28 Reasons I’m DONE Talking To Most Of My Conservative Friends And Family Members

I’m a Southern girl. Born in the South, raised in the South, and have rarely lived anywhere BUT the South. I actually love the South. I’ll die in the South. Being a Southern girl, I have more than my share of right-wing friends, neighbors, and family members — and some of you have in recent years crossed the line into nut-jobbery.

The fact is — I love you guys and that will never change.

I’ll admit that I’m disappointed and disturbed to see intelligent and/or educated people who are willfully ignorant. But while it does change my opinion about you on some level, more than anything I’m embarrassed for you. It hurts me to see you post conspiracy theories on your Facebook timeline, only to have them debunked with a quick Snopes link. It hurts me to see you expressing unapologetic and blatant racism and ignorance. It absolutely tortures me to see you being on the wrong side of history on so many issues.

Although I’ll always love you guys, I have had to quit — for my own sanity and for the sake of our relationships — attempting to engage in intelligent conversation about politics and social issues with most of you. From now on, we’ll talk about the weather, recipes, our mutual friends, our children, our illnesses, thrift shop finds, and our old memories. I want to know what’s going on in your lives. What books are you reading? What home improvements are you planning? Hell, I’ll even follow you on Pinterest!

I very much appreciate those of you who can still have an intelligent conversation and listen to another point of view. Hopefully this small group of sane conservatives never changes.

Here is why I have to abandon attempts at intelligent conversation with most of you.

1. You support revisionist history.

When I was in a high school history class, I’ll never forget one thing our teacher taught us: what you read in history books isn’t always accurate. The example she used was history books in the Soviet Union, now known as Russia. She informed us, to my shock and horror, that the Soviets pretty much included what they liked in the history books and left out everything else. As a result, she said, there were generations of Russian students who were misinformed.

Oh we were dismayed, my classmates and I! Those poor little Russian kids who were being taught false history. But wait….you guys on the right are trying to do the same thing right here in the Good Old U.S.A.

Last year, I wrote an article about Texas’ plan to revise history and include Moses as a Founding Father. When I shared the article with an educated Texas adult and asked “is this OK with you,” his response was:

“Why teach our children at length regarding the horrors of slavery as we have eliminated that curse from our society? We don’t deny it occurred here or anywhere else in the world, but, why dwell on a segment of our past that has been corrected? I don’t think it is appropriate to drag our dirty laundry through our history lessons at length.”

Because it’s HISTORY. You don’t get to just rewrite history books if it’s unpleasant. What are you thinking? Shall we rewrite the Revolutionary War? “A minor disagreement with Great Britain.” How about the bombing of Pearl Harbor? “A spat with the Japanese.”

2. You cite Jesus as your reasoning for rejecting marriage equality.

Yet the Bible only mentions homosexuality six times. Six. Times. 6. This many:


So why is this one of the biggest issues on your agenda? Why are you putting so much energy and hate into an issue that clearly wasn’t one of God’s major concerns?

As Christians who are pro-family, why would you deny people the right to the sanctity of marriage? If marriage strengthens families, why would you not want everyone to have this, even if you disagree with their choice of mate?

YOU (we) have destroyed the sanctity of marriage. There is no possible way that gay marriage can do more harm to marriage than heterosexuals have done. Yet we seldom hear a sermon bemoaning the divorce rate or people living together before marriage. Why is that? Because the pews would be empty.

3. You use Biblical scripture to excuse yourself from feeding the hungry.

There is nothing you do that makes me more disgusted with you than your abuse and misuse of 2 Thessalonians 3:10.

For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, If any will not work, neither let him eat. 2 Thessalonians 3:10

You are deliberately taking the scripture — ONE VERSE! — out of context when you use them to justify your own hatred of poor people. And again, you’re showing your ignorance.

From Liberal America reader Eric Susee: “2 Thessalonians 3:10. are NOT the words of Christ. They are the words of Paul of Tarsus, a man who never met Christ.”

Biblical scholars have pointed out that the author of 2 Thessalonians was referring to Christians who stopped working in anticipation of Christ’s return.

4. You lie when you say you value “freedom of religion.”

I had lunch with some conservatives a while back, and the topic of freedom of religion came up. They expressed concern at the “war on Christianity.” I cited a recent event that had occurred in which protesters interrupted the U.S. Senate’s first Hindu-led prayer. The response from my fellow diners? “Good.”

I don’t know how educated people can be so ignorant. Seriously. You can’t even see your own contradictions.

5. You claim God speaks to you and tells you to do things.

Over and over and over, we see right wing nutjobs in the news saying they’re doing this horrible thing or that horrible thing because God told them to. This is, to quote the Christian Courier, “a very convenient method of authenticating what you want to do.”

He does NOT do that.

God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son. Hebrews 1:1

But conservatives believe these nuts. Here is what I think: not only should sensible conservatives not believe these nuts, you need to start speaking out against them. These are the false prophets that the Bible warns us about, in my humble opinion. Most of you lack the courage to take a stand against these idiots even when you know they’re nuts.

6. You question my faith.

“Christian Left is an oxymoron.”

Oh my, I’ve heard that so much from the right, and believe it or not, I often hear it from my “friends.” First of all, your questioning of my faith genuinely means very little to me. What it does is destroy my opinion of you; I now view you as self-righteous hypocrites.

Recently, I found out that a woman from my church questioned her teen son for spending time here at my home with my children. I believe her words were “why would you want to be around someone so liberal.” I’ve never had a conversation with this lady. We’ve never even made eye contact. But alas, her comment (and more that she said) has forced me to now see her differently.

Keep questioning my faith, though, my people, because you can be sure I’m questioning yours. One thing I won’t do, however, is accuse you of not being a believer as you do me. What I will suggest to you is that my faith may be stronger than yours. I’ve educated myself, dared to question all things, and STILL believe. Most of you are too afraid to even learn. It may, after all, test your faith.

I’ll pray for you! 🙂

7. You care more about your guns than you do about children.

After the Sandy Hook massacre, and following other similar tragedies, I asked many of you if you loved your guns more than you do children. I made the statement of “I’d give up my gun forever if it would bring back even one of those children.”

I asked you if you’d do the same. You admitted that you would not.

8. You get excited about people dying.

You really, really like to see death. And not just to terrorists. You love the death penalty. You love war. You love seeing kids like Trayvon Martin being shot. They deserve it, you say. But his murderer has shown — again and again — since his acquittal that he is a dangerous person.

9. You assume that everyone who needs help are losers and parasites who refuse to work.

Approximately 47 million people receive food stamps, and most of them are children or the elderly, in addition to people who are employed. The numbers, from a 2012 USDA report:

  • 45 percent of SNAP recipients are under 18 years of age
  • Nine percent are age 60 or older
  • More than 40 percent live in households with earnings

10. You weren’t concerned about uninsured people– including me.

Most of you know that when I made the decision to become self-employed that I would be giving up my employer subsidized health insurance. I’m 47 years old, and like most people my age, have at one time or another had preexisting conditions that would cause insurance companies to deny me a private policy.

I didn’t want a free ride. I was eager to pay for my own insurance. Obamacare opened that door for me and millions of other hard-working Americans and disallows insurance companies from rejecting millions of Americans who were previously rejected. But without even knowing fully what the Affordable Care Act is, you chose the path of ignorance. You didn’t care.

11. The Creation Museum — that is all.

You think this is OK. It’s not. These people just make stuff up. Do you really think kangaroos floated from Africa to Australia on rafts? Why are you condoning this ignorance?

12. You’re liberal in youth, yet grow conservative in age.

I call this the Dead Peter Syndrome in men and/or the Formerly Hot Syndrome in women.

A couple of years ago, a man confronted me on Facebook about my liberalism. I knew him when I was growing up; he was a friend of my parents and his children were my playmates. He called me a stupid, misguided, amoral, liberal. Yes, those were his words. I had one question for him:

“When I was a little girl, didn’t I sit on your lap while you smoked a joint and drank beer?”

I’m afraid I burned the bridge of that friendship — and good riddance.

Similarly, many women who embraced the sexual revolution are now taking a stance against women’s rights and suggesting that I’m killing babies with my IUD.

You don’t get to live it up as a young person and then try to take a moral high ground when you get old and aren’t interested in living anymore.

13. You don’t want people who disagree with you to vote.

Oh, Gerrymandering, you ugly devil, you. But do we question why this is so common and seldom questioned by people on the right? It’s because you, my conservative voter loved ones, agree with it. You think it’s perfectly acceptable (and necessary) to suppress the vote. It’s for the “good of the nation.”

I once heard someone tell his wife to not inform her Democratic friend how and where to vote. “She’ll cancel out your vote.”

There you have it.

Sex Tips 69 Cover FINAL

14. Some of your best friends are black. Or Mexican.

A conservative I know professes that “my best friend is black” and balked when I called him and his wife racist. Why did I call him racist? Because my little girl — at that time about 12 — went to a movie with one of her African American friends and his mother. The conservative and his wife were “very concerned” about me allowing my little girl to consort with “blacks.” But oh, no, they’re not racist, are they?

I don’t care how many black or Hispanic friends you have. If you think that mentality is OK, then yes, you’re racist.

15. You scream about undocumented immigrant children at the border, but you hire Mexicans to do your dirty work.

I live in Texas. Duh! Every single upper-middle-class or wealthy person I know has at one time hired cheap labor to do their menial tasks like home repairs, yard work, housekeeping, and childcare. They actually seek out Hispanic people because they know that they do good work and that they’ll work for cheap.

16. You insist on calling undocumented immigrants “illegals” and “aliens.”

They are human beings. They are undocumented immigrants. Many of them are children. It reallyyyyy makes me furious to see you deliberately depersonalizing these human beings who are doing nothing but seeking the American Dream that you are so proud of.

And you do this on purpose. You know what you’re doing. You’re proud of your very unethical and un-Christian attitude towards these human beings.

17. You don’t mind using force against “lesser” groups to get what you want.

Case in point, protesting outside of abortion clinics.

Or protesting at the funerals of gay people. And yeah, I know that is Westboro Baptist Church and not you, but if you refuse to speak out against them, then you’re a part of the problem.

18. You love war, death, and destruction.

And why do you love war, death, and destruction? Because ‘Murica. Because you think this somehow makes us superior. We may be militarily superior, but we are ethically inferior.

Even when confronted with the lies, now confirmed officially, that got us into the Iraq war, you don’t care. You like for America to be the world’s largest terrorist organization and the world’s most formidable bully.

19. Speaking of war, you think draft dodging is OK and military service is for the little people.

Why doesn’t it bother you that Dick Cheney et al are draft dodgers? Or that Mitt Romney has an entire baseball team of sons and not one of them served in the military? Or that none of the current generation of Bush children have served in the military. Let me tell you in one sentence, as was told to me personally by a wealthy draft dodger:

“Wouldn’t you get out of it if you could?”

Dying for your country is such a noble cause — if you’re not one of the elite. Right?

20. You claim to care about the Constitution, but in reality you don’t.

Oh yes, you scream “CONSTITUTION” at the top of your lungs, but when idiotic Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) recently tried to strip the Constitution of the 5th and 6th Amendments, where were you? Where was your outrage?

You love the parts of the Constitution that please you personally — NOT the entire Constitution.

21. It’s impossible for you to see your privilege.

If you were born into a family and a place that allowed you to thrive, you’re blessed and fortunate. This isn’t the norm. A lot of success and stability depends on the structure that we have during our formative years. The vast majority of young Americans have not had your advantages and I can’t seem to make you understand that. I’ve stopped trying.

22. You don’t care about children.

You care about fetuses. Once those fetuses begin to breath outside the womb, your concern is gone if they’re born into a poor family that needs help.

Or how about poor children who are in school? Most of you want to do away with free and reduced lunches, for God’s sake. And let’s not even talk about free breakfasts for kids. What is wrong with you people??? There is no better investment that we can make as a nation than in the early childhood health of our children.

23. You’re greedy and miserable.

You spend more time bemoaning what is being taken from you that you do in being thankful that you have enough to share.

24. You think our religion is the only one.

I’m a Christian — a proud follower of the most amazing man I’ve ever studied. Most of what is good about me comes from the teachings of Jesus. I love my religion and my Holy Book. I use the Words in Red as a compass. But who am I to look at other people who feel exactly the same way about their own religions and judge them?

We’re all on this earth doing the best we can, making the best decisions that we can.

And we’re all taking our best guess. The evidence for and against their religion is no different than the evidence for and against ours.

25. You are lazy and you refuse to read.

I provide sources for you that will debunk most of your BS, or at least help you to see it a little differently. You refuse to read it. You stick to Fox News, World Net Daily, etc…You refuse to ever entertain another point of view.

I have a conservative friend who I adore. He and his wife grew up with me. I think he’s awesome because he did something amazing for me: he recorded Rachel Maddow for a week and watched her show. Did he agree? Meh, not really. But him being willing to even listen to another viewpoint won him favor in my book. Thank you, Michael.

26. Your misfortune is God’s blessing.

When something bad happens to you, you sanctimoniously think it’s God testing you and making you stronger. When something bad happens to me (or gay people or atheists or etc…), you think it’s God punishing them.


27. “Everyone has their lot in life.”

Except you, of course. Well, no….you do have a lot. Your lot is to have every privilege and entitlement and make sure your children have the same.

28. You think you’re the only one working and paying taxes.

“My tax dollars….” Here’s a clue: you’re not the only one paying taxes. Liberals pay taxes, too. Just how far do you think your $2,000 a year in income taxes goes? Or your $10,000, or even your $50,000? No matter how wealthy you are and how much income tax you pay — and most of those complaining aren’t paying that much — you’re actually probably paying more for wars (that you love) than for food stamps for children in poverty.

So anyhow….tell me, my loves, what are you cooking for dinner tonight?

All of this said, let me say this: I’m very grateful and appreciative of my sane conservative friends who can actually participate in an intelligent and respectful discussion. To name just a few (and if I leave anyone out, I’m sorry — these are just the ones I interact with the most on these issues): Michael, Laura K., Whitney, Laura M., and my pastor, Brent.

Thank you, my dear ones, for being sane. For understanding that things aren’t always black and white. And for disagreeing with me without belittling my very existence. And for not rubbing midterm losses in my face. And for never once calling me stupid or amoral for being a liberal.


About Tiffany Willis

Tiffany Willis is a fifth-generation Texan, a proponent of voluntary simplicity, a single mom, and the founder and editor-in-chief of Liberal America. An unapologetic member of the Christian Left, she has spent most of her career actively working with “the least of these" -- disadvantaged and oppressed populations, the elderly, people living in poverty, at-risk youth, and unemployed people. She is a Certified Workforce Expert with the National Workforce Institute, a NAWDP Certified Workforce Development Professional, and a certified instructor for Franklin Covey's 7 Habits of Highly Effective Teens. Follow her on Twitter, Facebook, or LinkedIn. She also has a grossly neglected personal blog, a  Time Travel blog, a site dedicated to encouraging people to  read classic literature 15 minutes a day, and a literary quotes blog that is a labor of love. Find her somewhere and join the discussion. Click here to buy Tiff a mojito.


Follow on Twitter Connect on Facebook Find on Google+ View all Posts Visit Website


  1. mea_mark says:

    Sure sounds like reality is a major bummer for republicans. Their heads must hurt all the time from the cognitive dissonance.

    1. joshuabayerjazz says:

      You used the ‘cognitive’ when talking about Republicans. That’s funny.

      1. lonnie93041 says:

        Now now be nice. God loves all His children, even rage filled conservatives. My mom loves me and I’m a shit head.

    2. Rick Kilgore says:

      Yep. Anybody who can simultaneously love Jesus and hate liberals is simply ignoring the obvious.

      1. Sam Oranger says:

        You are too funny. A socialist Christian. Now that is a laugh

        1. Southern Liberal says:

          And you are too funny. I always thought Jesus was pretty much a socialist.

          1. Bobloblaw67 says:

            They didnt have that concept then.

            1. Rick Kilgore says:

              They didn’t need the term, but if you’ll read the Bible (I know, it causes cognitive dissonance for conservatives who try to read it) you will find that in the early church they “held all things in common.” Really more communistic than socialistic. But we libtards understand this: The love of money is the root of all kinds of evil, and if you’re more indignant about your taxes going to feed the hungry than you are concerned (to the point of not trying to cut food stamps) for the poor and needy, guess what that means?

            2. See my reply upthread, please.

            3. Rick Kilgore says:

              That which modern capitalists tend to decry as socialism has usually been, as in the case of Stalin, state capitalism. You can deny this and return to your comfort zone, or you can research it for yourself.

            4. VincentTPackhorse says:

              “Money is the root of all politics.” Vincent T. Packhorse III

            5. VincentTPackhorse says:

              Just look at all the alleged corruption occurring in the PRC. It seems money (and sex) trumps ideology every time.

              Here’s one for you and two for me, three for you and four for me…

            6. RonzoL61 says:

              I’m not adverse to my tax dollars going to feed the needy. But that’s not where they go. They go to feed the the bloated, corrupt, inefficient machine that is our Federal Government.

