow man, or equality and justice for all - voting for Republicans, hating others, and going to Hell doesn't bother you.

Suit yourself. It is a free country. The fires of Hell need fresh evil souls to keep the Devil warm.

John 3:16 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I think it's more about Christian Values -
> believing in, and being willing to, fund a
> Government safety net for those less fortunate.
> Like the collection plate, food drives, and
> charity drives we have at our Church.
>
> I guess if you don't believe in God, or Jesus, or
> helping your fellow man, or equality and justice
> for all - voting for Republicans, hating others,
> and going to Hell doesn't bother you.
>
> Suit yourself. It is a free country. The fires of
> Hell need fresh evil souls to keep the Devil warm.


I understand your point but we do live in a country that has freedom of (and from) religion. And, a collection plate is optional. You said "willing" to fund. Note here, there is no option. Your money is taken from you.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not a legitimate question. Simply a rant against
> the idea that government should play a role in
> providing a safety net.


A hundred weeks of unemployment or a lifetime of food stamps and subsidized rent is not playing a role, Bill.

It's leading cattle to slaughter.

3ucEn
Attachments:

Well the Dems have given their base tax-payer funded phones......
Attachments:

gimme mo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At what point in your life did you decide it is ok
> to steal money from complete strangers?
>
> I ask this because it seems to me that you require
> complete strangers to fund your lives. It has
> become your expectation of those people who have
> studied in school, worked hard, taken risks, and
> become successful.

UR an idiot; clearly too stupid to live.

Kill yourself. Now.

John 3:16 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> lsdfjhfjh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Not true.
> >
> > It was asking at what point Libturdz on here
> > decided to drink the "you owe me" kool-aid
>
> I think it's more about Christian Values -
> believing in, and being willing to, fund a
> Government safety net for those less fortunate.
> Like the collection plate, food drives, and
> charity drives we have at our Church.
>
> I guess if you don't believe in God, or Jesus, or
> helping your fellow man, or equality and justice
> for all - voting for Republicans, hating others,
> and going to Hell doesn't bother you.
>
> Suit yourself. It is a free country. The fires of
> Hell need fresh evil souls to keep the Devil warm.

Giving is a Christian value. Forcing people to give is not. That's one of many ideas selflessness that liberals completely fail to comprehend.

Backwards Billy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Giving is a Christian value. Forcing people to
> give is not. That's one of many ideas selflessness
> that liberals completely fail to comprehend.

Giving is a Christian value and that was my brothers point when he wrote that above. But my brother weren't talking about forcing people to give nothing.

He was saying that voting a small tax to help poor folks so they can buy some food from the farmers market or groceries at the store, or voting a bond to help get some heating oil into their house during the cold, or a shelter spot in a jam, is a voluntary act of Christianity. Ain't nobody putting a gun to your head in that voting booth. Just you, God, and your conscience - if you got one.

Sure would lighten the load our church carries with our meal-a-day plan, clothing drives, and shelter ride program. We don't get enough people or money to meet most folks needs, especially with the Holidays and winter coming along.

Seems selfish and un-Chritian not to vote to help your own community when lots of us are chipping in more than our fair share. Hard enough taking care of our own folks as it is.

For one month of your rich folks cable tv or wifi internet you could feed a family for a week. Seems a small tax on stuff like that to feed others ain't that bad an idea. Mostly commercials on there for stuff nobody needs anyhow.

Not preaching. Like I said nobody has a gun to your head.

