Democrats are hypocrites

[tampa]

Quote from TGregg:



Wow, dunno how you can be a success as a trader without a fundamental understanding of free markets. I mean, this is a no-brainer, big time.

Imagine a society that says transportation should be free to all. I realize this causes a conflict in the liberals heart, a free thing, but one that benefits big companies. . . and it's way past me bedtime.

Anyway, imagine what happens to this Utopia? The feds fix the rate that they will pay for gas, and if you don't like it, tough luck. What do you think happens to supply? Do you understand how price restrictions increase demand? It's hard to believe, but my opinion of you Tampa has dropped even lower.

Dude, I can't see how you can be a successful trader when you see things that ain't on the chart - so to speak. Guaranteed health coverage is not "free coverage". Perchance I lack a fundamental understanding of free markets, as you say. But you my friend do indeed lack a fundamental understanding of what has been proposed - either because you ain't too swift, or because you don't want to understand.

On another mattwer - how will I ever be able to live with myself knowing that you think even less of me.

 

[tampa]

Quote from Pabst:

Guy's there's no reason that in this new age era of global prosperity that we can't have it all. I too want to be an idealist! Count me in. Let's get our slice of the PIE !!

Congress shall neither infringe nor underfund: The right to a free education, lunch, books, and transportation from K3 through post graduate studies. The right to free Universal healthcare, including abortions, prescription drugs, mental health therapy, and botox shall be provided for all citizens and illegal immigrants. No state may pass a law calling for the incarceration of a convicted felon. Congress must pass by a two-thirds super majority any tax decrease that allows the rich or working middle class to not work six months per year as serfs for Federal, state, and local Governments. The right to free, regulated energy, except for SUV owners, shall not be abridged. All members of the Global community shall be allowed to live in these United States, but no corporation may export a job overseas. The second amendment is hereby repealed, all militia will now be sanctioned only by the U.N., and of course gun-ownership need not be banned, since before the passage of this amendment, all firearms manufactures will be sued out of existence and their executives enslaved to Louis Farrakhan.

Pabst, does it make you feel better to pretend that folks with whom you disagree say things that they never said?

It sure is a lot easier then dealing with what has been said, ain't it?

 

[Doubter]

Give me a fucking break. How dare you call me ignorant. You are a cheap, ugly little man, without an ounce of compassion, but a ton of worthless excuses to deny decent hard working Americans health coverage.________________________________________

After many years working and living among the third world poor I guess you better educate me on what compassion really is.

After years of experience what you are proposing starts a "cycle of dependency" that I have seen as devastating to the poor. What I have spent years working on are innovative self help ideas that do not create a "cycle of dependency" but build self esteem and independence that are lasting and sustainable. The liberal template is to just throw someone else's money at the problem and then feel good. If you are truly compassionate then get personally involved and put your own rescources into it like many others are doing instead of pontificating.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

The thing that annoys me about guys like tampa is they act like we aren't spending any money now on the "poor." We have had this so-called War On Poverty now for like 37 years and all we hear is "send more money." Six months in Iraq and they are ready to turn tail and hand it over to the French.

Liberals measure progress by how much money the government can seize and spend. Their one aim in life is to spend other people's money on their pet projects. For once, it would be refreshing if they looked with an objective eye at the RESULTS of these massive programs.

1. War on Poverty. Colossal failure. Hundreds of billions wasted, much on administration. Minority communities that once valued education, hard work and family structure have been transformed into ghettoes of dependency characterized by failing schools and near 100% rates of illegitimacy. Obvious career paths have been reduced to two, drug dealing and welfare. If the KKK had been given carte blanche to destroy minorities, they couldn't have hoped to do such a thorough job.

2. Aid For Dependent Children. Classic feel good program. Result has been to encourage uneducated, unskilled teens to have children they can neither raise nor provide for. Guess that's our responsibility. Basic aim of program is to eliminate the stigma of illegitimacy. It's certainly accomplished that goal, at terrifying cost. All studies show the most reliable way to exit poverty is to get an education and have a stable marriage. This program undermines both.

3. HeadStart. Another program that even Republicans line up to support. If we've encouraged these poor teen moms to have children they can't possibly raise, we owe them some help, right? Despite spending enormous sums, all studies show benefits of HeadStart dissipate by third or fourth grade. Whether this is the result of abysmal governmetn schools or lack of family structure is debatable but ultimately irrelevant.

I could go on, but nobody gives a damn. Why should I? We'll continue to waste money because otherwise libs will have a fit and call everyone mean-spirited and callous. Can't have that with an election coming.

 

[AAAintheBeltway]

Quote from tampa:



... .
BTW - a system that is really designed primarily to finance religious private schools with public money is not exactly a program to "improve" public education..

Apparently one virtue that rich liberals have that neo-con Republicans lack is the desire to pay out of trheir own pockets for private education for their kids - neo-cons want me to pick up the bill.