            7. maryinbama says:

              Except the food stamp program has one of the lowest instances of waste of any program and also one of the lowest payment error programs. Food stamps are also an ongoing economic stimulus program. We pay less for our food at the grocery store because food stamps help the bottom line of most grocery stores. With more being purchased, more workers are needed to process the customers. When more workers are hired, they make money and spend it in other businesses in the community. Food stamps constitute nearly 50% of Walmart’s sales in Oklahoma. The SNAP program has allowed Whole Foods to open stores in low income, urban neighborhoods. Since Whole Foods pays a good wage for its employees, this is opening up jobs for people that might just eventually support their family. Private charities cannot have the same type of impact on communities.

            8. William Lanteigne says:

              The “Food Stamp” program, despite Conservative sniveling and whining to the contrary, is the most efficient and least abused government program of all, especially with the introduction of the EBT cards. Even in the rare cases of abuse, the basic intent of the program (farm price supports) still works, because the funds are spent on food. Further, the funds spent are a direct stimulus to the economy, and make up the entire profit for many grocery retailers- unlike many other government programs, where the funds are sucked up into the pockets of rich CEOs and shareholders and never again see the light of day.

            9. RonzoL61 says:

              Are you people deliberately ignoring the point?

            10. J C Leslie says:

              Better, and more christian to feed a thousand to save 100 than to starve that 100. Luckily, in this country, out of a thousand, we feed only maybe 15 who don’t deserve it.

            11. Rick Kilgore says:

              So, you’ll deprive the majority, who are truly needy and spend the funds on food in order to stop the abuse of the program by a few? I’ve researched the fraud stats. Have you? Every program is going to have problems. The Iraq war, which helped no one but defense contractors and other corrupt corporations, literally *lost* more money than we’d need to fund the SNAP program for a decade. Pallets of cash just vanished. Why do some jerks squandering a pittance disturb you so much more than these far more egregious misappropriations?

            12. RonzoL61 says:

              Saying that the food stamp program ” is the most efficient and least abused government program of all”, is like saying the guy driving the get away car isn’t as much of a criminal as the guys inside robbing the bank!

            13. J C Leslie says:

              That’s a very liberal view, considering that most of the bloat in DC is maintained by conservative efforts, which they then blame on things like having to care for the sick or feeding the needy, trying to cut those programs so they can collect more of the money for themselves.

            14. Rick Kilgore says:

              I am also unhappy with how our money is budgeted. It’s pretty easy to find out how the money is spent, which is why I’m so bewildered at how hard conservatives work to get the relatively small allocation away from people who are hurting. They’d rather spend it drug testing welfare applicants than feed a starving family whose mom or dad got a false positive or, Heaven forbid, dared to smoke a joint or take a pain pill they weren’t prescribed. But now I’ve gone and opened up a whole other can of worms , haven’t I?

            15. RonzoL61 says:

              My family wasn’t rich. My dad worked two jobs. He left the house at 4:30 in the morning and didn’t get home until 9 pm most nights. He struggled to keep a roof over our heads. I’m a truck driver. I’m not rich either. I live paycheck to paycheck. I don’t have much left at the end of the month, and I’ll be damned if I’m going be happy about being forced to give what I bust my ass for every day to some deadbeat who thinks the rest of us owe them a living! I get randomly drug tested to keep my job, they should damn well get drug tested if they are getting my money!

            16. Rick Kilgore says:

              And we live in a country where people are free to form their own opinions and vote accordingly. It’s not a law that voters have to actually know anything about the issues, and I have to believe, due to who’s getting elected, most voters don’t.

            17. RonzoL61 says:

              Not much doubt about that, Rick!

          2. mikeconstitution says:

            Conservatives, classical liberals, donate far more personal time and treasure than modern liberal/leftists that seem content to leave taking care of others to government bureacrats.

            1. AnotherMan2 says:

              That is actually not so. Conservatives count all of their tithing as charity. And it is the poor who most often take care of the poor.

            2. RonzoL61 says:

              There is a difference between willingly giving and having the Government take it at the point of a gun!

            3. maryinbama says:

              Such hyperbole!!! If you were a TRUE Christian, you would want to give.

            4. nameinvain says:

              … AND give anonymously! Bragging about how much one gives seems to be a GOP thang.

            5. bhean saoirse says:

              Having something taken is not giving – it is theft.

            6. maryinbama says:

              Oh good Lord!!! I did not want any portion of my taxes going to fund a war in Iraq. I don’t want any part of the taxes I pay being used to play “whack a mole” against the latest crazy people in the Middle East (especially ones who got their weapons from previous tax dollars that bought their weapons). A much higher percentage of my tax dollars went toward military action than toward feeding people. I don’t begrudge a child food or shelter.

            7. Buffy says:

              I give. I donate, I pay taxes. But when I hear young people have babies on the state dime. Then planning the next one in a year and a half. I ask how do you plan on paying nursery when you are struggling with this baby. I am told that what the government is for? I would have had a dozen kids. I could not afford it so I did not have them.

            8. ge205 says:

              Seriously doubt you’ll find a poor person with a dozen babies. Or with six or five. Four or three, maybe. One or two most likely. And those people can’t get abortions so guess what? They’re having babies on the state dime.
              If you don’t want legal abortions, then society has to pay for children who’s families do not have the means to support them properly.

            9. maryinbama says:

              Most teen mothers don’t plan on a baby in the first place. That is why free and universal birth control is so important (especially long term birth control measures). Colorado received a $1 million donation that they put toward birth control for high risk teens and teen pregnancy in that state dropped 40%. We also need comprehensive sex education in our schools. We also need to pay a living wage for full time work. Most of parents who receive SNAP work full time, but when you make minimum wage, you gross income is $15,000 per year (take home pay is less than $1000 per month). Just saying, “don’t have kids” sounds reasonable, but it is not a pragmatic stand. Preventing unplanned pregnancies in the first place and then making sure that those who are working hard make enough to live on is the way to prevent having tax dollars supplement their living expenses. I also planned and spaced my three children, but I had enough money to buy reliable birth control so that I was able to do so.

            10. steveranden says:

              What gun is that?

            11. Rhonda Thissen says:

              What government is taking anything from you at the point of a gun? Pics or it didn’t happen.

            12. RonzoL61 says:

              Really? Try not paying your taxes.

            13. Rhonda Thissen says:

              Please provide one single example where the IRS showed up with guns blazing when someone didn’t pay their taxes. I’m so TOTALLY calling shenanigans on that one.

            14. RonzoL61 says:

              Can you tie your own shoes?

            15. Jed says:

              I would have thought that by now you would have been arrested. When you are, you will better understand the allusion to “the point of a gun.” And by the way, even before the era of photo-shopping, photographic evidence was suspect. Now it is meaningless.

            16. Rhonda Thissen says:

              Why would I have been arrested? You don’t know me from Eve, so why would you have assumed that? WTF.

            17. Jed says:

              That whoosh sound you heard was the comment going over your head. Light one for me.

            18. Rhonda Thissen says:

              Ummm…whatever you say.

            19. Jed says:

              Okey-dokey then.

            20. Shep Schultz says:

              Are you making a the claim that if one does not pay his taxes he will never be confronted by an armed agent of the government during a collection attempt?

            21. Guest says:


            22. Rhonda Thissen says:

              They were talking about taxes. My question stands.

            23. Debi Biderman says:

              Tell me the last time someone pointed a gun at you. The truth is Americans are all priveleged because we live in a country where we are free to say almost anything and not get shot. Try that in Libya or Egypt or China. Taxes are the price we pay to live here and we have really low taxes in America. Rich people need to pay their fair share. So should Businesses that make outrageous profits. The idea that the GOP wants no more taxes is crazy .

            24. RonzoL61 says:

              Here’s a thought… how about EVERYBODY pays their “fair share”?

            25. Red47 says:

              The word “fair” is used as an emotional manipulator. It is more exact to say equal percentage.

            26. Paul says:

              Except that isn’t what someone usually means when they say fair. It is subjective. The user knows it will be heard differently in each ear and perfectly in each ear. Its darn near a magical incantation.

              Ask anyone if we should have fair taxation. Why yes they say. Ask them if everybody should pay exactly the same rate without credits or deductions. Crickets.

            27. Red47 says:


            28. Jed says:

              “Since this is an era when many people are concerned about ‘fairness’ and ‘social justice,’ what is your ‘fair share’ of what someone else has worked for?” ~ Dr. Thomas Sowell

            29. Paul says:

              Literate people have many authors they consider masters. They usually have one or two they consider defining benchmarks. Thomas Sowell is that to me.

            30. Jed says:

              Dr. Sowell is not only a brilliant man, but he is also processed of great honesty and humility, virtues all rare in contemporary popular culture. And we have more like him.
              Why so many Americans turn to such as second-rate actors and mediocre singers for political and cultural wisdom is unfathomable.

            31. Paul says:

              He also has a sharp sense of humor. I corresponded with him briefly, There is no such thing as an “ex” marine. That people turn to different sources is the choice of guidance by reason and the ability to compare truth to self no matter how brutal the outcome versus popularity. “Easy” as tool for discriminating “best” from “irrelevant” is way over rated.

            32. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Sowell’s great, no?

            33. Jed says:

              He is that. We are blessed with a number of such individuals, which makes the fact that they are so little respected in popular culture all the more tragic. A ‘prophet in his own country’ perhaps.

            34. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Reading his Barbarians Inside the Gate was a bit of a turning point for me.

            35. Paul says:

              For me it was “A Conflict of Visions”

            36. Dutch says:

              And asking a poor person the same percentage of taxes as a rich person
              does not come under the heading of “fair” I don’t know if they still do
              this, but we were routinely shown pie charts about what percentage of the
              total pie (pay check) goes to such things as food, housing, etc. and then
              what we should reasonably pay for such things.

              There are a whole lot of people who paycheck barely costs life’s necessities
              so why should their “fair” share be charged at the same rate as those who
              live in McMansions, how many poor people get the constant use of
              a company car, a company jet, a company computer system and telephone
              service. And the thing that bugs me the most is that people who got
              medical insurance through their company and the company paid for it,
              did not have to count that as income in which taxes must be paid, but those
              who had to buy their own medical insurance, did not get a tax deduction.

            37. Paul says:

              If I earn $70K per year and a “poor person earns $25K and we are taxed at a 10% rate (for example) Then I pay $7,000 and they pay 2,500. I pay more than them, as it should be. The burden and the incentives are proportionate. They may pay the same rate as I but we pay different taxes. The tax seems fair to me but it is the fairness of the incentives that is most important to me.

              In a progressive system, there is great power bestowed upon the politician who has the power to allocate obligation, to chose who to punish or reward by promoting resentment as it is done now. These incentives have created the class warfare tragedy we currently suffer. One you seem to suffer from with your condemnation of the “rich” as a faceless class, a crime to be disproportionately punished. This is a modern American Bill of Attainder, where culpability is voted out of the legislature with no crime proven and no due process. It is not how a free and sovereign people should be treated and causes far more harm through elite horsetrading as it cures. This is the evil of the 16th amendment.

              As far as deductions exemptions and credits go, it is immaterial to the discussion. It could be better or worse in a changed system depending on how the system was built and isn’t “cured” by either. I would say that a flat tax, with zero exemptions or special credits should do better at limiting those inequities.

            38. Dutch says:

              Well, as I said before, the rich are getting a whole lot of things that are
              not considered taxable income, starting with medical insurance, and
              going through the most mundane of their other benefits – like travel, and
              company cars, and free telephone and computer service. Those are
              the things that I can think of from our small office (we haven’t paid our
              own telephone bills in 30 years or bought one computer yet) and we are
              a small nothing business in the scheme of things.

              And trust me, at 10% there will be those who still can’t afford to pay, and
              there will also be those who will cheat also.

              I find this an interesting question: All of us who get a salary from a
              business have SS payments taken out. But it stops at a certain amount.
              Bill Gates would be finished about 10:00 a.m. on January 2. We are
              done about half way through the year, and some are never done paying.

              Is that fair?

            39. Paul says:

              Thank you for illustrating my point about the resentment incentive. You justify disproportionately fining a faceless class of people on the basis of a few anecdotes about a few barely known ones. You cite a postulated privilege some may have as a justification for punishing a vast unknown class that may have participated…or not. This popular punishment promised to be delivered by populist politicians is a sad exchange for the loss of sovereignty and freedom of many you do not sympathize with, do not know and have zero idea what their culpability is for your imagined crimes. A very convenient ideology you have there. But I must have misunderstood you, fairness is a value you cherish, right? Perhaps your sense of fairness does not extend to those you mindlessly hate.

            40. Dutch says:

              You know, just give it up. You have ideas about me that just are not
              true at all. Like I mindlessly hate. I think about unfairness a whole lot
              more than I do fairness. Those who make it in this life do so for any
              number of reasons, some by going completely against the odds. But
              more likely it is because of where they have lived, their upbringing, their
              genetic and emotional makeup, finding the right mentors, and so on.

              Others are not so blessed. And probably wouldn’t give this as much
              thought as I have been doing lately, except for two reasons. One of
              them is reading these forums. I’ve been on forums before, but took
              a break of a couple of years because I was tired of them, I was traveling
              a lot, and just had other things to do. And so here I am and it is reading
              the same old thing – that CONSTANT complaint that the welfare people
              are stealing from the rest of us and they are lazy and have babies to
              get more money. That sort of vitriol and hatred disgusts me beyond
              belief. Meanwhile, we are throwing tax incentives and anything else
              we can get our hands on to give them anything they want.

              The other thing that has been lighting my fire is some things I have
              been reading that have suggested (strongly) that it is a whole lot
              worse than I thought. We might as well wrap our land in a package
              and give it to them for Christmas.

              God bless America.

            41. Cecillia says:

              “If I earn $70K per year and a “poor person earns $25K and we are taxed at a 10% rate (for example) Then I pay $7,000 and they pay 2,500. I pay more than them, as it should be. The burden and the incentives are proportionate. They may pay the same rate as I but we pay different taxes. The tax seems fair to me but it is the fairness of the incentives that is most important to me.”

              i have presented a variation on the same theme, over and over gain. Now, I have your statement and mine – thank you!

            42. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              True DAT, Red. Communists never appeal to the mind when emotions are so much more available, particularly in the uninformed, under-informed, and the misinformed.

            43. Red47 says:

              The education system makes certain that it is difficult to use the mind over emotions. We have turned into a nation of whinging criers. They are the ones who make the most noise. The rest of us just roll our eyes and make sure they don’t hurt themselves.

            44. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha. Good picture…

            45. Jed says:

              It may be the best thing for them if they hurt themselves.

            46. Red47 says:

              Well there is that.

            47. Red47 says:

              No pain, no gain?

            48. Red47 says:

              No pain, no gain?

            49. BJ4..u2 says:

              Which explains the Fox News business model.

            50. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Hope! Change!

              Sucker! :o)

              I doubt that was Fox’s but, given that I haven’t had TV for about 13 years, I wouldn’t know.

            51. RonzoL61 says:

              Everyone paying an equal percentage isn’t fair. Just ask any liberal!

            52. Red47 says:

              Some people are more equal than others, no?

            53. Wrabble says:

              ” So should Businesses that make outrageous profits. ”

              What is an “outrageous profit?”

              Why penalize success and subsidize failure?

            54. BJ4..u2 says:

              How can you praise “success” built on profits maximized by low wages and look down your nose at “failure” when those who are building those maximized profits by keeping wages low include a class in how to apply for the government benefits that their low wages qualify them for – along with the disdain of those who look down on people who need food stamps to feed their families?

            55. Wrabble says:

              I asked you first. If you can’t respond to my simple direct questions why should I answer yours?

            56. Paul says:

              “Luke..Come back from the dark side”, you’re having too much fun.

            57. Shep Schultz says:


            58. Brindle_Catahoula says:

              Fooled ’em again!

            59. Paul says:

              Thanks Brindle, you ever need help you look me up.

            60. BJ4..u2 says:

              Sorry, but I don’t recall you asking me a question????

            61. Wrabble says:

              What is an “outrageous profit?”

              Why penalize success and subsidize failure?

            62. PJ4 says:

              Oh hey Wrabble, as warning… conversing with this guy (his real name is Gary) is a big waste of internet space.
              He’s a liar, and he’s obsessive.
              If he becomes obsessed with you, he’ll follow you around everywhere and then tattle on you to his band of liberal harpies.
              If he’s proved anything at all, it’s that, while he doesn’t have much in the way of intelligence, he’s definitely a very good minion.

              Just be thankful he’s not on our side. 🙂

            63. Wrabble says:

              Thanks for the heads-up.

            64. PJ4 says:

              Oh and the best part is—he thinks he’s ever so clever
              That’s the part that just makes me pity him
              I can’t dislike the guy—he’s just too pathetic and well into his dotage
              Check out his feed of you have the stomach for it
              It’s pretty sick

            65. BJ4..u2 says:

              Thanks for giving Wrabble the head’s up about me not being on your side. As you can see, he’s not too quick. He probably needs the guidance of a Pretentious Juvenile.