John 3:16 from Luray Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Backwards Billy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Giving is a Christian value. Forcing people to
> > give is not. That's one of many ideas
> selflessness
> > that liberals completely fail to comprehend.
>
> Giving is a Christian value and that was my
> brothers point when he wrote that above. But my
> brother weren't talking about forcing people to
> give nothing.
>
> He was saying that voting a small tax to help poor
> folks so they can buy some food from the farmers
> market or groceries at the store, or voting a bond
> to help get some heating oil into their house
> during the cold, or a shelter spot in a jam, is a
> voluntary act of Christianity. Ain't nobody
> putting a gun to your head in that voting booth.
> Just you, God, and your conscience - if you got
> one.
>
> Sure would lighten the load our church carries
> with our meal-a-day plan, clothing drives, and
> shelter ride program. We don't get enough people
> or money to meet most folks needs, especially with
> the Holidays and winter coming along.
>
> Seems selfish and un-Chritian not to vote to help
> your own community when lots of us are chipping in
> more than our fair share. Hard enough taking care
> of our own folks as it is.
>
> For one month of your rich folks cable tv or wifi
> internet you could feed a family for a week. Seems
> a small tax on stuff like that to feed others
> ain't that bad an idea. Mostly commercials on
> there for stuff nobody needs anyhow.
>
> Not preaching. Like I said nobody has a gun to
> your head.

Yup, you missed the point. You're talking about a vote to force someone else to give. If you feel compelled to help your neighbor, great. Most of of us would and already do the same. But voting for a government program that forces everyone else to pay is not, in my eyes, a selfless or Christian act.

Your opinion. So how come they can take my hard earned tax money and give it to rich oil companies that got more than their fair share instead of those that really have the real need without my vote? Answer me that.

@Vexxxed-There is a big difference between arguing, as the OP is, that the government should not be involved in providing a safety net, and arguing that the existing safety net provided needs to be reformed. I disagree with the first position, but agree with the second.

John 3:16 from Luray Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your opinion. So how come they can take my hard
> earned tax money and give it to rich oil companies
> that got more than their fair share instead of
> those that really have the real need without my
> vote? Answer me that.

What is the profit margin of oil companies? Look it up if you want but I will answer it for you. It's around 6%. Apple makes about 30% (maybe more). You bash the oil companies because they sell world-wide in bulk and make a very slender profit margin...and they employ people and keep people in cars driving, which leads to more federal taxes collected (per gallon) and local taxes collected (per gallon) and personal property taxes for automobiles. See, the government makes their money back in a huge way.

We can take away any and all subsidies to all companies. But that would lead to higher prices for their goods.

Shanaynay and Trailer Park Billy Bob on the other hand...they serve no purpose beyond some basic sales tax revenue.

Exxon/Mobil made $44.9 Billion in profit in 2012.
Shell made $28 Billion in profit in 2012.

The Government gave them both tax breaks.

jsdgefjefjk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John 3:16 from Luray Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Your opinion. So how come they can take my hard
> > earned tax money and give it to rich oil
> companies
> > that got more than their fair share instead of
> > those that really have the real need without my
> > vote? Answer me that.
>
> What is the profit margin of oil companies? Look
> it up if you want but I will answer it for you.
> It's around 6%. Apple makes about 30% (maybe
> more). You bash the oil companies because they
> sell world-wide in bulk and make a very slender
> profit margin...and they employ people and keep
> people in cars driving, which leads to more
> federal taxes collected (per gallon) and local
> taxes collected (per gallon) and personal property
> taxes for automobiles. See, the government makes
> their money back in a huge way.
>
> We can take away any and all subsidies to all
> companies. But that would lead to higher prices
> for their goods.
>
> Shanaynay and Trailer Park Billy Bob on the other
> hand...they serve no purpose beyond some basic
> sales tax revenue.

Look at the countries without a social safety net
Its not pretty......West Africa
So there is benefit to helping the poor

John 3:16 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Exxon/Mobil made $44.9 Billion in profit in 2012.
> Shell made $28 Billion in profit in 2012.
>
> The Government gave them both tax breaks.