Vouchers do two things. They give poor parents trapped in a hellhole system a lifeline to get their kids a decent education. Two, they encourage much needed competition for the public school system.

Your other "point" escapes me. Vouchers are for poor people, not rich neocon's. The fact that lib's are willing to actually pay for private schools for their own kids speaks volumes about the importance they attach to it. It is one of the few things I can think of that liberals are actually willing to spend their own money on, rather than get the government to tax others to pay for their pet projects.

 

[bungrider]

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:



Vouchers do two things. They give poor parents trapped in a hellhole system a lifeline to get their kids a decent education. Two, they encourage much needed competition for the public school system.

Your other "point" escapes me. Vouchers are for poor people, not rich neocon's. The fact that lib's are willing to actually pay for private schools for their own kids speaks volumes about the importance they attach to it. It is one of the few things I can think of that liberals are actually willing to spend their own money on, rather than get the government to tax others to pay for their pet projects.

The voucher issue is a mystery to me, in the sense of who supports it and who doesn't.

Personally, I am all for them, because they tend to work, and socially I am pretty liberal. Well, for minors, anyway.

If public schools can't be managed properly enough to provide safety and quality education, then they should be shut down and the money should be sent to an institution that can deliver.

Vouchers seem to level the playing field, IMO. And that is the basis of capitalism -- free and open playing fields.

 

[Doubter]

In an ethnic group where I lived and worked there was a government department set up to "help" these ethnic people. From the governments' own figures they put in $15,500 for every etnic family as defined by the department. Of that money only $3,400 actually got to each family. The rest was spent on bureaucracy that was made up of good, caring, concerned, high paid, do no work, liberal bureaucrats. Is this not hypocricy?

 

[Doubter]

Quote from bungrider:



The voucher issue is a mystery to me, in the sense of who supports it and who doesn't.

Personally, I am all for them, because they tend to work, and socially I am pretty liberal. Well, for minors, anyway.

If public schools can't be managed properly enough to provide safety and quality education, then they should be shut down and the money should be sent to an institution that can deliver.

Vouchers seem to level the playing field, IMO. And that is the basis of capitalism -- free and open playing fields.

_________________________________

Finally, I couldn't agree more.

 

[tampa]

Quote from Maverick74:

OK, I'll make a list. If I am missing any please free to add. By the way this list also proves a very interesting point about democrats and liberals in general. They basically live their lives like republicans but preach democratic values to win elections. Here goes the list. One more thing, I am focusing on the elite liberals and those not living on the street.

1) Liberals, especially hollywood limousine liberals say they are for the environment, yet how many of them drive gas guzzzling SUV's that get 6 miles to the gallon.

2) Liberals like the Gores and the Clintons espouse the virtues of a strong public school system yet they themselves spent thier whole life in the most expensive private schools. In Al Gore's case it was St. Albans, the most expensive in the nation.

3) Liberals say they want universal health care but not for them. No they have the money to choose any hospital or any doctor they choose. They will never be on a list with 30,000 names on it have a specialized procedure.

4) Liberals say they don't mind paying taxes, but yet some of the most famous and well known liberals set up trusts and foundations to shelter that very income from taxes. Most pay very little in tax because they can afford the best tax attorney's and tax consultants.

5) Most liberals want to abolish guns, of course don't tell that to their armed security team that patrols their private estates. And those rich liberals who don't have body guards, live in nice posh neighborhoods where security isn't a problem.

You see, they are basically republicans behind closed doors, but in public office they are liberals. But if liberals want to live like conservatives what does that say about conservative values and the conservative way of life, must be something there. Now I would love for anyone to make a list of republicans and how they live like liberals behind closed doors. Good luck.

We'll try this again - and again until you name names.

Otherwise some may think that you are just a blowhard who can't back up anything he says,

 

[axeman]

tampa: "Might you provide the names of three liberals who drive vehicles getting 6mpg? You need not list the "many" you cited, just 3 will do."


Kevin Murray - Lincoln Navigator
Richard Alarcon - Lincoln Navigator
Martha Escutia - Lincoln Navigator

Six miles per gallon may be exaggerating a bit, but them Dems are
certainly SUV driving hypocrites.


"But those concerned democrats wouldn't have such a car. In the California Senate, three democrats drive $50,000, gas guzzling (EPA 12/16 mpg city/highway) 300 hp Lincoln Navigators and one democrat drives an even more fuel thirsty (12/15 mpg) 320 hp GMC Denali making the biggest hypocrite award go to Senator Dean Florez of Shafter. The three Navigators belong to democratic state Senators Kevin Murray of Culver City, Richard Alarcon of Sun Valley and Martha Escutia of Montebello."

Source: http://www.mtdemocrat.com/display/inn_2002_columnists/Larry Weitzman/H1225_W.txt



peace

axeman