              You calling me a liar and obsessive. Now THAT’S funny.

            66. PJ4 says:

              Glad you can see the humor in your own short comings
              (pun intended)
              I’m sure he’s sharper than you…well my 3 year old is too, but that’s not the point.

            67. BJ4..u2 says:

              I’ve got 5 o’clock shadow that’s more abrasive than you try so desperately to be (and fail except in the eyes of the easily impressed).

            68. PJ4 says:

              Oh…did you think I was trying to be abrasive?
              Oh Gary, you’re such a delicate soul.

            69. BJ4..u2 says:

              Take some vitamins or something. You’re getting weaker and weaker.

            70. PJ4 says:

              Take some vitamins or something. You’re getting weaker and weaker.

              Said you wife when you stopped being able to get it up for her 20 years ago.

              Oh Gare Bear, you don’t need to keep playing the pity card with me… most of us already feel nothing but pity for you so there’s no need to let the world know about your sexual ineptness.

            71. Mars Attacks! says:

              Actually, I feel revulsion and contempt toward him… but that’s just me.

            72. PJ4 says:

              Well, I did say most of us because I realize he makes some people feel revulsion and contempt as well.
              I understand.
              But personally, I can only feel pity for the poor thing.

            73. PJ4 says:

              Gary’s talking about his basement experiments again–check out my feed.

            74. BJ4..u2 says:

              You seem to have me confused with your husband again. Is there a probiotic for that?

            75. PJ4 says:

              No, Gary, no one would ever confuse you for their husband.

            76. BJ4..u2 says:

              You might be right. Except for the ones I wouldn’t touch with someone else’s, women generally tend to prefer me to their husbands.

            77. PJ4 says:

              “I don’t care who you are, now that there is funny!”

              *snort* *spit take*

              If that’s what you have to keep telling yourself to keep from pulling the plug on yourself, then have it Gary.
              You keep building yourself up in your head dear, I actually encourage you to do this.



              Oh you poor poor pitiful thing.

            78. 🙂 this is a strange thread. Going to sleep soon. Have a good night.

            79. Nordog6561 says:

              I feel pity for Gayr Bear the way I feel pity when I see a rat dying in a trap.

              Sure, I hate to see it suffer, but hey, it is a damn rat after all.

            80. Nordog6561 says:


            81. Mars Attacks! says:

              At least the rat has the decency to die when it’s been thoroughly crushed.

            82. Nordog6561 says:


            83. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              It’s also not really far from the truth, Gary.

              Every time you and I have crossed paths, it takes less than 10 posts for you to usually go scrabbling for the door. It usually takes less than 10 words to find something you’ve lied about, misrepresented, been less than forthcoming over, or blatantly just don’t understand.

              When running doesn’t help, you just change the subject.

              You might consider the charge of being a hypocrite, a liar, and likely several other things as being “funny”, but it makes them no less accurate….no matter how many cheerleaders you bring along (all of whom share the same “oh crap, a real argument? Time to run!” mentality).

              If you’d like to challenge my assertions, we can take your claims of being a Christian minister, for starters, and bank them against your own comments. I doubt any claims of your honesty and character would last long at that point. Even just your silly name change is enough to point out a flaw in that argument, and how petty (and perhaps obsessive) you can be.

              I’m going to hibernate again, but you stay classy Gary. I’m sure you will. 🙂

            84. BJ4..u2 says:

              Lots of blather, a dearth of evidence. Challenge your assertions? Perhaps you’d care to attempt to prove them first. Thank you for playing.

            85. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              I noticed you, once again, changed your name….after one of my assertions that you claim i needed to prove. That really wasn’t hard.

              Sure, Gary. I’d love to play along. Let’s give it a roll, shall we? Of course, your sudden name change again, so that anyone else seeing it wouldn’t know better if they’d not seen it before, is at least a fun start.

              In all seriousness though, your whimsical Christian kindness was demonstrated not long ago, and maintained up until the last few hours or so(?) by having a name that was a duel-insult against another user while throwing in a gratuitous sexual reference while you were at it. Do your parishioners know you like making sexual innuendos at people online you’ve never met, often make lewd or lascivious-based jokes, and then preach to them after the fact? I’d wonder about that (the claim, much less the possibility this occurred).

              How about your claims of being Christian…a minister, no less….yet I had to correct you several times on exactly what the Bible says. I’m not a minister, and I shouldn’t have to correct you. Those are also in the feed, Mister G. You’ll remember the specific one about judgment, condemnation, and so forth as a fast reminder? Of course. Your response is in your feed as well.

              I see in your feed, from the not so distant past, where you (a person again stating they’re a minister) makes the claim of absolutely loving it when people experience what you list as “inevitable heartbreak”. My, my….very Christian of you, eh? I’d dare say that any of your cheerleader squad would hesitate if they saw, say…an actual Christian….making comments about enjoying and liking the emotional suffering of others. The negative comments about that person, not to mention the glaring hypocricy of such a position, would fill volumes. Yet…you’re totally fine with such hypocritical statements(and enjoy it, affirmed by your own words).

              How about any number of the conversations we had on LAN, which can be read by anyone who cares to do so and follow the exchanges, where you do exactly as I claim. Hell, you’re doing it now. I’ve made assertions that anyone with rudimentary reading skills can verify, and your rebuttal is to say I need to prove them. Well, read all you like. You’ll find no shortage of proof. It’s all right there to read.

              Let’s be honest. You can’t really challenge what’s been offered, without going back and editing your posts. You didn’t say I was wrong, or that I made an error. You just stated you wanted proof. There’s a plethora of it in both of our feeds. Anyone who wants to see proof is invited to read through them and see it all for themselves.

              In all honesty, I just wish you (as a preacher, you know)…would actually act like you believe what’s typed into your posts, rather than something that’s so easily identifiable as nothing more than a lie. I mean, you’re wanting people to believe that you’re a Christian minister who also, by the way, has performed and helped perform abortions. Doctor, preacher….are you also an astronaut as well?

              The only lack of evidence, Gary, is that you are anything that you’ve claimed. You say one thing, and act completely contradictory.

              No, thank *you* for playing, sir. 🙂

            86. Mr. G. says:

              So I don’t live up to your expectations of a Christian minister? You claim to have “corrected” me on what’s in the Bible – as if there is only one way to understand those words? Since you’ve asked, yes, I do and always have behaved pretty much the same with the members of my church. I’ve been told that one of the most charming things about me is my willingness to be real. I’ve also been told that one of the most unsettling things about me is my willingness to be real. I guess that just shows us that I can’t please everyone all the time.

              It appears that you’ve misinterpreted / taken out of context what I said as somehow “absolutely loving” people’s emotional suffering and reframed it in your own words. The few times I’ve edited posts, it’s been when I noticed a typo or that a word came out of my fingers differently than it was in my head when I was composing it. It has NEVER to been done to “cover tracks” after someone called me down about something (although II have had the occasion to admit in another post that I was mistaken in a previous post).

              That you doubt something does not make it a lie – no matter how far afield it might be from your expectations.. No, I’m not an astronaut. I have, in fact, as a clinical specialist in the Army, assisted at and performed abortions under the supervision of a licensed ob-gyn specialist about 45 years ago. I am, in fact, a duly ordained Christian minister although not affiliated with any denomination and not currently on any church’s staff.. Yes, I’ve done things that I’m not very proud of in my life – and a few that I was truly ashamed of – my involvement with abortion is neither.

              You appear to be somewhat obsessed with me. Suit yourself. I hope this clears up a few things for you.

            87. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              “So I don’t live up to your expectations of a Christian minister?”

              Actually, you don’t (by your actions and words) live up to the description of what one is, based on what you claim is your prescribed faith. My expectations notwithstanding, there’s no real getting around that fact.

              “You claim to have “corrected” me on what’s in the Bible – as if there is only one way to understand those words?”

              Sure, we can disagree or discuss what something means, but getting it just plain wrong is a different matter altogther, isn’t it?

              “Since you’ve asked, yes, I do and always have behaved pretty much the same with the members of my church.”

              So, you crack dirty jokes, make fun of those who disagree with you by using sexual innuendo, and the like. Great. Glad we cleared that up. How many oral sex nicknames have you given your fellow church folks, and called it to their face…you know, just for making sure we get the numbers right.

              ” I’ve also been told that one of the most unsettling things about me is my willingness to be real.”

              Apparently, dishonesty also is a hallmark of your “church”…and good to know.

              “It appears that you’ve misinterpreted / taken out of context what I said as somehow “absolutely loving” people’s emotional suffering and reframed it in your own words.”

              You, of course, then spend absolutely zero time dispelling my notion with any actual discussion or rebuttal other than an out-of-hand dismissal. Who knew that simply saying “nope!” was such strong evidence to back up your claims!

              “That you doubt something does not make it a lie – no matter how far afield it might be from your expectations.”

              I never said it did, but even a casual reader would be inclined to believe something is amiss. I’m not even saying you’re blatantly lied about everything. What I am directly saying is that your words and actions don’t match up. You might be many things, but when someone makes a claim, and their actions and words don’t back that up in the slightest….well, you give doubt a foothold. After a while of seeing the same hypocritical actions and words, really…the issue settles itself.

              “I have, in fact, as a clinical specialist in the Army, assisted at and performed abortions under the supervision of a licensed ob-gyn specialist about 45 years ago.”

              Glad to see you admit it, but it wasn’t what was called into question. You could have spent time actually talking about things that were, but such is life I suppose.

              “Yes, I’ve done things that I’m not very proud of in my life – and a few that I was truly ashamed of – my involvement with abortion is neither.”

              Which is more telling about your personal state of affairs that any other non-argument or description you’ve made so far.

              “You appear to be somewhat obsessed with me.”

              So, someone calls you out on what is obviously bovine scatology, and suddenly they’re “obsessed”. You must be far past the clinical definition of such a thing with some of the people you follow and stalk online, so please don’t put me in the same boat as you. I’m sorry Gary, but you don’t flatter yourself. I just call out errors wherever they may be, and posting one time to you or so (in what, 6 weeks or more? I was offline for almost an entire month) isn’t even close. If you want to fantasize about someone being obsessed with you, your feed is full of sycophants who would lovingly and willingly take that role.

              I do wonder, though. You state that you’re a duly ordained minister. I have to ask…is it through the Universal Life Church or its affiliates? Really curious!

              Ta-ta, Mr. GaryG-GayBj4u, or whatever your name is later on today. Have a pleasant day.

            88. Mr. G. says:

              So you don’t approve of the way I do Christian? I’m fine with that. I’m not at all concerned about whether or not I comply with your expectations.

              My remark about obsession referred to what sounded like a very lengthy review of my posting history. That seems rather weird to me. I can’t imagine going to that much bother even for my own posts.

              No, not Universal Life or affiliates.

            89. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              “So you don’t approve of the way I do Christian?”

              Perhaps I didn’t say it slowly enough the first time, so let’s give it another go.

              My approval isn’t what’s important. My original assertion is that you’re a liar and a hypocrite about it. When you claim to be something, and then repeatedly act in a manner which no casual observer could even give you the benefit of the doubt over, then approval isn’t really the issue, is it?

              I’m not looking for approval, nor giving/withholding it. I’m simply calling out your actions and words as being the exact opposite of the very religion/faith you claim to hold dear.

              “My remark about obsession referred to what sounded like a very lengthy review of my posting history. ”

              Not really. It took me less than a handful of posts to really see what color your stripes are…and since I was last active a little over a month ago or so, and because I don’t have a problem with short or long term memory….well, I would think that recalling past conversations wouldn’t be a problem for someone such as yourself. Apparently, I’ve overestimated you in this respect. Past that, even a cursory glance at your posting history reveals precisely what I was claiming…not an in-depth review or anything akin to being obsessive. Basic reading comprehension, less than 5 minutes of reading, and that’s about it.

              “That seems rather weird to me. I can’t imagine going to that much bother even for my own posts.”

              Perhaps. On the other hand, if you were bothered at all with consistency, actually following your own religious tenets, and even passively trying to remember your own comments, it wouldn’t be that strange at all. Personally, I find it strange that you -can’t- remember even basic conversations you’ve had in recent times. Maybe you just need some vitamins? 🙂

              Interesting. That would have been my first guess, with Unity and a few others along that line as close second guesses. Maybe one day you’ll share.

              Have a great evening!

            90. Mr. G. says:

              I must admit that I occasionally act in a hypocritical manner despite my best intentions. That others do so does not excuse me from that error. I am an imperfect person. That said, the limits of your knowledge about the diversity present among Christian added to what you approve as sufficiently Christian does not make me a liar. I’ll start with the fact that. although the conversion is not yet complete, I am in the process of completely wringing religion out of how I do Christianity. That’s not unique. That line of thought has been present among Christian thinkers for at least 80 years and there are hints of it prior to that. That might give you a hint as to my position vis-a-vis the religious tenets you think I should adhere to. Along with that, I freely admit that I do not consider the Bible to be literally true. Nor do I see it as uniquely definitive. Neither of those lines of thought are original to me among Christians either. With the possible exception of those who have a religious devotion to their own belief systems has given them illusions which I experience no sense of obligation to join them in holding, none of that makes me a “liar”.

              I have attended a few services at Unity, but that’s not where I was ordained or attend services today. Given the unpredictable behavior found among some denizens of the Internet, I decline to present the opportunity for one of them to go off on a brainless rant by directly revealing who ordained me. I don’t fear that, but I don’t see any reason to expose nice people to the ravings of a lunatic either. They have much better things to do with their time than be distracted by that meaningless noise.

              It seems that your problem with perceiving the “color” of my “stripes” is based primarily in the filters you wear that distort your perceptions. While I’d suggest that you’d do better to not make strident revelations of your ignorance and would appreciate it if you’d desist in wrongly accusing me of being a liar, I also realize that’s not under my control. It’s not as though you’re capable of forcing anything on me via your ignorance. I’m not afraid that some people will discover that they don’t approve of / agree with my beliefs. I’m not trying to deceive anyone.

            91. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              *Edit* I posted this yesterday, but the link I had placed it in moderation. Should this post twice, the link will be in the other one, but I’ve removed it from here for speed of posting. Hopefully, this posts faster, and I’ll apologize in advance if it double posts later.

              “I must admit that I occasionally act in a hypocritical manner despite my best intentions. ”

              Which was my assertion…that you claimed I had no proof of, and yet here you are admitting it. That’s actually very honest of you, and I appreciate the validation.

              ” That said, the limits of your knowledge about the diversity present among Christian added to what you approve as sufficiently Christian does not make me a liar.”

              I’m sorry, but you still seem foggy on what’s being presented. I’m not saying you’re “insufficiently Christian”. People are imperfect. People make mistakes. It happens. What I’m saying (again for the 3rd time, plainly….which goes back to my claim of misunderstanding, if not misrepresenting, the point) is that you’re telling people you’re a minister. Allow me to break it down (and thus also bring credence to my “correct you on the Bible” section as well).

              There are 17 provisions in Acts 29 that outline exactly what a Pastor (Minister, or whatever title you prefer) should be and do. *edit* This is where the link was removed. A simple google of “biblical requirements for a pastor”, or review of your Bible, will bring you to Acts 29, where that can be examined at length. However, the specific link can be found here, which you’ll note with a slight modification.


              Let’s see. 1 and 2 are personal info about you that I can’t speak to, but 3 could be a bit..difficult. I’m going to give a pass, but leave it on the table in case there’s something else that justifies it later.

              You fail miserably at #4. Repeatedly.
              Based on your words and statements here, #5 is more than likely a dead wringer as well.

              As with some of the others, 6 might be either way, though I did note your little post about hitting happy hour earlier, so…again, could go either way, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt here.

              You fail pretty hard at 7. You certainly, especially with your words, have no intention of being a peacemaker in any real way. You’ve stated as such. Honestly, between us…you want capitulation from those who disagree with you, and nothing more. I wouldn’t even try to pretend otherwise.

              To shorten this, the only other one I can’t bring up specific examples of you getting wrong is #8. The entire remainder of the list, all the way down, are examples that I could make where you’ve stumbled ALL day.

              So, let’s recap, to make sure we’re on board. You’re claiming to be a minister (currently in a church position or not isn’t relevant). You, however, practically possess none of the actual qualifications (prescribed by the book your own faith is based upon….*regardless* of denomination, I’ll add). That was, and is, my entire point in that area of the discussion. Nothing more, nothing less.

              As for the rest…

              ” I am in the process of completely wringing religion out of how I do Christianity. That’s not unique. That line of thought has been present among Christian thinkers for at least 80 years and there are hints of it prior to that. That might give you a hint as to my position vis-a-vis the religious tenets you think I should adhere to.”

              Actually, I have zero problem with this. I believe in Christian ideals, but also some Eastern philosophy points and other items along the way. I personally would applaud you for trying to get religion out of it on some level, because I believe it tends to gum up the works. We find common ground here, which is good.

              “With the possible exception of those who have a religious devotion to their own belief systems has given them illusions which I experience no sense of obligation to join them in holding, none of that makes me a “liar”.”