In gross terms that's an enormous profit. But in relative terms it's not as impressive as it sounds. Do you have any comprehension of the enormous amounts of capital at risk to produce those profits? Do you understand how much trial and error there is in finding profitable wells? Do you really understand the "tax breaks" offered to energy companies? Do you know how many people are employed by oil companies? Of course not, because it takes actual thinking. Just keep repeating the broken record of the fear mongerers.

jsdgefjefjk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John 3:16 from Luray Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Your opinion. So how come they can take my hard
> > earned tax money and give it to rich oil
> companies
> > that got more than their fair share instead of
> > those that really have the real need without my
> > vote? Answer me that.
>
> What is the profit margin of oil companies? Look
> it up if you want but I will answer it for you.
> It's around 6%. Apple makes about 30% (maybe
> more). You bash the oil companies because they
> sell world-wide in bulk and make a very slender
> profit margin...and they employ people and keep
> people in cars driving, which leads to more
> federal taxes collected (per gallon) and local
> taxes collected (per gallon) and personal property
> taxes for automobiles. See, the government makes
> their money back in a huge way.
>
> We can take away any and all subsidies to all
> companies. But that would lead to higher prices
> for their goods.
>
> Shanaynay and Trailer Park Billy Bob on the other
> hand...they serve no purpose beyond some basic
> sales tax revenue.


John 3:16, you missed the point of this post. Let me put it in 2nd grade terms for you. If you sell something and make $1 profit, you have $1 profit. If you sell 6 billion of those things at $1 profit each, you will have $6 billion.

Oil company profit margins are very low. They just happen to sell to the entire planet and, therefore, make many sales and many dollars.

Do you comprehend it now?
.

Not exactly that simple Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John 3:16 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Exxon/Mobil made $44.9 Billion in profit in
> 2012.
> > Shell made $28 Billion in profit in 2012.
> >
> > The Government gave them both tax breaks.
>
> In gross terms that's an enormous profit. But in
> relative terms it's not as impressive as it
> sounds. Do you have any comprehension of the
> enormous amounts of capital at risk to produce
> those profits? Do you understand how much trial
> and error there is in finding profitable wells? Do
> you really understand the "tax breaks" offered to
> energy companies? Do you know how many people are
> employed by oil companies? Of course not, because
> it takes actual thinking. Just keep repeating the
> broken record of the fear mongerers.

Do you really understand that "profit" is cold hard cash that's left over at the end of the day after they've paid enormous sums for R&D and all their employees?

I understand your point. However, the tax breaks guarantee at least a break even for oil companies. Why can't all businesses get that? Why is it only the monopolies that the people really have no choice in dealing with?

gimme mo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At what point in your life did you decide it is ok
> to steal money from complete strangers?
>
> I ask this because it seems to me that you require
> complete strangers to fund your lives. It has
> become your expectation of those people who have
> studied in school, worked hard, taken risks, and
> become successful.

At what point in your life did you start to think that a deliberately obnoxious political troll post was a legitimate question?

jdfghrfuh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John 3:16, you missed the point of this post. Let
> me put it in 2nd grade terms for you. If you sell
> something and make $1 profit, you have $1 profit.
> If you sell 6 billion of those things at $1 profit
> each, you will have $6 billion.
>
> Oil company profit margins are very low. They just
> happen to sell to the entire planet and,
> therefore, make many sales and many dollars.
>
> Do you comprehend it now?
> .

2nd grade terms huh? Aren't you the clever one with a nasty streak.

Like I don't know what a profit is. Need be I reckon I can turn one faster than you can turn a hot screw into wet mud.

Big oil companies are the most profitable corporations on the planet. Some have more profits than many countries have GDP. Thats documented fact, kindergarten through college. They pay a lot of taxes too I grant you. But you gotta admit even after the IRS takes their pound of flesh, those oil companies still got more profits than you can shake a stick at.

Do you comprehend that at some point oil companies got enough profit that they don't need a tax break anymore?

Maybe there is a point when the oil company has enough profits that its time starving people deserve a meal.

Maybe the greedy people at the oil company aren't the right ones to say when that point is, especially if the choice is more in their stuffed pocket or food in an empty belly.

You may have read the bible. Do you comprehend it smarty pants?

