What prevents liberals from seeing truth?

[futurecurrents]

Tell that to the people who survived Katrina and Sandy....... Local churches and charities were the only people on the ground with aid for days. Ever hear of a thing called the Red Cross?

I live in Oklahoma, we were devastated by Tornadoes this year...... the State and Federal gov's did their jobs in securing the areas, providing low interest funding for folks without insurance, FEMA type aid in that fashion... but nearly all the hands on help, aid, food, clothing ect... came from private and religious charity groups.

Private charity can't even keep up with the food stamp cuts. Meals on wheels is now delivering fewer meals because of it and private donations are not making up the difference.

Yes private charity like the Red Cross can work very well in some cases. Absolutely. But they are simply inadequate for the larger nationwide and constant need social safety net things like food stamps etc.

 

[Spike Trader]

No question that conservatives are stupider and more ignorant than liberals. This has been shown by multiple studies.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The National Republican Congressional Committee is doubling down on its use of websites that appear to be in support of Democratic House candidates but actually direct money to the Republican campaign effort. However, the NRCC said it would give refunds to donors who were confused or misled and contributed to the organization inadvertently.

The Tampa Bay Times reported Monday that Ray Bellamy, a doctor from Tallahassee, had asked for a refund from the NRCC for the $250 he donated through a website which he thought would help Democrat Alex Sink. He claimed that the NRCC had denied his request.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/03/republican-website-donations_n_4719196.html

 

[Lucrum]

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1) That participation in the Program would be
completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary

2) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
On the first $90,000.

3) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible

4) That the money the participants put in went to the
Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
General Operating Fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and spent.

5) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away -- you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
General Fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically
controlled House and Senate.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That's right!

Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!

------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- ---------

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans
want to take your Social Security away!

 

[Scataphagos]

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1) That participation in the Program would be
completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary

2) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
On the first $90,000.

3) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible

4) That the money the participants put in went to the
Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
General Operating Fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and spent.

5) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away -- you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
General Fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically
controlled House and Senate.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: That's right!

Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!

------------ -- ------------ --------- ----- ------------ --------- ---------

Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans
want to take your Social Security away!

The DemoCraps (Socialist/Communist) have an agenda. "The end justifies the means" in their eyes. Lies wherever necessary.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Private charity can't even keep up with the food stamp cuts. Meals on wheels is now delivering fewer meals because of it and private donations are not making up the difference.

Yes private charity like the Red Cross can work very well in some cases. Absolutely. But they are simply inadequate for the larger nationwide and constant need social safety net things like food stamps etc.

Private charity would increase if people were allowed to keep more of what they earned for themselves.

 

[Tsing Tao]

The Federal government, while not perfect, is the best most practical way to get aid to the needy in a practical universal fashion. Private charity doesn't come near enough and anyone who thinks churches and private charity is enough is dreaming. States are no more efficient and are probably more corrupt than the fed. Government is not inherently good or bad. For citizens. Of course the corporations that want no regulations think otherwise.

Sorry, the State governments are better and more practical. The states have their own vested interest at heart. To believe the Federal Government is run by some bureaucrats who have this benevolent view towards the states is asinine. They want a power grab, nothing more.

 

[Scataphagos]

Sorry, the State governments are better and more practical. The states have their own vested interest at heart. To believe the Federal Government is run by some bureaucrats who have this benevolent view towards the states is asinine. They want a power grab, nothing more.

CORRECTAMUNDO! The Founders recognized this with their emphasis on "STATE rights and controls".

 

[Wallet]

Private charity can't even keep up with the food stamp cuts. Meals on wheels is now delivering fewer meals because of it and private donations are not making up the difference.

Yes private charity like the Red Cross can work very well in some cases. Absolutely. But they are simply inadequate for the larger nationwide and constant need social safety net things like food stamps etc.

If the Government is so efficient why does private charity even exist? Your mixing entitlement with charity, The Government would do better spending it's money getting people off the tit, building their lives demanding they learn a trade and let local charity take care of the needy.

Where I live almost all the local churches combine to supply a local food and clothing bank, next town over a large Baptist church operates a free medical clinic, comparable to any doctors office in the city, x-ray, diagnostic, etc.. Local churches partner with the YMCA to provide after-hours child services for the school district. My Church has a large life-center (gymnasium and kitchen) which is opened and used by the local authorities (staffed by volunteers) whenever there's an emergency or natural disaster in the area.

I don't know where you live, or how involved you are in your community, but around here, folks take care of each other.

Oh, btw..... if you were to look at your political maps you'd see Oklahoma is about as red and conservative as a state can be. All the outpouring of charitable work is done by a populace that's overwhelmingly religiously right winged.

 

[Tsing Tao]

I don't know where you live, or how involved you are in your community, but around here, folks take care of each other.

Liberals don't typically support the poor. They want you to.

 

[stu]

you seem to equate charity and charitable works with paying massive taxes to a large govt which is morphing into a fascist state.

The Bible Jesus story is set in a time when a massive non democratic imperial govt ruled. So in that regard, and others , it was as bad as fascist, and gave most people no say or voting rights at all.

Yet the Jesus model, the model which those who call themselves Christians keep leaning their personal moral standings against, clearly requires both symbolically and literally, to sell all their belongings and give it to the poor. That is what exactly ? It certainly isn't Conservative. Is it Libtard?

to your point...
Jesus said to the rich man (who stated he was following all the commandments) ... if they wilt be perfect sell everything and follow me. And, just like when he taught about rich men and camels going through the eye the needle... the point of the message was explained to the apostles.

Yes, it is explained quite clearly by the Jesus dude. In order to enter the kingdom of god (whatever that might be), amongst other things....

....Jesus says to sell all you have and distribute it unto the poor.....

Here is the message...
Putting faith in his own works such as following your following all the commandments is futile... it is impossible to get to heaven (or close to impossible) based on mans works or the sum his deeds because they fall short
But, with God grace and all things are possible.

....while you say, it's futile to do what Jesus says. Don't fancy your chances much with that kingdom of god.

Now you do not have believe the message or the messenger... but lets stop with the ridiculous rewrites.

Yes, do stop trying to rewrite and re-interpret everything out of all reason.

Not sure why you should expect to be able to elect honest and competent people in govt when all you want to do is hypocritically find reason to not act according to what you set up to be your own moral standards - the Jesus model.

But I'm not surprised. As a Christian you constantly need to rewrite Bible Jesus. He makes Che Guevara look like a Tea-publican.