              Perhaps not in that respect, but that one set of examples doesn’t change the charge. It does, as I outlined earlier, create quite the problem for you when you claim one thing, and yet clearly aren’t that thing. Would not hypocricy be classified as being dishonest, by it’s nature?

              “I have attended a few services at Unity, but that’s not where I was ordained or attend services today. Given the unpredictable behavior found among some denizens of the Internet, I decline to present the opportunity for one of them to go off on a brainless rant by directly revealing who ordained me.”

              While I suppose you have a point about people trolling you, I was genuinely curious. For me, it was simply a way to get a window into your belief systems. While I might pitch in some occassional snark, I’m sure that we’ve been at this long enough to know the other isn’t going to be camping out in the others’ yard anytime soon. I respect your decision to keep that private, and I’ll not push farther on that point.

              “It seems that your problem with perceiving the “color” of my “stripes” is based primarily in the filters you wear that distort your perceptions”

              As above though, it’s really not. It’s a comparison with the black and white of your own book of faith banked against what I see you say, and what you’ve said you’ve done offline, which leads me in that direction. Again, I’m not trying to make this a tug-of-war for approval or disapproval. Simply pointing out that A+B does not equal C here.

              “. While I’d suggest that you’d do better to not make strident revelations of your ignorance ”

              You could suggest it, and that’s fine…but there’s no lack of inculpatory evidence to demonstrate that I’m neither ignorant nor wrong. You’re welcome to believe that, of course, but it won’t me me any less correct in what I’ve said. As stated…I see someone say something wrong, and I go after it. 🙂

              “It’s not as though you’re capable of forcing anything on me via your ignorance. I’m not afraid that some people will discover that they don’t approve of / agree with my beliefs.”

              Nor would I. I find, personally, that when people inject the ideal of one needed to convert to their religious way of thinking in order to be right, that I’m dealing with someone who can’t inevitably see the forest for the trees. Otherwise, since we’re not really going on the approve/agree train of thought, this point of yours becomes moot.

              ” I’m not trying to deceive anyone.”

              There are times, Gary, where I’m not sure whether you’re doing it consciously or not. I think there are things you genuinely believe where you’re in the right, despite the factual evidence to the contrary. Could just you being stubborn. Could be me just being too strict. I suppose that is a matter of opinion. But while there may be, in some circles, varying levels of truth (subjective, objective, observable, etc)…sometimes facts are just facts and we’re forced to live with them.

              Have a good day, sir.

            92. Mr. G. says:

              I would think that anyone familiar with my posting history would understand that, for me, there is no such thing as a “book my faith is based on” or “book of my faith”. The only belief that I have about the Bible is that the evidence reveals it as a severely flawed collection of texts. There is no Acts 29. Acts has 28 chapters. The passage your link refers to primarily reference two texts (1 Timothy , and Titus) that, at least according to a large majority of scholars, are not what they were believed to be at the time they were included in the Canon. They’re both forgeries under Paul’s name. You’ve been operating under that mistaken impression that a Christian minister necessarily grants the Bible authority and the right to define what Christianity means. Your charges of hypocrisy rest on the mistaken assumption that I have claimed to follow the Bible as perhaps a listing of guiding principles that I claim to subscribe to but don’t comply with. This is the point in a trial at which the judge issues a summary judgment in my favor because your charges are not supported by the evidence.

              Our exchange has, however, given me pause to consider something. Given that my ordination was done within the bounds of authority prescribed by the Bible, it’s not unreasonable to think that I might somehow be further bound by that authority. Now I need to at least discuss the ongoing validity of my ordination with appropriate powers-that-be and, depending on the outcome of that, perhaps seek ordination under different terms or resign altogether and henceforth refer to myself as a “former minister”.

            93. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              “I would think that anyone familiar with my posting history would understand that, for me, there is no such thing as a “book my faith is based on” or “book of my faith”.”

              Yet, your posting history really doesn’t matter in this case. You claim to be a Christian, whether you inject religion into it or not. The Bible is the book upon which the entire Christian faith is based, whether you believe it’s literal or not.

              I think the main problem you’re having (and thus justifying my comments before) is that you’re confusing a subjective opinion with an objective claim. An example would be your position that my approval is somehow important. Approval is a subjective point of view, just as much as someone claiming that vanilla ice cream is the best flavor. I’m making an objective statement of right and wrong, however. The book upon which the faith you claim (Christian, regardless of pure religious interjection or denomination) to represent clearly has non-fantasy, non-supernatural statements about what it, as an institution, requires out of a minister. The objective point I’ve made is that you fail at them repeatedly, and in the majority. Your belief about the Biblical accounts of Jesus, Job, Lot, or any other character or event is a complete non-sequitur.

              Easy recap. You claim something. The book that you only marginally believe in, but lay claim to as a matter of your ordination, specifically lists quaiflications of a minister, at which you exceedingly fail or fall short of….it’s not an opinion, it’s not the interjection of faith or religion. It’s a direct, factual comparison between a list of requirements and your actions/words compared to it. The fact that you misunderstand, or want to misrepresent, my position here only justifies my points entirely.

              ” There is no Acts 29. Acts has 28 chapters.”

              Was more for the reference of the website…but fair enough. At least you bothered to google the information you were looking for.

              “The passage your link refers to primarily reference two texts (1 Timothy , and Titus) that, at least according to a large majority of scholars, are not what they were believed to be at the time they were included in the Canon. ”

              Which would be great, if you actually showed me that information. Unless you’re willing to make the argument that being a peacemaker isn’t a quality that’s desirable, etc….then really, you’re going nowhere with this. So, which scholars? Which publications? Who said these things?

              “You’ve been operating under that mistaken impression that a Christian minister necessarily grants the Bible authority and the right to define what Christianity means.”

              Incorrect. You’re reversing it. My assertion is that the Bible, by virtue of said list, is dictating what qualifications are required for one to carry that title appropriately. Your need to cherry-pick the parts you like, and disregard the rest, carries no actual weight. A pastor who doesn’t given any credence or allows their own texts to carry any real weight is really not someone representing it at all, now would it? That’s akin to someone at an AA meeting telling you not to drink, and then going home and having just 1 beer, because telling alcoholics not to drink is more of a general guideline rather than a set standard. When you incorrectly assert things in this way, it’s easy to see how you get turned around.

              ” Your charges of hypocrisy rest on the mistaken assumption that I have claimed to follow the Bible as perhaps a listing of guiding principles that I claim to subscribe to but don’t comply with.”

              So, you’re a minister for a set of principles you neither agree with, nor wish to follow. Then the charge, as you describe it yourself, stands. It’s hypocritical to call yourself a minister, and then not bother to care, follow, or even agree with the very tenets of the book your faith/religion of ordination establishes.

              Of course, it could be an ordination not based in Christianity, which would then make your charge of being Christian suspect, or cherry picked, or false.

              Any way you slice it, it comes across as either an outright lie, or something incredibly hypocritical. Charge stands, sir.

              “This is the point in a trial at which the judge issues a summary judgment in my favor because your charges are not supported by the evidence.”

              The only evidence here is from you. Mine is incredibly straight forward. You’ve not bothered to list any details or information which would actually disprove a thing I’ve said, but have constantly confused subjective/objective items, confused approval with factual purity, and consistently make statements that easily lead to a charge of lying/hypocrisy stick. You can keep saying it’s born of ignorance, or that it’s incorrect, but you offer nothing of substance and expect even casual readers to simply assume you’re right because you say so. Conversely, I list the very things Christianity (the religion/cause you claim to be a member of, and a minister of) states are requirements for that post. You fail at them, constantly and consistently. It’s not hard to see that a trial judge would laugh your lack of any evidence of any kind out of a court.

              “Given that my ordination was done within the bounds of authority prescribed by the Bible, it’s not unreasonable to think that I might somehow be further bound by that authority. Now I need to at least discuss the ongoing validity of my ordination with appropriate powers-that-be and, depending on the outcome of that, perhaps seek ordination under different terms or resign altogether and henceforth refer to myself as a “former minister”.”

              Yes. Yes it would. I love how you spent more time arguing against this concept, and then arrive at it anyway. The fact that I have to now point out that your entire argument is moot, because you came to the same answer I was saying on your own, should be enough to give you pause in quite a few ways.

              Thank you for the reply.

            94. Mr. G. says:

              There are numerous sects of Christianity that barely mention the Bible and do not consider it to be the “defining book” of their faith. There is no basis for claiming that I’m being a hypocrite with regard to compliance with the Bible because there was never any acknowledgement of authority of the Bible in the first place. I cannot be in breach of a “contract” that never existed.

              The one thing I’m acknowledging here has to do with the claim of authority under which my ordination was done. In any case, I haven’t referred to myself as a Christian minister for awhile and doubt that I’ll bother to again any time soon. In most if not all cases, I’ve only done so in response to claims that “Christians….” as a means of communicating that “Not all Christians…..”. I’ve taken to being more specific – correcting people by saying, more or less, “that may be true of SOME Christians, but it is not true for all Christians”

            95. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              “There are numerous sects of Christianity that barely mention the Bible and do not consider it to be the “defining book” of their faith.”

              So, could you name some of them? Even a short list would be great for a starting point. I mean, if they are numerous, then listing, say…5 or so…shouldn’t be a challenge. We can go from there.

              “There is no basis for claiming that I’m being a hypocrite with regard to compliance with the Bible because there was never any acknowledgement of authority of the Bible in the first place.”

              Yet, in your last post, at the end you completely up-end this, and most of the remainder of your other postings, by backtracking. I’m sorry, but you don’t get out of it that easily. Either you believe that there was authority in the ordination, as you pointed out before, from such a source or their isn’t. Your acknowledgement of such a fact doesn’t remove it from play, and your dancing around of this idea repeatedly while claiming to be “Christian” while not actually believing in the very things which contain it’s precepts and principles is, by it’s nature, hypocritical. While we can verbally spar over what sects believe, or what dogma that each one follows, there are very few avenues to go down where, at some point, your own answers (and admissions, like the end of your last post) really are nothing more than dismissals of inconvenient items you wish would go away.

              “The one thing I’m acknowledging here has to do with the claim of authority under which my ordination was done.”

              Which would be, after all, the very “contract” you pretend doesn’t exist in the very sentence preceding this one. If there is authority there, and you entered into a position of having to acknowledge it as some authority (any authority at all, really), then saying “there’s no contract” and then saying “well, there is a claim of authority” seems like nothing more than weasel wording at best. Either you’re beholden to the precepts, concepts, and rules which are behind your ordination, or you choose not to do so. This puts us right back at square one again. I mean, think about it. To be ordained in a Christian faith, any Christian faith, as a minister would be you agreeing (by oath, if not by direct words within the book which contains the articles of said faith/religion/sect) to follow a set of rules/guidelines/precepts. It’s a “contract”, whether you like it or not, whether you really agree with it or not, or whether you choose to follow it later or not.

              Come on Gary. Your argument is nothing more than “I’m not liable for something I agreed to as a result of being ordained, because I didn’t acknowledge the authority of the book they used to ordain me”. Since you keep mentioning law, you can walk into a court of law and say you don’t recognize their authority one iota. We both know that such a thing wouldn’t change the outcome of the case, right?

              “In any case, I haven’t referred to myself as a Christian minister for awhile and doubt that I’ll bother to again any time soon.”

              Perhaps…but you’ve done it enough to where someone who casually reads things online, such as myself, knows to call you out on it. The frequency of your claim doesn’t diminish if i’m right or wrong about it, in any event.

              “In most if not all cases, I’ve only done so in response to claims that “Christians….” as a means of communicating that “Not all Christians…..”. I’ve taken to being more specific – correcting people by saying, more or less, “that may be true of SOME Christians, but it is not true for all Christians”

              Again, perhaps. It just, without reading too far into it, just seem like you have been presented with a less-than convenient truth about something you’ve claimed, and you’ve presented no real evidence or rebuttal other than basic out-of-hand dismissals and specious statements about authority.

              I’m sorry, but when you keep having to backtrack, pause, and so forth…really, I’m sure we’re at the end of this discussion, and I’m comfortable with my assessments. You’ve not refuted them, and you’ve had to backtrack and admit things that you said I was ignorant of and the like after the fact.

              I don’t really see where you have anything of use to add, past this point, which would even be remotely convincing.

              I will, however, remember your point about “some Christians” believing things or acting certain ways. I think, given your stances on things, that’s an interesting point.

              Thanks for the reply.

            96. Mr. G. says:

              Despite my attempts to inform you that I am not resident in the box, you’ve one again presented relentless, redundant pseudo-intellectual rambling to insist that I do not behave as you expect a resident of the box you insist I’m in should. I can’t say whether you’re being intentionally obtuse, just trolling me for fun, or have something else in mind. What I can say is that I’m finding what you say so boring that my attention begins to wander when I read yet another lengthy diatribe from you. Having enjoyed our exchange to the fullest, I all I have left to say to you at this point is, “Don’t be surprised if I don’t bother to respond to you again. If you’re truly interested about what you ask me, you can search out the answers elsewhere,”

            97. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              “Despite my attempts to inform you that I am not resident in the box, you’ve one again presented relentless, redundant pseudo-intellectual rambling to insist that I do not behave as you expect a resident of the box you insist I’m in should. ”

              This would be the “running away” portion, I suspect. If it’s redundant, it’s only that way because apparently after having parsed this out for your several times, you keep bringing up the same excuses, only to backtrack out of them later when you’re forced to admit that you’re wrong.

              No, Gary. I’m not rambling, nor claiming that you are confined to some metaphorical box. You might even have tried to make a point before now, or justified your stance. You’ve done neither. The “box” you keep talking about is one of your own making, one of your own admission, and one you refuse at some points to acknowledge it exists before then having to backtrack that as well. The redundancy is only that somehow, you keep doing these things and then continue talking about things as if your last posts never happened.

              “I can’t say whether you’re being intentionally obtuse…”

              Misdirection. You already know I’m not, and you’re already familiar with why.

              “….just trolling me for fun…”

              Which also, even the casual reader could admit, isn’t happening.

              “or have something else in mind.”

              I did, and you’ve managed to prove my points swimmingly so far. I do appreciate it, even if for some reason, you still have no real idea what those are, despite it being laid out in plain English.

              “What I can say is that I’m finding what you say so boring that my attention begins to wander when I read yet another lengthy diatribe from you.”

              Yet, you keep responding with the same non-answers, the same non-sequitur statements, and the same efforts at evasion that you’ve stomped your feet about earlier as not being true. The rebuttal really writes themselves.

              “Having enjoyed our exchange to the fullest, I all I have left to say to you at this point is, “Don’t be surprised if I don’t bother to respond to you again. If you’re truly interested about what you ask me, you can search out the answers elsewhere,””

              I’m glad you have, as have I. If you choose not to respond, then really I’ll be getting more of the same. I’ve asked for proof of your argument points (reference: number of religions question from my last post, the one before that about about the numerous scholars which would justify your point, and so on). You’ve provided none, and now in this late hour give me the “well, I’m going to not respond now”….which, whether you realize it or not, is really just more justification from what i said first off….with you, it’s always a tactic of running away from a valid argument, or changing the subject.

              Honestly though, Gary…I can’t seek those answers elsewhere. I’m asking you specific questions, and making specific comments, about *your* behavior and belief system. Unless there’s a book somewhere that’s titled “All About Gary: 101 Things You Wanted To Know!”, then really…even this last, desperate out of hand dismissal just seems comically out of place.

              Until next time, sir. 🙂

            98. I believe you and don’t get what their problem is.

            99. I am delighted Gary “is on my side.” I enjoy talking to him and do not consider him obsessed or a liar. These ad hominem attacks on him seem very week and don’t help your argument against Gary.

              Also, I’m working on a blog post about being called a “Harpy.” I’ll add your post this to it.

            100. PJ4 says:

              I’m glad Gary’s not in my side
              You can have those sloppy seconds
              That’s great that you don’t see his lies and obsessive nature

              Are you trying to imply that his ad hominem attacks on me and others are very strong and help his argument against us?

              It’s excellent that you’re working on yet another blog post
              I’m honored and flattered that you think my comment is worthy enough to be apart of it

            101. I don’t consider Gary “sloppy seconds’ I give him more respect than that. What can I say I’m a creative person. I’ve been blogging on an off for about seven years. It’s really super easy. It literally take five minutes to start a blog. All you have to do is go to Blogger and start one.

            102. PJ4 says:

              I only give respect to people who deserve it
              Gary is less than deserving
              But you’re entitied to your own opinion

              I’m sure it’s easy to start a blog…having the time to fill it all in is the problem

            103. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              Since we had a good exchange earlier, I’d pick your brain.

              If someone were really going to get into it, say full time…would you recommend doing an entirely professional page up front, or start on something like Blogger, Tumblr, etc…and then progress later?

              Personally, I’ve had several good folks tell me I should start one as at least a part time gig, but my main considerations are a lack of audience (especially just starting out, when everyone has a blog, you know?) and having the proper time and energy to make it something I’d be proud to put out there.