John 3:16 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> blah, blah, blah

You write like a 70 year old. It's sad that an old crazy person is on FFU lecturing someone on anything. Your time is over grandpa. Die and stop taking our money for your social security. No offense.

John 3:16

You're right. All corporate "welfare" should end. With that comes higher prices for you and me. If corporate "welfare" ends, so should individual welfare. The people getting welfare aren't creating jobs so the welfare going to them is nothing more than a handout to people who refuse to work at a job they feel that they deserve.

I'll make sure to call Barry and his cronies to let them know how you feel. I'm sure they will listen to your demands.

jkldgergyf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John 3:16
>
> You're right. All corporate "welfare" should end.
> With that comes higher prices for you and me. If
> corporate "welfare" ends, so should individual
> welfare. The people getting welfare aren't
> creating jobs so the welfare going to them is
> nothing more than a handout to people who refuse
> to work at a job they feel that they deserve.
>
> I'll make sure to call Barry and his cronies to
> let them know how you feel. I'm sure they will
> listen to your demands.

Refuse to work?
How do you know that?
Corperations pushed for the illegals so they could pay less for work.

jkldgergyf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John 3:16
>
> You're right. All corporate "welfare" should end.
> With that comes higher prices for you and me. If
> corporate "welfare" ends, so should individual
> welfare. The people getting welfare aren't
> creating jobs so the welfare going to them is
> nothing more than a handout to people who refuse
> to work at a job they feel that they deserve.
>
> I'll make sure to call Barry and his cronies to
> let them know how you feel. I'm sure they will
> listen to your demands.


We first must get back the welfare handed out by Obama to "green" companies that failed.
.
Attachments:

jkldgergyf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John 3:16
>
> You're right. All corporate "welfare" should end.
> With that comes higher prices for you and me. If
> corporate "welfare" ends, so should individual
> welfare. The people getting welfare aren't
> creating jobs so the welfare going to them is
> nothing more than a handout to people who refuse
> to work at a job they feel that they deserve.
>
> I'll make sure to call Barry and his cronies to
> let them know how you feel. I'm sure they will
> listen to your demands.

It will raise prices OR compinanies can take less profit.
If we had true competition then the market would decide which it would be.

Oh and which gov benefits are you willing to give up?

Capitalism? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> If we had true competition then the market would
> decide which it would be.


That's not how Obama views it. He gave a ton of our tax dollars to failed/failing "green" companies.

So this contradicts the true capitalism argument but we need to invest in future technology

We had many failures in the space program but the successes changed the world.

Future Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So this contradicts the true capitalism argument
> but we need to invest in future technology
>
> We had many failures in the space program but the
> successes changed the world.

I agree with you. But John 3:16 seems to think that corporate welfare should end. If it ends for one, it needs to end for all.

jkfghrf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Future Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So this contradicts the true capitalism
> argument
> > but we need to invest in future technology
> >
> > We had many failures in the space program but
> the
> > successes changed the world.
>
> I agree with you. But John 3:16 seems to think
> that corporate welfare should end. If it ends for
> one, it needs to end for all.


So maybe we review corporate "welfare" and keep what makes sense and end what doesn't
This was done with welfare with Clinton and Newt

jkfghrf Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree with you. But John 3:16 seems to think
> that corporate welfare should end. If it ends for
> one, it needs to end for all.

Well there you go again putting words in my mouth with your "John 3:16 seems to think" stuff. You on the marijuana cause your eyes are reading words I never wrote.

I asked asked if there is a point when the oil company has got enough profit they don't need a tax break no more?

I asked if there is a point when the oil company has enough profits that its time to spend the rest on people who need a meal or a hand up?

I asked if maybe the greedy people at the oil company are the right ones to say when that point is, especially if the choice is more in their stuffed pocket or food in an empty belly?

Didn't never say I was for or against anything other than maybe people being good Christians and voting for a tax to feed the poor or help folks in a bad fix.

Didn't never say nothing about no corporate welfare neither.