            104. MamaBear says:

              CM, I would suggest you look at successful blogs from different subjects, and see what they do have in common that makes them successful. My two favorite cancer ones are Nancy’s Point and But Doctor I Hate Pink. Both have run several years and they know what their readers want and need. Ask others for recommendations or look over your current favorites.

            105. Cynical_Meliorist says:

              Thanks for the vote of confidence!

            106. MamaBear says:

              Heard a rabbi say that the reason most people are conservative, but most politicians and activists are liberal, is that the conservatives had more important things to do, like joyfully busy raising families, as well as volunteering in their synagogues and churches, scout troops and PTAs, and soup kitchens and homeless shelters, to get involved in politics.
              I suspect that goes for the majority of blogs as well, with certain highly targeted exceptions, like a cancer blog or a home schooling blog.
              PJ, you are a voice to be reckoned with, not a harpy. Should you ever find time for a blog, between kids, grad school, husband, and CPC volunteering, I’m sure you will have a genuine message, not just a gripe fest.
              ps. Those awful intolerant Christians……the rabbi’s message was being broadcast on a Christian radio station! LOL

            107. PJ4 says:

              Indeed Mamabear, indeed

              And thanks!

            108. Nordog6561 says:

              And I would say that most military people are conservative because they know what it’s like to work AND live in a giant federal government bureaucracy.

            109. MamaBear says:

              I suspect most who go in the military lean conservative to begin with. A liberal would be afraid he might be asked to learn to shoot a (gasp) gun, or drive a gas-guzzling tank.

            110. Nordog6561 says:

              Why don’t you have a blog documenting all the names you’ve been called?

              People must just flock to such things.


            111. PJ4 says:

              While that would fill many pages on the Internet, unfortunately my real world obligations prevent me from full immersion in the virtual world

              As it is, I’m on here too much

            112. My site that’s been running for three plus months already has more than 1,800 page hits. If I keep this up I can start selling ad space. Here’s the new post and updated design. I still have more design work to do. Maybe I’ll devote a special post to your favorite word “ghoul.” (Only if you’re lucky)

            113. Nordog6561 says:

              Be still my beating heart.

            114. PJ4 says:

              But do the hits count if it’s the same few people viewing your page over and over again?

              Do they have to be unique hits?

            115. Not sure. I’ll have to check google analytics.

            116. Mr. G. says:

              OMG! It’s HAPPY HOUR down the street. I think I’ll go be more happy – later, tater 😉

            117. Sounds good to me. I’m ready for happy hour.

            118. Mr. G. says:

              Here’s to happy, ER!

            119. Mr. G. says:

              At the same time or alternating????

            120. Mr. G. says:

              OK – conference call time – don’t act weird 😉

            121. Huh? I’m always weird. That’s my middle name.

            122. Mr. G. says:

              Look – if I can’t pick my nose during the video conference, is it too much to ask you to wait too?

            123. You can’t scratch your butt either.

            124. Mr. G. says:

              I didn’t and they didn’t see you when you did.

            125. Can you see what I’m doing now?

            126. Mr. G. says:

              OMG! But I’m enough of a gentleman that I won’t repeat it for the whole Internet 🙂

            127. And you know who would be watching you.

            128. Mr. G. says:

              Not unless there’s $50 in it – $75 for two.

            129. Mr. G. says:

              Here it is 14 hours later, and I’m still stunned that you let me watch you do that.

            130. I tried to post a link to my blog with the Harpy article and it’s pending. Anyway I told you I would post a link but can’t. It’s linked on my profile.

            131. PJ4 says:

              Love it

            132. Dutch says:

              Well, a couple of suggestions.

              Company profits and CEO compensations are often at the expense
              of those who use the products. The stuff costs more than it needs to.
              NOBODY needs to or should be making a $billion a year or $billion in 10

              Then it is no longer our land, it is theirs, to do what they please with it.

            133. Wrabble says:

              “Company profits and CEO compensations are often at the expense
              of those who use the products.”

              Company profits come when a company provides a product or service that people want and when they do it in a way whereby their costs are lower than their income.

              There is nothing inherently evil about that arrangement.

              If you don’t want a product or service or you don’t want your money going to someone you don’t like because you think he or she makes too much, then don’t patronize that business. It’s pretty simple.

              Wealthy entrepreneurs like Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, John D. Rockefeller, Ford, and J. P. Morgan contributed far more to the success of the people of this country than did a million other people.

            134. Paul says:

              So you got pinged on a 7 moth old comment too?

            135. Wrabble says:

              Dutch is a real winner, fo sho.

            136. Shep says:

              Me too.

            137. Dutch says:

              First of all, perhaps we have different ideas as to what makes a country

              2nd, Carnegie, et al, did not make the kind of money that today’s
              entrepeneurs do even with the inflation taken into consideration. There
              are those then and still today who do what they do because they love
              doing it and are good at it. And the money comes with it but it is not
              the reason why they do it. Give a person a chance, and if they
              have it in them, they too can succeed.

            138. Wrabble says:

              “2nd, Carnegie, et al, did not make the kind of money that today’s entrepeneurs do even with the inflation taken into consideration.”

              Consider that today’s entrepreneurs have access to much larger and more global markets than did the entrepreneurs of the 1800s and early 1900s. Of course the numbers look larger now when inflation is considered – you have to also consider how the global marketplace has made it possible to derive revenue from international sources and how modern distribution, advertising, communication, etc., all work together to make it possible for people to sell – and profit – a lot more.

              The people I mentioned were fabulously wealthy when compared to ordinary Americans, many of whom lived in squalor, had no running water, etc.. That is the real yardstick of wealth comparison.

              What right do YOU have to limit what others can make? How is YOUR life diminished by the fabulous success of others? You are not harmed in the slightest and your life is probably enriched by their success, in many ways you can’t even imagine.

            139. Dutch says:

              Sorry, but I’m not convinced. It boggles my mind to know that the
              conservatives by and large just hug and kiss the rich guys all the time.
              Why? Do you think that no one is developing things in other countries?
              And their wage gaps are not anything in the world like ours. Nor was our
              wage gap anything like it is today, forty and fifty years ago.

            140. Wrabble says:

              Jack Ma is worth about $28B and he lives in a country where the average wage is about $5,000 for a ratio of 5,600,000 to 1.

              Bill Gates is worth about $80B and he lives in a country where the average wage is about $27,000 for a ratio of about half that in China.

            141. Dutch says:

              Two people do not make a sample.

              There is a chart out there on the web (unless Soros paid to have it
              removed) that shows country by country the differences. I’ve been
              searching for it, and have found many other articles but not that one – the easiest to read. And many of them were old, even going back to 2002. Many others didn’t have a date at all, that I can find. So I went to the old tried and true (Wikipedia) and this is what I found.

              “U.S. income inequality has grown significantly since the early 1970s,[8][9][10][11][12][13] after several decades of stability,[14][15][16]
              and has been the subject of study of many scholars and institutions.
              The U.S. consistently exhibits higher rates of income inequality than
              most developed nations due to the nation’s enhanced support of free market capitalism and less progressive spending on social services.[17][18][19][20][21]”

              It is a very long article, and this part is under “Overview” Meanwhile, I have other things
              to do. Am moving to “winter” home next week and have a lot of packing to do.

            142. Wrabble says:

              “Two people do not make a sample.”

              And yet you are willing to base tax policy on just a very few people like billionaires. There really aren’t that many of them.

            143. Wrabble says:

              Suppose that the government confiscated say half of the net worth of wealthy people like George Soros and Warren Buffet and John Kerry and Herb Kohl and Diane Feinstein and Al Gore and Elizabeth Warren and Claire McCaskill and Hillary Clinton.

              Please tell us how your life and the lives of others would be improved.

            144. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Unless a government was loaded with ignorant, lazy, greedy, and petulant children, why would it do that, Wrabble? That’s just infantile. :o)

            145. Dutch says:

              I think you picked the wrong people. Politicians don’t produce. Warren
              Buffet is known for how well he pays his people. I don’t know who Herb
              Kohn and Claire McCaskill are, but let me guess, – they are democrats.
              And George Soros, from all I can tell, he seems to be an investor and/or
              a banker.

              Now would you like to discuss Trump. This is from his own biography
              on the internet: “Donald J. Trump is the very definition of the American success story,
              continually setting the standards of excellence while expanding his
              interests in real estate, sports, and entertainment. He is the
              archetypal businessman –– a deal maker without peer.”

              And Wikipedia has more to add to that:

              Four of Trump’s businesses have declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy.[191] According to a 2011 report by Forbes,
              these were due to over-leveraged hotel and casino businesses in
              Atlantic City: Trump’s Taj Mahal (1991), Trump Plaza Hotel (1992), Trump
              Hotels and Casino Resorts (2004), and Trump Entertainment Resorts
              Trump said “I’ve used the laws of this country to pare debt. … We’ll
              have the company. We’ll throw it into a chapter. We’ll negotiate with
              the banks. We’ll make a fantastic deal. You know, it’s like on ‘The
              Apprentice’. It’s not personal. It’s just business.”[194] He indicated that other “great entrepreneurs” do the same.[192]

              America needs more like him, don’t you think? Oh, wait he has said the other great
              entrepreneurs do the same thing. What a blessing for America. No wonder the rest
              of the world is not quite as impressed with our “greatness” as we are.

            146. cecilia says:

              how about rich corporations just pay their taxes?
              That’s what happened in the 1950’s and during those years the middle class BOOMED.

              without a middle class America is dead

            147. Wrabble says:

              The middle class rose in the 50s not because of taxes but because skilled labor was necessary. A person could make a very good living running a lathe, assembling cars, running an adding machine, taking dictation, etc..

              However, we have innovated ourselves out of much of the need for as much skilled labor.

              CAD/CAM and CNC machines have replaced a huge portion of our manufacturing workforce. Companies no longer need rooms full of accountants and bookkeepers – computers are far more efficient at that.

              Large insurance companies used to require hundreds of well-paid actuaries to determine insurance premiums, risks, policy content, etc.. Now they can do the same work faster and more accurately with a dozen or so actuaries and some computer systems. I personally know of one such insurance company that went from over 400 actuaries to eight.

              The labor required to assemble a car has fallen from an average of 70 hours per vehicle to under 20 hours – and that skills required are far less than they used to be.

              Sorry, innovation and global trade have impacted the middle class, not taxes.
              And FWIW, corporations do pay a LOT of taxes, even if they are losing money and don’t pay federal income tax, they still pay property tax, Social Security, Medicare, and a whole raft of other taxes.

              You are just reciting dogma without thinking.

            148. cecilia says:

              I didn’t mean to imply that corporate taxes were the ONLY reason we had a healthy middle class in the 50’s.
              But it was a factor.

              and, yes, jobs have been going OUT of America because that’s what corporations are doing.

              Also, you are talking to someone who saw the writing on the wall and learned – on my own time and money – how to use a computer and I was able to continue and flourish in a career. (And I’m not one of the rich people. ie I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth. I picked myself by my OWN bootstraps.)

              the gop haven’t done right by this country for a good 30 years
              They have screwed the middle class and I’m not supporting anyone who doesn’t respect the middle class

            149. Wrabble says:

              “jobs have been going OUT of America because that’s what corporations are doing.”

              And the Democrat stronghold of Chicago just sent a trade delegation to China to see how they could increase business with that country.

              And before you say, “Oh they are trying to drum up business for American companies,” they aren’t.

              BTW, Wal-Mart, which is hated by the left (even though Hillary Clinton used to be on the board of directors) is the largest importer of American-made goods into China.

              “the gop haven’t done right by this country for a good 30 years”

              The Bush tax plan increased the share of tax paid by the wealthy and decreased the share paid by lower income workers. The Bush tax plan increased the Child Tax Credit from $600 to $1,000 – which had a profoundly positive effect on budgets of the middle class.

              If that 67% CTC increase was so bad for the middle class, why haven’t Democrats repealed it?

              Furthermore, you fail to prove your case about the relationship between corporate taxes and the welfare of the middle class.

              When I prove you are wrong, instead of either disproving my points or even addressing them directly, you merely recite more liberal dogma and propaganda.

              BTW, how is the Democrats’ war on the coal industry helping the middle class in coal states?

            150. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              I hope you’re only working for what it takes to produce the good or service I might be buying from you/your employer; wouldn’t want to overpay.

              Rather than envy those making a profit, why don’t you go into business for yourself? Or does that sound like too much work?

            151. BJ4..u2 says:

              An outrageous profit is one gained by paying workers a wage that qualifies them for government assistance – which effectively spreads their cost of doing business across all taxpayers – not at all honest. That amounts to forcing the rest of us to subsidize their failure to pay a living wage in pursuit of giving the appearance of success.

            152. Wrabble says:

              Is that the fault of the business or of the government programs that enable it?

            153. BJ4..u2 says:

              I suspect you aren’t quick enough on the uptake to realize that food stamps, etc. are actually corporate welfare – icing on top of the conservative mantra of “cut taxes”.

            154. Wrabble says:

              You’re right, I am not “quick enough on the uptake” to realize that food stamps, etc., are actually corporate welfare.”

              I didn’t realize that the left wants to cut those aspects of “corporate welfare.”

            155. BJ4..u2 says:

              When businesses pay a living wage and the wealthy pay taxes appropriate to their income, no one will qualify for them. In other words, there’s more than one way to cut those aspects of corporate welfare. Guessing here that never occurred to you.

            156. Yes! Can we say Walmart?

            157. BJ4..u2 says:

              They’re blatant about it – a class in how to apply for benefits as part of new employee orientation.

            158. Laurie Neufeld says:

              Obvious troll is obvious. Do not feed. Carry on.

            159. jaggedlittlepill says:

              I am so sick of hearing “penalizing the rich”. That is the biggest load of horse shit EVER. No one is penalizing the rich. The rich are using the poor to get richer, idiot. What about penalizing people who are scraping by on almost nothing when the fat cats don’t PAY ANY TAXES AT ALL? Poor people still pay taxes, but not the corporations or the billionaires. They hide all their money. They like to cut things though. They cut benefits for the least among us and give it directly to people who have more ill gotten gains than they will ever be able to spend. Are you a billionaire? Why would you rather YOUR money go to gazillionaires than a kid who goes without supper every night? Is that kid a failure in your book? You should be careful about your smugness. God is listening and YOU ARE NOT A MEMBER OF THE 1%. They are stealing from you, too, and it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that you could suffer a reversal of fortune someday and need help yourself. Oh, but that would make you a FAILURE wouldn’t it???

            160. Wrabble says:

              “I am so sick of hearing “penalizing the rich”.”

              Did someone type that? Or are you, in typical lib fashion, misrepresenting what I actually posted – to suit your dogma.

              ” the fat cats don’t PAY ANY TAXES AT ALL? Poor people still pay taxes, but not the corporations or the billionaires. They hide all their money. ”

              If that were true (“they hide all their money” and don’t pay any taxes), then why do the top 10% of income earners pay more than 2/3 of the total federal income tax bill (and the top 1% pay almost 1/3)?

              money.cnn DOT com/2014/04/04/pf/taxes/top-1-taxes/index.html

              “The top 40 percent of households by before-tax income actually paid
              106.2 percent of the nation’s net income taxes in 2010, according to a new study by the Congressional Budget Office.

              At the same time, households in the bottom 40 percent took in an
              average of $18,950 in what the CBO called “government transfers” in

              cnsnews DOT com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/cbotop-40-paid-1062-income-taxes-bottom-40-paid-91-got-average-18950

              And while we are at it, our top corporate tax rate is the highest among developed nations. Having a rate like that forces our businesses (in order to remain competitive in the global market) to move assets, revenue, profit, and JOBS to other countries.

            161. Biolochic says:

              As a successful business owner I place people before profit – something that blows the minds of conservatives. I measure success not only by profit, but by how many people I’m able to help. When you place profit before people, when money is the only thing you treasure while walking over and often firing “the little people”, then your success is empty. Profit mongering is a sign of mental illness.

            162. Walter Mow says:

              another socialist heard from… taxation is not the problem… those liberal spending bills supported by both parties with all the pork are the real problem.. cut the pork, cut the deficit.. voila, the debt shrinks.. it ain’t rocket science..

            163. ge205 says:

              1. What is pork to some is investments/real social benefits to others.
              2. Cut out of the “pork” and there will still be “pork”. Pork has existed since governments existed and will always exist. That’s not to say we should always look to make spending more efficient. Yet, cutting waste is not the only answer to stopping debt.
              3. If conservatives are really concern about pork, they should be focus on the dollars spent on corporate welfare versus pennies spent on helping the poor. Yet, one could argue corporate welfare creates a better business climate. In that case, see point #1.

            164. Wrabble says:

              What do you mean by corporate welfare? Are you talking about scams like Solyndra?

            165. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Obama’s corporate welfare (Contribution laundering/favor-buying):

              The complete (probably not now as this list is old) list of faltering or bankrupt green-energy companies:

              Evergreen Solar ($25 million)*
              SpectraWatt ($500,000)*
              Solyndra ($535 million)*
              Beacon Power ($43 million)*
              Nevada Geothermal ($98.5 million)
              SunPower ($1.2 billion)
              First Solar ($1.46 billion)
              Babcock and Brown ($178 million)
              EnerDel’s subsidiary Ener1 ($118.5 million)*
              Amonix ($5.9 million)
              Fisker Automotive ($529 million)
              Abound Solar ($400 million)*
              A123 Systems ($279 million)*
              Willard and Kelsey Solar Group ($700,981)*
              Johnson Controls ($299 million)
              Schneider Electric ($86 million)
              Brightsource ($1.6 billion)
              ECOtality ($126.2 million)
              Raser Technologies ($33 million)*
              Energy Conversion Devices ($13.3 million)*
              Mountain Plaza, Inc. ($2 million)*
              Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Company ($10 million)*
              Range Fuels ($80 million)*
              Thompson River Power ($6.5 million)*
              Stirling Energy Systems ($7 million)*
              Azure Dynamics ($5.4 million)*
              GreenVolts ($500,000)
              Vestas ($50 million)
              LG Chem’s subsidiary Compact Power ($151 million)
              Nordic Windpower ($16 million)*
              Navistar ($39 million)
              Satcon ($3 million)*
              Konarka Technologies Inc. ($20 million)*
              Mascoma Corp. ($100 million)

              Imagine all the cardboard “homes” Dems could have bought for the poor with all that money.

            166. RonzoL61 says:

              We pay plenty of taxes. Most of it is wasted on paying for this bloated, corrupt, inefficient Government. Wouldn’t streamlining the Government free up money that could better be spent elsewhere? But, your side never talks about that. And why doesn’t anyone on your side ever talk about simplifying the tax code and doing away with all the subsidies and loopholes that allow “The Rich” to “not pay their fair share”? As long as those things are in the tax code, people will continue to take advantage of them.

            167. infadelicious says:

              That’s what businesses go into business for.. To make profits, if not where’s the incentive for investors or entrepreneurs who are after all usually donating to local charities and creating jobs. Duh! Dont buy their products then. Don’t like someone else’s success? Envious of their profits but don’t wanna work like they did to build that success? No probs, vote democrat and demand what you think is yours- that being money earned off someone else’s sweat and hard work. Despicable really

            168. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ow! Dancing with the Dulls, again? :o)

            169. infadelicious says:

              Ha ha! I’m waiting in airport and I was bored. 🙂 just sharing truth and sunshine with those who need it most. I am a National Treasurer ya know.

            170. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha. On your way back to the MW? Oh, and you forgot… leyenda.

            171. infadelicious says:

              Leyenda… I never forgot. It’s on my résumé , page two. LOL. ;-0)

            172. infadelicious says:

              Btw I went from 80 f in Mia to around 0 in Philly and now I am headed to minus 20 F. It’s not good trend. 🙁

            173. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Yikes. 70s here yesterday.

            174. infadelicious says:

              Grrrrrr! *#+***%# !!!! Ummm, I mean .. How nice for you sugar

            175. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              It’s not seasonal but I’m glad to have it.

            176. Dauger says:

              I thought the Bible said render under Caesar’s what is Caesar’s? In other words, pay your bloody taxes. If not, well then yes, the nice law enforcement officer will be by to escort you to court to answer for your violation of the law (and God’s law too, it seems).

            177. uphogger says:

              I don’t think you’re fully understanding that one. Tithing is a commandment but God leaves it to our moral agency whether we pay it or not. That isn’t to say there won’t be consequences down the line. Taxes, however, are the law of the land, a temporal order, not a spiritual one. There will be penalties for nonpayment. What happens when government gets so onerous that one feels compelled to resist? That’s an abridged version of what happened in US history. God’s law never reflects man’s law and seldom is the opposite true. But God said in Malichi that we should prove him herewith with our tithing, such that we should receive a blessing we wouldn’t have room to hold. Myself, I have a testimony that it’s true. However, when I’ve I’ve much in taxes, yet they want more and threaten me if I haven’t got it on hand, that’s not how God works. They don’t act out of love and benevolence and there’s your biggest difference between the two.

            178. pwlsax says:

              I notice he called money “treasure.” mmmmmmmHMM!

            179. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              That’s an utterly moronic attempt to make a nonexistent distinction. Tithing is voluntary giving. That is the very definition of charity.

            180. Jed says:

              I’d wager everything I own that the percentage of donations to church groups that actually get to those in need is enormously higher than do the percentage of tax dollars.

            181. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              I believe that information exists although I don’t recall personally seeing it but I’ve always figured the need to proffer such information was the result of quibbling with petty people, desperate to believe unbelievable things, so I never followed up on it.

            182. Jed says:

              Probably so, but given the resistance to factual data by so many Leftists such as those posting here, there’s little point in pursuing it.

            183. Cletus B Neckbeard says:


            184. Red47 says:

              Petty me!!! I love this stuff. However, because of my usual shortcoming, I cannot find my link. 🙁

            185. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              That goes for me too, positively.
              In addition, this is one hundred percent true for every Orthodox Jewish synagogue that I know of.

            186. Jed says:

              In my very limited experience (having had a very dear friend in my youth who was an Orthodox Jew), I agree wholeheartedly.

            187. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              Thanks for your very kind words, as usual.

              I can personally testify to the many different organizations that exist. There are some that target specific situations. For example the Bikur Cholim Charity (Its literal meaning is “visiting the sick,” in Hebrew. It is a term encompassing a wide range of activities performed by an individual or a group to provide comfort and support to people who are ill, homebound, isolated and/or otherwise in distress). They help pay for medications, medical bills, etc. They even have volunteer drivers to drive ill people to hospitals, doctors, etc., people who cook meals for the sick and their families, etc. These services are all encompassed under one charity, alone.
              There are countless others.
              There are also “Gmachs” which are free loan societies where people can borrow anything pro bono from crutches to cradles, LITERALLY!!

              In my community alone, there are about forty to fifty Gmachs. It is simply beautiful…. 😉

            188. Jed says:

              And I thank you for that.

            189. Red47 says:

              You can look that up on the charity watchdog sites. the last census report shows that about 24 cents on the dollar actually gets through the moneychangers to the govt’s version of poor through taxation.

            190. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              True dat. Thanks.
              Not a very good showing.

            191. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              That is not the case.
              In Orthodox Jewish communities, the people that are financially better off economically, give most generously to charities that go DIRECTLY to help assist poor people. (Poor people give what they can, when they can).
              There are different charities that provide assistance for different needs. For example, there is a charity that helps people who have illness and have a hard time paying for their medical expenses. The money that gets donated goes entirely to help these stricken people.

            192. maryinbama says:

              Nope. That trope was based on faulty numbers and logic. Conservatives donate most of their charitable dollars to their churches…churches that do very little to help anyone in need. Most of their charitable dollars go to preacher salaries, construction and utilities, not to the poor, sick or hungry.

            193. steveranden says:


            194. Buffy says:

              Wow. Gotta tell that to the catholic church

            195. Jed says:

              The Catholic Church has donated an extraordinary amount to the poor. That is true as well for every Protestant denomination. The fact that Christian charity is not reported in the MSM does not negate its existence.

            196. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Another of the MSM’s better kept secrets is that conservative are more generous in their private givings than regressives.

            197. Jed says:

              Absolutely; and not just in terms of money. They tend to give of themselves and their time as well.

            198. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              You bet. My wife will probably end up giving her church at least four grand this year. If they were to pay her at the rate her employer pays her, it would amount to at least half again that.

            199. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              AMEN AND AMEN!! You are positively spot on!
              It would not work as well with the money, alone.
              In my community, there are many people, (whose personal economic circumstances vary tremendously), that donate time to these charities.
              What is so great about people donating time is the fact that they don’t have to be wealthy to be a part of it, yet they are just as vitally needed. It gives everyone a sense of personal pride and accomplishment to be a part of helping other people in need. It is a win win situation all around.

            200. Red47 says:

              To be precise, it’s called building a community. 🙂

            201. R_Swift says:

              When you give your time you are giving the most precious and limited commodity you have, a portion of your life.

            202. R_Swift says:

              Without seeking accolades…….

            203. jaggedlittlepill says:

              That’s because rich CONservatives hoard all the money and many liberals are the ones who have to seek out the help. You must have missed THOSE stories the last few years. I wonder if conservatives would be inclined to help a liberal person if they showed up on the doorstep of one their mega churches asking for help, but wasn’t a member of said church. Going strictly by what they do and not by what they SAY they do, I find it highly doubtful that they would get close enough to a poor person to even hear what they said. Yes, we are all extremely touched by their sudden concern for the middle class and the working poor…

            204. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Please repeat that louder and with greater frequency, Lil Goebbels; there are still a few of us who know the truth!

              Oh, and put your money where your mouth is a get a job.

            205. jaggedlittlepill says:

              Alas, a work-related injury prevents anyone from hiring me. I put in 32 years though, so I guess I’ve paid my dues. Why do you pricks have to come to a liberal site and try to sound like you know something? Every single one of you is a feces flinging howler monkey and no one here would piss on you if you were on fire. Hey, there’s something we have in common! A mutual disrespect and bilateral hatred. Who says we can’t work together? I’ll pray for you…to have a sudden and irreversible explosion in the general area of your heart. Buh-bye, now.

            206. Doctor Hook says:

              Sucks when you lose every argument, doesn’t it? We don’t feel your pain.

            207. infadelicious says:

              Oh dear, someone’s in a mood today. Are you naturally prone to grand mal hissy fits or is it brought on by huffing bath salts and metallic paint?

            208. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              “Why do you pricks have to come to a liberal site and try to sound like you know something? ”
              Shut up, sit down, and pay me!
              Got it.
              If I thought my existence was contingent on the generosity of others, I probably wouldn’t abuse them with name-calling.
              Sincerely yours,

              Howler Monkey

            209. infadelicious says:

              People like jagged lil pill make everyone on the site a little dumber with each post she pukes out.

            210. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Gotta wonder if that’s even possible on a site like this.

            211. infadelicious says:

              I do declare sir, that is a very good point. The stupid is strong here

            212. Biolochic says:

              Actually, it’s the poor who donate more than the rich. Disquss won’t let me paste the many links that show this. Google “poor give more to charity than rich”. You’ll see Liberal & Conservative (as well as neutral) sites exposing this. Why do they give more? Because they know how rough it is and how even $1 means a lot.

            213. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Actually, that’s an idiotic thing to say. I’ll bet you love railing on the Koch Bros., too. Have the poor given $25 million to the United Negro College Fund? Even though the fund initially rejected it, they yielded to their inner whore and accepted it.

            214. Biolochic says:

              Dude, just look it up. I was surprised too when I found out last year.

            215. Biolochic says:

              I was surprised too when I found out. Seriously, look it up.

            216. Biolochic says:

              OK, I’ve posted a reply 3 times but, Disqus isn’t showing it. I was also quite surprised to find out that it’s true that the poor give more. You really should look it up.

              And by the way, I’m not a Liberal, nor a Conservative, so chill out about attacking me. I’m a person who like to find out as much information as possible, often from conflicting sides, and to make up my own mind.

            217. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Disqus showed your originals. I just ignored them.

            218. Biolochic says:

              Yes, it’s far better to bury your head in the sand and to keep your mind closed to the possibility that you might not have all the facts. Truth is irrelevant after all. Have fun with your willful ignorance 🙂

            219. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Thank you! I will!
              BTW, “projection?” Look into it.

            220. maryinbama says:

              Catholic Charities in the USA get between 75-80% of their funding through US tax dollars.

            221. jesus is watching says:

              My mom worked for the church after she retired. She was a classic liberal. The other classic liberal Christians do all this ‘donating’ that you speak of. The conservative people this article speaks of just ride my moms coat tails and say, ‘look at all this good work my church is doing!!’ So NO! You are being bad. Liberals are gods children. Conservatives are the devils.

            222. Biolochic says:

              Liberals go out there and feed the poor themselves. Conservatives reply by making feeding the poor illegal – in the name of Jesus.

          3. Oh, boy; the old Christianity = Socialism canard again. Okay, once more, here’s the difference: In Christian intentional communities, as with the Apostles in the Book Of Acts, the people agree to “hold all things in common”. Under socialism, the government makes the people hold all things in common at gunpoint. See the slight distinction there? At the back of any system of government there is the implicit recourse to force. And with socialism, where the government requires behavior that properly springs from private conscience, the guns must come out more quickly and more often than in a free society.

            1. ge205 says:

              That is YOUR definition of Socialism versus Christianity which is extremely wrong.
              You cannot tell me that people in highly socialist and DEMOCRATIC countries such as those in northern Europe are forced to share at gun point hold things. And where did this “all things common” come from? Private property remains an important part in most counties.

            2. Stogiebear says:

              Acts 4:32 — The community of believers was one in heart and mind. None of them would say, “This is mine!” about any of their possessions, but held everything in common.

            3. steveranden says:

              Still not quite right. European countries are still capitalist, but have much stronger social programs. Social programs are not “socialism.”

            4. ge205 says:

              I 100% agree that European countries are still capitalist. Yet, conservatives love to throw around the word “socialism” when it comes to the social programs in America, which are much weaker than those is Europe. So let’s stop arguing about Obama and the Democrats being “socialist”, shall we?

            5. johnsawyer says:

              Those Christian intentional communities, both then and now, aren’t as benign towards those who disagree or want to leave those communities as you portray. Their system of enforcement and punishment is every bit as punitive as you feel a government’s is, because enforcement and punishment in both systems generally doesn’t involve guns, despite its supposedly being the tool of last resort.

            6. Ejection from a community /= being thrown into a gulag.

            7. William Lanteigne says:

              “Under socialism, the government makes the people hold all things in common at gunpoint.” This is the consistent conservative LIE.

              The last time someone actually pointed a gun AT YOU was when?

              Probably never, if you’re white and Christian.

              But if you’re white and Christian, it’s okay to LIE to make your point, isn’t it?

            8. I don’t live in a socialist country, thank god. All my charitable giving is voluntary.

            9. Jesus is watching says:

              Police, education, power, roads, water, all socialized in America. You DO live in a socialist country. You mix up dictatorship with socialism because you are mistaken, Sanity Inspector.

            10. cookies says:

              We enforce private property at gun point!!!!

            11. Debi Biderman says:

              Not me I enforce my privacy with locks. No guns here!

            12. cookies says:

              The police and military enforce private property laws with guns every single minute of every single day. On behalf of the state.

            13. Gert says:

              Well I’m pretty sure people who get death threats daily probably have good reason to remind those sending them that the staff is armed. If you had 2 brain cells to rub together you could have figured out this whole logic thing.

            14. cookies says:

              Oh, surprise! Since I speak the truth, you defend with insults and justifications. Good for you. My point remains.

            15. steveranden says:

              Um, not quite. Socialism is merely the government owning and running the means of production, i.e. banks, utilities, oil companies, etc. and then the profits go back into society to pay for health, education, etc. You still work for a paycheck and own your own house and car. Nowhere does it say anything about guns.

            16. nameinvain says:

              At gunpoint? Maybe here in the USA but still-there are no laws that come to mind whereby the punishment for breaking a tax law would get’ya shot. We have a pretty successful blend of capitalism and social programs here in the USA. For that I am grateful. True socialist countries. like in Scandinavia, are always ranked as being among the happiest countries.

            17. Dairy cattle are happy, too. The door is open. When a Scandinavian gets tired of living like human livestock in a government welfare barn, a bureaucrat waiting to administer his every life move, and wants to see how far his talents and ambitions can take him, he can always emigrate. To America!

            18. Jesus is watching says:

              Does your user name represent, a person that you skillfully avoided and are now on the lamb from? Because if the SI ever got wind of where you were, I’m sure they’d love to put you back in your padded cage.

            19. Consider my nic to be a literary puzzle.

            20. Rhonda Thissen says:

              Which is irrelevant, because the US is not IN ANY WAY a socialist nation.

            21. That’s not for want of American leftists trying.

            22. Rhonda Thissen says:

              In the right-wing bubble, you mean? Sure.

            23. Jesus is watching says:

              Incorrect. Actually the roads, education, police, fire, healthcare are all socialized in the USA. Conservatives want to turn the US into an Anarchy. They use parlor tricks to confuse voters like The Sanity Inspector and fear mongering to make them vote with them. It works very well, religion is a powerful tool. The Christians that support the GOP are following false profits and are sinners.

            24. Rhonda Thissen says:

              Having public infrastructure does not a socialist state make. There are some things government must do or manage for the common good, regardless of the system of governance in place.

            25. Gert says:

              Perhaps you are unfamiliar with what the word socialist means….

            26. Rhonda Thissen says:

              I’m well aware of what socialism is. There’s quite a difference between public infrastructure and government control of private enterprise. Government in the US does not own the means of production.

            27. Brent Slensker says:

              Those MEAN Socialist European governments holding all those Libertarians in FEMA camps….

            28. BJ4..u2 says:

              The Christianity described in Acts is communism, not socialism.

          4. Fred Beloit says:

            But far funnier is what some of you have on the Leftist side of the world. Over there you have filthy rich Marxists. Now that is really funny.