My daddy made me promise to never take a nickel I didn't work for myself. Never have. Never will.

I'd as sure naw the bark off a rabid dog before I was to ever take a lick of Government assistance money and have the Revenue agents take my family property.

Bipartisan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> So maybe we review corporate "welfare" and keep
> what makes sense and end what doesn't
> This was done with welfare with Clinton and Newt

I am curious what your idea is of "makes sense"

Does it make sense to take away corporate welfare from companies with low profit margins, take on a lot of risk in research and development, and employ lots of people?

Does it make sense to take away corporate welfare from companies with high profit margins?

Does it make sense for the government to give money to "green" companies (which hasn't worked so far) where the founders of those companies are financial supporters in politicians' runs for office?

Just trying to get an idea of what people consider to be reasonable and what they think "makes sense".

John 3:16 from Luray Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your opinion. So how come they can take my hard
> earned tax money and give it to rich oil companies
> that got more than their fair share instead of
> those that really have the real need without my
> vote? Answer me that.

I would assume it's for the same reason that my money goes to welfare programs without my vote.

John 3:16 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------


> Didn't never say I was for or against anything
> other than maybe people being good Christians and
> voting for a tax to feed the poor or help folks in
> a bad fix.

From the Christian Bible:


Proverbs 13:4
The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing, while the soul of the diligent is richly supplied.

2 Thessalonians
For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.


Proverbs 12:24
The hand of the diligent will rule, while the slothful will be put to forced labor.

making sense Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bipartisan Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > So maybe we review corporate "welfare" and keep
> > what makes sense and end what doesn't
> > This was done with welfare with Clinton and
> Newt
>
> I am curious what your idea is of "makes sense"
>
> Does it make sense to take away corporate welfare
> from companies with low profit margins, take on a
> lot of risk in research and development, and
> employ lots of people?
>
> Does it make sense to take away corporate welfare
> from companies with high profit margins?
>
> Does it make sense for the government to give
> money to "green" companies (which hasn't worked so
> far) where the founders of those companies are
> financial supporters in politicians' runs for
> office?
>
> Just trying to get an idea of what people consider
> to be reasonable and what they think "makes
> sense".


So you would have to look at the benefits of each.
What make sense to me may not to you but if we can each have solid reasons then hopefully there would be a consensious, compromise maybe
Hence why I mentioned Clinton and Newt
Two very different ideas but in the end worked something out that they thought would move the country forward.
Or we could just yell at each other and all just be miserable

Bipartisan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Or we could just yell at each other and all just
> be miserable

Welcome to FfxU lol

jkefjhfgj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> John 3:16 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
>
> > Didn't never say I was for or against anything
> > other than maybe people being good Christians
> and
> > voting for a tax to feed the poor or help folks
> in
> > a bad fix.
>
> From the Christian Bible:
>
>
> Proverbs 13:4
> The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing,
> while the soul of the diligent is richly
> supplied.
>
> 2 Thessalonians
> For even when we were with you, we would give you
> this command: If anyone is not willing to work,
> let him not eat.
>
>
> Proverbs 12:24
> The hand of the diligent will rule, while the
> slothful will be put to forced labor.


What you do to the least of us you do to me
Or something like that

Not a noble expert Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> What you do to the least of us you do to me
> Or something like that

"Jesus" never expected a handout and sure as heck didn't steal from some to give to others.

He did, however, turn water into wine. And that's why I'm leaving in 20 minutes to go have a few glasses of wine with dinner at Coastal Flats.

jkefjhfgj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> From the Christian Bible:
>
>
> Proverbs 13:4
> The soul of the sluggard craves and gets nothing,
> while the soul of the diligent is richly
> supplied.
>
> 2 Thessalonians
> For even when we were with you, we would give you
> this command: If anyone is not willing to work,
> let him not eat.
>
>
> Proverbs 12:24
> The hand of the diligent will rule, while the
> slothful will be put to forced labor.

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.