            1. Yes, this frequently escapes the comprehension of Leftists. In the U.S. the rich eat caviar. In Cuba and North Korea the commissars eat caviar, on behalf of The People. Socialism is a system where money and power is taken from the few (the rich) and redistributed to the even fewer (socialists).

            2. blf83 says:

              Read your dictionary as your definition is greatly flawed.

            3. If only socialism could be confined to dictionaries…

              “I was guilty of judging capitalism by its operations and socialism by its hopes and aspirations; capitalism by its works and socialism by its literature.” — Sidney Hook

            4. maryinbama says:

              It might help if you truly understood what socialism is. North Korea is NOT a socialist country. It is a dictatorship. It is a bureaucratic, paternalistic state ruled by a small group of capitalists. It can call itself socialist all it wants, but that does not make it so anymore than the former USSR was a socialist (or communist) country. The former USSR was an oligarchy (a group dictatorship). It was not communist because the workers did not hold the means of production.

            5. I’m sorry, I can’t hear you because this pile of 100,000,000 victims of socialism in the 20th Century is in the way.

            6. ge205 says:

              I’m sorry, I can’t understand you because of your insane blabbering.

            7. steveranden says:

              Nope. Try again. You’re thinking of communism.

            8. nameinvain says:

              Cuba is not a socialist country. That tidbit has never escaped my comprehension.

            9. That’s another circular alibi I dislike.
              “Socialism and communism are different, because communism murders its own people and socialism does not.”
              “But the Soviet Union murdered its own people and called itself socialist!”
              “They weren’t really socialist.”
              “Why not?”
              “Because socialism doesn’t murder its own people.”

            10. Epicurus Rex says:

              Yes, because Stalin called the Soviet Union Socialism to make a dictatorial communism more palatable to the rest of the developed world. Much like Castro promised he’d create a Capitalist Democracy in Cuba after receiving aid.

              The problem is, people seem less willingly ignorant to look at Cuba and assume that it actually *IS* a Capitalist Democracy.. but quite a lot of people (including yourself) seem willing to make the fallacious conflation of ‘Socialism’ and ‘Communism’. But that’s fairly par for the course. Claim it’s a ‘No True Scotsman’ all day if it makes you feel better. You just look fairly ignorant in doing so.

            11. J C Leslie says:

              Who do idiots like you think pays the salary of the rich in America? They certainly haven’t earned a paycheck with hard work in many years, in most cases. They are receiving the earned money of those poorer than themselves who do all the labor, and pay much too little in taxes back to society for the privilege. Being rich is one thing, everyone should have the opportunity to work hard, get rich, and live comfortably. Being so rich that you actually actively impoverish the rest of society should be criminal.

            12. jesus is crying says:

              North korea and cuba are not socialist democracies lol those are communist dictatorships.

              You are so dumb omg!!!

            13. Brent Slensker says:

              Fallacious BS. Not even trying. You get an F.

          5. Dutch says:

            ME TOO.

        2. It was a Christian socialist who wrote the Pledge of Allegiance. Socialism was a huge thing in Christianity until the 20th century.

        3. steveranden says:

          Who is “socialist”?

        4. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

          What’s really hilarious is that you know most these people on here aren’t Christians but pretenders imagining themselves glib enough to BS the rest of us.

          Isaiah 5:20
          “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.”

      2. Al Gore says:

        Rick, don’t worry, we still love you. Jesus does also. We just vote different and reject your ideology, that’s all.

        1. Rick Kilgore says:

          Funny how Jesus probably loves you too, though you reject his ideology ans cast votes like stones.

      3. R_Swift says:

        Always with the hate, you need to take those flame colored glasses off.

        1. Rick Kilgore says:

          What hate?

          1. R_Swift says:

            Wow, an epiphany. You are correct, what hate?

            1. Rick Kilgore says:

              So you agree, there is no hate in my comments.

            2. R_Swift says:

              I was wrong, you are a dim bulb and didn’t have an epiphany.

            3. Rick Kilgore says:

              Once again, you’ve proven to yourself that you’re right.

    3. Clay says:

      Cognitive dissonance is only a problem if you actually care about reconciling contradictory opinons. Which of course, most authoritarian thinkers do not. Compartmentalization is the order of the day for them.

      1. Bobloblaw67 says:

        Cognitive dissonance is when you have a Obama bumper sticker and a Department of Peace bumper sticker on your car.

        1. Clay says:

          Oh. Em. Gee. This one is totes adorbs! Can we keep him? I’ll kick in the hutch and a dialup connection.

        2. Rick Kilgore says:

          Cognitive dissonance is when you claim to be a Christian but won’t study the Bible because it disturbs your perception of Jesus as being more concerned with your right to keep all your money than with the plight of the poor who depend on the safety net for food and health care, a Jesus who wants his followers more concerned with fighting their pet sins than with …well, with all the stuff the Bible actually says Jesus wants them to do.

          1. Jed says:

            You are funny, I’ll give you that. Not well versed in the Bible, but funny. Please cite chapter and verse to justify your contention that Jesus wanted a government controlled “safety net.” By the way, good luck with that.

            1. Peter Gibson says:

              Lemme guess, another knucklehead claiming Jesus was a socialist. Special bunnies, this lot. SMH

            2. Allah Carte says:

              I think you are confusing mythical jesus with mythical republican jesus.

            3. Peter Gibson says:

              If you say so Sparky.

            4. infadelicious says:

              That’s ‘Mythical Sparky’, which would also be a great name for a band.

            5. Paul says:

              His band? Whimsical bone.

            6. infadelicious says:

              Ha ha ha ha! There’s no doubt about that

            7. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              And Allah Carte would be a great name for a shooting supplies store….

            8. Rick Kilgore says:

              Who has ears will hear. Everyone one else will consider their own well being ahead of that of others. The safety net doesn’t control the government and I never suggested that it did or should. But it gets food to people who need it. If you’re willing to get rid of that in order to hang onto your extra $40 or $50 a year, it’s not explanations you need. It’s enlightenment.

            9. Jed says:

              Reading is fundamental. “The safety net doesn’t control the government” is not the same as “a government controlled ‘safety net’.” Look closely and you’ll see the difference.
              Meanwhile, you have yet to provide any evidence that Jesus wanted the government to provide that safety net. That was, after all, the point was it not?

            10. infadelicious says:

              Quit deflecting away from his deflection from the point

            11. Rick Kilgore says:

              No it was not my point. My point is that some people are more upset about some of their money being taken by the government and given to the poor. These people, if given the choice, allow the poor to suffer more if it mean they could keep that money. It’s very, very simple. Poor people are eating because of Food Stamps. I’m saying that is unchristian to prefer that they suffer rather than you be inconvenienced.

            12. Jed says:

              Your comment was:

              Cognitive dissonance is when you claim to be a Christian but won’t study the Bible because it disturbs your perception of Jesus as being more concerned with your right to keep all your money than with the plight of the poor who depend on the safety net for food and health care, a Jesus who wants his followers more concerned with fighting their pet sins than with …well, with all the stuff the Bible actually says Jesus wants them to do.

              Clearly, you were attempting to create a Biblical justification for government run welfare where no such justification exists.

              It is decidedly disingenuous of you to attempt to to force a government program of taxation with the same religious beliefs you vehemently ban from all government venues.

            13. Rick Kilgore says:

              Not by any stretch of the imagination. But what you are doing is attempting to justify the further disadvantaging of the already disadvantaged by pretending that the absence of a literal commandment in the Bible to fund a government safety net enables you to wash your hands of the suffering that would result from taking that safety away. Christianity is love. And apparently you love your money more than you love your fellow citizen.

            14. Jed says:

              Speaking of stretches, how much further do you plan on stretching this ridiculous diversion of yours? Are you really so dense as to fail to understand the difference between charitable giving of one’s own free will versus government compulsion to give under penalty of criminal law?
              By the way, the correct spelling of “assume” is ass-u-me. Do something useful with yourself and join the army.

            15. Rick Kilgore says:

              I don’t if you can’t, or simply won’t understand what I am saying. Let me try to break it down.
              US citizens (most of us) pay taxes.
              Many US citizens are Christians.
              Some US citizens are in dire straits and can’t meet their financial obligations and could use a little help.
              Rather than take a bullet for the team and begrudgingly allow these people to eat, these alleged Christians are up in arms, preferring that the recipients of Food Stamps be deprived of the pittance allocated them over indignation of being forced to help the needy. In my mind, a charitable person would be tickled pink that some of this money that is being “stolen” from them is going to help the less fortunate.

              Jesus did say not to bitch about being robbed “Whoever takes your cloak, withhold not your cloak also,” and ” if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back.”
              Luke chapter 6 pretty much spells it out for whoever has ears to hear.

              Bottom line, if you’d rather let people suffer than have a paltry amount of your taxes spent on feeding the poor, you don’t give a shit about the poor.

            16. Jed says:

              You appear to be incapable of rational thought.
              You also are obviously ignorant of basic economics.

              Where do you stand on partial birth abortion?

            17. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Show us your check stubs for all of the extra money that you send to the IRS after it robs you the first time each year.

              Meanwhile, nothing in the good book instructed ‘give to Caesar so that he will give to the poor.’ It just didn’t work that way.

            18. SoundMind says:

              NOT THAT I would recommend using it, but there actually is an IRS account entitled “Voluntary Contribution to Reduce the Public Debt.” A list of contributors may turn up Guilt somewhere along the line…

            19. Red47 says:

              His head popped off on that last one. He;s tryin’ real hard, though.

            20. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Perhaps it is much more unchristian for today’s rent subsidized big screen tv and cable used caddy in the driveway poor to be able to trade foodstamps for money to buy drugs than it is to eliminate those fraud filled programs, return our tax dollars and enable us to directly fund help for the poor.

            21. Rick Kilgore says:

              That’s between them and God. Or the police. It’s my desire to do unto others as I would be done by, and Christians were never commanded to launch preemptive strikes against potential sinners, collateral damage be damned. That’s Republican Jesus, and he’s actually the devil.

            22. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              So many comedians out of work, and you use this as your cover story for confiscatory taxation, forceful redistribution of wealth, and big government replacement of the church.

            23. Rick Kilgore says:

              It matters not one whit. You’re in league with the forces of darkness. You’re on the judgmental, root-of-all-evil, control freak, enemy of thew common people, social Darwinism, Ayn Rand applauding, divisive, prejudiced…,. It’s pointless to argue with you because the dividing line between conservatives and the rest of the world isn’t facts and figures that can be manipulated to support mutually exclusive contentions. The reason you’re on that side is that you place more value on being right in terms of presenting a more persuasive argument (which I must imagine is a long term goal of yours, since you obviously can’t do it now) and having rights than you place on doing what is right. You don’t give a tinker’s cuss for the less fortunate or the victims of rampant industrialization because laws have been or are in the process of being created to give you the “right” to molest sleeping women, take land away from people too poor to hire a gaggle of attorneys, poison the land, air and water, murder unarmed “assailants,” declare people’s love for each other insufficient or counterfeit or somehow not as good as yours and so they cannot get married and endure the absolutely unjustifiable disadvantages (over a thousand) imposed on people of a lesser god or love or whatever soapbox you pontificate from and the charges go on for infinity and the fact that you actually need to be told this means that you’ve got some switches flipped that shouldn’t be or something; Because you don’t really have to know a lot to be on the right side of the line, you just have to care about people. That includes veterans as well the troops sent to kill and die for the privileged war mongers’ filthy lucre – and it means not only fetuses, but the human beings you force to be born to impoverished families, rape victims and single teenagers because you think you have the echo of a glimmer of “what God wants” to the point where you’re willing to force them to live in compliance with whatever the hell the antichrists that are running the Christ-Fascist corporate Christan industry were told by their lawyers and accountants think it must be.
              Unfold your arms, open your eyes, and stop arguing for the oligarchy while masquerading as an advocate for the perishing hordes of temporarily embarrassed millionaires listening to hateful, rich assholes on the radio trying to stay abreast of WWJD as interpreted and authenticated by the minions of …what’s their god called? Oh yeah: Ego.

            24. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              You ran out of room for this to be your asylum entrance application.

              Basically you could have just admitted that you are a delusional, perhaps even drug-addled communist who regularly projects onto people garbage that you haven’t a clue about. -It would have saved you a lot of effort.

            25. Steven Kranowski says:

              So sorry that Rick’s response was too much for your microscopic attention span, ‘cos all you offered in return was more childish insults.

            26. 8US1182fTrumpsMuzisBarryingUS says:

              It’s not that my attention span is too small for Rick’s presumptive spew of brain addled propaganda; it’s merely the case that I don’t have time right now to correct such a damaged by-product of today’s broken non-education socialist / communist indoctrination system. Rick, and apparently you, would necessarily need to be capable of critical thought in order to comprehend what I would reply if either of you were worth the time investment to do so.

          2. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

            “Thou shalt not steal” sound familiar?

            “By the sweat of your brow will you have food to eat until you return to the ground from which you were made. For you were made from dust, and to dust you will return.”

            Genesis 3:19

            Sound familiar? Note that it doesn’t say “By the sweat of everyone else’s brow.”

            There’s a word for what you’re doing. Blasphemy, I think is what it’s called.

            Why are you so ignorant? What’s the matter with you?! :o)

            It’s not a “safety net” when it’s disabling people and promoting communism.

            1. ge205 says:

              That verse is irrelevant. Are you without food after you pay your taxes? Hungry? Starving?
              “Again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go
              through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of
              God.” Matthew 19:24

            2. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              I’d go into detail but you’re clearly hopelessly stupid. Or disingenuous. Or played with the greatest of ease. Or a combination of the three.

            3. Duckbudder says:

              And your response adds to the conversation how?

            4. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Enhanced self-awareness, hopefully. Kinda hard to add something to nothing.

              It’s quite noble of you to come to the rescue of another member of the collective.

            5. David Ward says:

              You conservatives don’t disappoint. Always projecting.

            6. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Herd-defense posture and lame deflection duly noted.

            7. infadelicious says:

              That and measles are becoming a real problem for us

            8. Red47 says:

              Can we vaccinate for that?

            9. infadelicious says:

              LOL. I hope so

            10. Shep Schultz says:

              Maybe we should talk to the good Dr.

            11. Red47 says:

              Thank you.

            12. Paul says:

              The are the meld.
              Add some heat and two pieces of bread and you have a grilled cheese sandwich.

            13. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              The least they could do is be loaded with jalapeños and bacon.

            14. infadelicious says:

              Mmmm bacon

            15. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              The perfect Valentine’s Day gift for the missus! Thanks!

            16. J C Leslie says:

              Most of us don’t need a silly fantasy novel to do our thinking for us.

            17. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Just soothsaying politicians, passing off mind-numbing repetitions of “hope and “change” as gravitas, no doubt.

            18. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              And don’t forget telling us that we’ll save twenty five hunnert on our new socialist medicine policy….

            19. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Oh yeaahhh… That’s why I gotz me a bunch of policies. In fact, I bought so many, I made enough money that I paid for my ’round-the-world vacation!

            20. Red47 says:

              Stop it.

            21. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Man can cannot live on dread alone… :o)

            22. ge205 says:

              And it clear you hopelessly lost that little debate since you resorted to insults. More along, now.

            23. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ow! I’ve been skewered by another rapier (half) wit! :O)

            24. ge205 says:

              You give me too much credit. Even a quarter wit could skewed you. Funny how you started off all biblical and then quickly devolved into throwing insults. I don’t mind when insults are directed at me. But boy, going after others who made civil and rational comments is just juvenile. I seriously have to think that you are a 14 years old insecure kid. And since 14 year old insecure kids like to have the last words, then you may have it.

            25. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              “Even a quarter wit could skewed [sic] you.”
              I stand corrected.

            26. Jed says:

              Cletus, you’re just havin’ more fun than a caterpillar at a foot ticklin’ contest.

            27. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha. I didn’t build those! :o)

            28. Jed says:

              Sort of like roping a calf, ain’t it?

            29. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Where your “companion” proffered a lie for a premise, debate is not possible. Why are all of you communists so stupid? Trust me–I’m not 14.

            30. ge205 says:

              If you are not 14, then stop writing like you’re 14.

            31. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              That’s it? :o)

            32. ge205 says:

              Yes, pretty much. But hey, if you want to engage in a real debate, let me know. Otherwise, enjoy your recess from home school.

            33. infadelicious says:

              Still got nothin’ right ? Yawn

            34. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              I think it’s a bunch of junior high kids killing time during computer lab. :o)

            35. Jed says:

              By Jove, I think you’ve got it!

            36. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Shot in the dark… :o)

            37. William Lanteigne says:

              Okay, someone asked for detail; here it is:

              Genesis 28:20 – 28:22

              20 And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on,

              21 So that I come again to my father’s house in peace; then shall the LORD be my God:

              22 And this stone, which I have set [for] a pillar, shall be God’s house: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.

              2 Corinthians 9:7 –

              Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, [so let him give]; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

              Malachi 3:10 –

              Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that [there shall] not [be room] enough [to receive it].

              Malachi 3:8 – 3:12

              8 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.

              9 Ye [are] cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, [even] this whole nation.

              10 Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that [there shall] not [be room] enough [to receive it].

              11 And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the LORD of hosts.

              12 And all nations shall call you blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land, saith the LORD of hosts.

              Mark 12:41 – 12:44

              41 And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much.

              42 And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing.

              43 And he called [unto him] his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury:

              44 For all [they] did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, [even] all her living.

              2 Corinthians 9:6 –

              But this [I say], He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.

              Luke 6:38 –

              Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

              Malachi 3:8 –

              Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.

              Matthew 6:4 –

              That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

              Hebrews 13:5 –

              [Let your] conversation [be] without covetousness; [and be] content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

              Acts 20:35 –

              I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.

            38. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Sooner or later you’re going to have to figure it if you want to live in a Theocracy or in a Socialist State.

              I’m certain that God wasn’t instructing Vlaldimir, Mao, Pol Pot or Barry in the verses that you list.

              I’m also certain that the age of the Jewish Theocracy has been replaced with a New Deal, which is made with individual people, not governments.

              If your actual intention is to set up the USA as a Christian Theocracy, then I will give you credit that the possibility is quite interesting, but I will also give you the wake up call that our current semi-socialist American Government is not at all that.

              Make up your mind.

            39. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              They conveniently overlook all the admonitions against sloth, envy, greed, idleness, etc.

              Communists stop researching when they receive confirmation or affirmation of their preconceptions.

              Conservatives seek the truth.

              They wonder why we know they’re stupid…

            40. Barack'sGotYourBack says:


            41. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha. ‘Can’t believe you said that on this site. :o)

            42. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Keep ’em guessin….

            43. Rick Kilgore says:

              Typical dodge. A miserable tu quoque fallacy. However, greed is one of the things we’re addressing here. But none of what you said justifies taking food away from hungry people.

            44. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Rick, stop while you’re behind, waayyy behind. You’d never get away with the intellectual sloth I see on here in a decent college.

            45. Rick Kilgore says:

              Well, I have your word on that, don’t I? And nothing else. You follow a tu quoque fallacy with an appeal to your own authority? I’m not interested in formal debate, I just like discussing the issues. Not muddying the water so nothing ever gets sorted.

            46. William Lanteigne says:

              That’s a brain-dead simple concept that’s entirely disassociated from reality; of course those aren’t our only choices- never have been, never will be. Only the extreme Tea Party/”Christian Conservative” zombies buy that particular pile of nauseatingly putrid pile of excrement.

              The bible verses quoted were to counter the Tea Party/”Christian Conservative” LIE that taking care of the poor is anti-Christian. Clearly, there are many references above that show the opposite.

              It also makes good economic sense. As right-wing governors have thoughtfully documented, poor people spend less on drugs than the general population, thus most of the assistance money is spent in the general economy, acting as an economic stimulus. The oppositions to assistance to the poor are thus ideological, not economic, and based on ignorance, stupidity, hate, and prejudice, not fact, which explains your position.

              From the “Vlaldimir, Joseph (Stalin), Mao, Pol Pot, Karl, Kim-Jung” quote it’s clear you haven’t the mental capacity to comprehend the differences between Communism and Socialism; I question whether you understand democracy. However, neither communism nor socialism are incompatible with a free market economy.

              The central problem is that we really don’t have a free market economy. We have an oligarchy where moneyed interests are free to buy influence to help them line their pockets, at the expense of the rest of us, including brain-dead zombies like you.

            47. Red47 says:

              That verse in context clearly states that the man couldn’t get in because he chose money over God. God consistently related to people with and without wealth. He cared about what was in the heart rather than the wallet.

            48. Kate217 says:

              And yet Jesus fed the hungry (remember the loaves and fishes?) and healed the sick. He also preached that we should love our neighbor as ourselves and when asked “who is my neighbor” responded with the parable of the good Samaritan. At the time, the Samaritans were the enemies of the Jews. Jesus did not pick the nationality at random. He was basically saying that your neighbor is everyone. You ARE supposed to be your brother’s keeper. “Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” Matthew 25:40

            49. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Says the middle-aged, unemployed woman. Go figger.

            50. PJ4 says:

              *spit take*

            51. Cletus B Neckbeard says:


            52. Kate217 says:

              My boss told me that it literally took an act of Congress for him to let me go; they cut the budget to the agency that I was contracted to. The nature of work in the DC area (because Congress doesn’t get that contractors are more expensive than direct employees) is that you get a contract for a specified amount of time. When the contract runs out, you have to find a new one. I am NOT on food stamps, by the way, although I probably qualify.

              I have frequently over the years fed the needy out of my own pocket. I have paid rent for those who would be homeless if I didn’t. I have given until it hurts to people in need. I would do all that again, even though it means that I am currently struggling when I might not be had I turned my back on them. I don’t think that’s an extraordinary thing to do. I think it’s being a decent human being.

            53. zonmoy says:

              yes, your a decent human being rather than a demon like Cletus.

            54. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              I thought she was using a younger picture of Hillary too, until I looked closer….

            55. ge205 says:

              Very well said, Kate.

            56. Kate217 says:

              That’s very kind of you to say. Thank you.

            57. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Ok, so we are, but how about getting the government out of the way so that we can carry out that directive?

            58. infadelicious says:

              Amen Reverend Cletus, amen

            59. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Be heeled! It drives commienists crazy!

            60. infadelicious says:

              DEMcommies are the worst. Bocelli in 1 hour. 😉

            61. Cletus B Neckbeard says:


            62. infadelicious says:


            63. Red47 says:

              Not being a commienist and being well-heeled makes ’em crazier.

            64. William Lanteigne says:

              So, you are submitting that 10% of your income directly toward helping the poor and the widowed, right?

            65. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Isn’t that what ‘big gubment’ claims that it is doing with the way in excess of 10% taxes that it confiscates from all of us already? We’ve got over 40 million on food stamps with billboards south of the border instructing invaders how to get them once they illegally sneak across our border.

              Or, is it the case that you are going to get on board with the rest of those who want to shrink the size, expense, waste and unconstitutional overreach of the current government so that we can move back to a financial ability to donate to the needy out of or own choice?

              Admit that it is disingenuous of you to expect us to shell out the 10% of our income directly to the same poor who are already benefiting from the upwards of 40, 50; even 60% of our income that the government already confiscates through every avenue that it can imagine —–so that according to your view on scripture the poor can more than double-dip on all of the victims of William Lanteigne thought.

            66. Rick Kilgore says:

              Communism is how the early church functioned. Acts chapter 2. “They held all things in common.” In fact, one couple, who decided to hang onto what they felt entitled to were slain by the Holy Spirit.
              Your typically conservative preference for the Old Testament is clear evidence that you don’t understand the gospel. Jesus was a liberal. Old Testament law was “An eye for an eye,” or, as it is commonly called, Lex Talionis. Jesus abrogated that by saying, :You have heard it said, an eye for an eye, but I say unto you, whoever smites you on one cheek, turn to them the other.” He said that you have been taught to hate your enemies, but he said instead to love your enemies, i.e., those who would “steal” your money in order to eat.
              What you call blasphemy is actually what Jesus taught. So call him the blasphemer. I’m just the messenger. But shoot me if you think you must.

            67. zonmoy says:

              Luke 16:19-31

              ESV / 8 helpful votes

              “There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen and
              who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate was laid a poor man
              named Lazarus, covered with sores, who desired to be fed with what fell
              from the rich man’s table. Moreover, even the dogs came and licked his
              sores. The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s
              side. The rich man also died and was buried, and in Hades, being in
              torment, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at
              his side. …

              enjoy hell you rich scumbag,

              Acts 4:32-35

              ESV / 8 helpful votes

              Now the full number of those who believed were of one heart and
              soul, and no one said that any of the things that belonged to him was
              his own, but they had everything in common. And with great power the
              apostles were giving their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord
              Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. There was not a needy person
              among them, for as many as were owners of lands or houses sold them and
              brought the proceeds of what was sold and laid it at the apostles’ feet,
              and it was distributed to each as any had need.

              for doing the opposite of what the first Christians did.

            68. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Thanks. I get it. None of you know a thing about Christianity, capitalism, or reality.

            69. Rick Kilgore says:

              Since you submit, and therefore obviously accept, statements made on nothing but the authority of the speaker, here’s my contribution, though I’ll back mine up with Bible verses and you cannot.
              What you wrote,

              “The least of my worries is the judgment of a bunch communists trying to pass themselves off as Christians, trying to blur the distinction between Christianity and communism/collectivism.”
              You would have likely said to Peter, Paul, Timothy and the early church, because they were saying and doing exactly what you decry as unchristian.

            70. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              I submitted nothing. I told all you droolers why you’re wrong and, typical of the willfully
              ignorant, you reject it. There’s probably not a Christian on this blog, just irretrievably low-information, easily-led types whose many delusions include imagining themselves to far abler than they really are to pull their “social justice” theological BS over on their intellectual betters which includes just about anything with a pulse.

              Those of us who didn’t grow up in times of universal deceit are more discerning.

            71. Rick Kilgore says:

              Anytime you wanna leave off the rhetoric and ad homs and say something concrete, I’m here.

            72. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              No ad hominems. I can’t dumb anything down that much. Seriously. Of all the sites I’ve been on, I’ve not seen any frequented by such abjectly stupid and ignorant people.

            73. Jed says:

              You forgot immature.

            74. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha.. Color me corrected! :o)

            75. Red47 says:

              Oh my stars. I am laughing so hard I am snorting. “Almost done..almost done”, she said sotto voce.

            76. Red47 says:

              I adore his response to this. Isn’t he the cutest? No clue.

            77. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              SMH On the upside, he’s available for adoption! :o)

            78. Red47 says:

              My quiver is full. Also, I am too old to want to paper train another babeh.

            79. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              You would have to be literate and be able to comprehend the point that Cletus made in order to be able to make remotely accurate predictions about what he may or not think of Peter, Paul and Mary.

            80. Rick Kilgore says:

              Hey, feel free to argue with me, but a simple, “Uh-uh, you’re wrong” is really a waste of your time and mine.

            81. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Well, I know that it’s very likely that you wouldn’t admit that you are in error in spite of the evidence, but I am just getting warmed up.

            82. Jed says:

              Rick is incapable of understanding his error. There is little hope for him other than some “nice young men in their clean white coats…”

            83. Rick Kilgore says:

              It’s a simple question of priorities. You think I’m not intelligent because I have different values. Not because I lack information, knowledge or experience.

            84. Jed says:

              No, it is not a question of priorities! I don’t think you’re unintelligent, I know you’re unintelligent because you have repeatedly demonstrated yourself incapable of making the simplest of logical distinctions.
              If you cannot understand the difference between an individual acting of his own free will and an individual being compelled by force to do anything you are intellectually incompetent and need supervision.

            85. Red47 says:

              They got a little stuck on the concept of the government’s gun early on in this discussion. Tehy couldn’t go between figurative and literal very smoothly. It became silly. Now you are going to get that stupid theme going again. Ouch.

            86. Jed says:

              May be just the masochist in me that continues, but the degree of their inability to think is astounding.

            87. Red47 says:

              I can’t even comment I am laughing so hard. Thank you al so much!

            88. Rick Kilgore says:

              I would be pretty dumb if that were the case. And between you and me, I’d rather be dumb than cruel.
              I know you are very unhappy that some of the money the government takes from you is going to feed the hungry. But let’s try to be here now. Deal with the situation we are in.
              You are being taxed. Some of the taxes go to defense, social security, Medicare, the national debt and yes, the safety net.
              Out there in our nation, there are people who, for various reasons, need help getting by. Fortunately for them, some can get Food Stamps, SSI, Earned Income Credit, etc.
              Now, if you persuade the government to stop helping these poor people, do you expect to suddenly get serious tax relief? They cut the bejesus out of food stamps last year. Obama signed the bill, which disqualifies him as a liberal, in my mind. You should be much better off financially now, if that is the case.
              So despite your indignation at being taxed (or do you not mind the taxes, but just don’t want poor people getting any of it?) you should weigh the damage being done to you (or is it just a matter of principle?) against the damage that SNAP recipients will suffer and then say, “I don’t care how much they will suffer, it’s wrong for the government to feed them with my money and I want it to stop now,” or endure a little monetary inconvenience and – however begrudgingly – deign to let them continue to get a very small amount of benefits until something else can take up the slack.
              It is about priorities. If you think the injustice being done to you through taxes and food stamps is a bigger deal than what will happen to people using the safety net if it’s removed, then you have prioritized your “fundamental rights,” or your right to your money or a desire for justice for you regarding your forced participation, or whatever your rationalization may be, above people who are getting an average of $1.40 per meal having that pittance taken away from them. And that will then put additional strain on food banks and other charities, increasing their hunger and the detriment to their health that will accompany it. You can bury it all under an avalanche of words, but the bottom line is you care more about your rights than you do for struggling people. Otherwise you’d be insisting that the budget for food stamps be increased, knowing that not only is it one of the least abused and defrauded programs, but it provides direct, immediate and desperately needed help to people who could move from poverty to abject poverty if you get your way. If this outrage of yours and your ilk is not motivated by a contempt for the poor, it still looks exactly what it would look like if it were.
              You want to end food stamps? Raise the minimum wage.

            89. Jed says:

              One, stop making ridiculous assumptions.
              Two, study economics.

            90. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Wouldn’t it be awesome if you were intelligent enough to understand that almost all people “in need” are in need for essentially two reasons 1) Failed government policies, often from the very party who conned them into thinking it actually wanted to help them and 2) Personally irresponsible behaviour, often encouraged by the same politicians who, again, conned them into thinking they wanted to help them?

              Notice a pattern there, Dullard?

            91. Rick Kilgore says:

              I dunno. Maybe everyone agreeing with you would awesome. Maybe not. Doesn’t affect the fact that people will go hungry if you take away their food stamps before they get another source of food. Asshole.

            92. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Splendid retort. Did I make too much sense?

            93. Rick Kilgore says:

              Only if making sense means finding an excuse to wash your hands of any moral obligation whether that excuse can be verified or not. Wash up, Pilate, at the laver of self exculpation.

            94. Wrabble says:

              “I’d rather be dumb than cruel. ”

              You did ok on achieving the former quality if not avoiding the latter.

            95. Rick Kilgore says:

              I know you think it’s cruel that I don’t fight the safety net. You’re entitled to that opinion. This is the dividing line between left and right.

            96. Wrabble says:

              The IRS ays that over 20% of EITC payments are in error. Is it cruel to want to reduce fraudulent claims?

            97. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Good luck getting an honest answer to that.

            98. Rick Kilgore says:

              I’d think you’d be downright giddy that some tax burdens were being alleviated, but that’s just me foolishly expecting consistency. But no, I was mainly referring to food stamps, the pet peeve of the billionaire class for some reason. And yes, I think it’s cruel to deprive truly needy people of much needed relief just to keep thieves from getting over on an inattentive agency’s clerks.

            99. Wrabble says:

              So you don’t fight the “safety net,” but how about the fraud net?

              “During reform efforts by the Internal Revenue Service, which runs the program, we learned that about 25 percent of the EITC payments are made in error, accounting for more than $10 billion in improper spending.

              This error rate far exceeds the rates of other programs, such as the Food Stamp program (5.8 percent) or Medicare (4.4 percent).

              This high error rate means that government is making payments to people who do not
              qualify for them or is providing beneficiaries with the wrong level of support. We should expect more from the nation’s largest pro-work assistance program.”

              spotlightonpoverty DOT org/news.aspx?id=56feabd1-31d1-46ed-b2bd-fad2b7d6f478

            100. Rick Kilgore says:

              It’s a lot of money, but I could point out, and you would know if you gave a shit, of hundreds of times that amount being wasted, squandered and pilfered. But go get the poor people. Take their stolen pennies away from them and turn a blind eye to the real thieves. I see whose side you’re on. The oligarchy’s.
              Let me guess, you think the sea levels are rising because Jesus sheds a tear every time a dollar that could have been used to buy a bomb is spent on hungry children.

            101. Wrabble says:

              It’s terrible how these partisan Republicans are trying to gut the ACA, which we liberals know was perfect and should never have been opposed in any way by those obstructionists!

              “The official sign-up season for President Barack Obama’s health care law may be over, but leading congressional Democrats say millions of Americans facing new tax penalties deserve a second chance.

              Three senior House members told The Associated Press that they plan to strongly urge the administration to grant a special sign-up opportunity for uninsured taxpayers who will be facing fines under the law for the first time this year.

              The three are Michigan’s Sander Levin, the ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee, and Democratic Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, and Lloyd Doggett of Texas.

              All worked to help steer Obama’s law through rancorous congressional debates from 2009-2010.”

              hosted2.ap DOT org/APDEFAULT/3d281c11a96b4ad082fe88aa0db04305/Article_2015-02-16-US–Health%20Overhaul-Penalties/id-b1c64dfc3f7946adba5dcd09c2ec5ff4

            102. Rick Kilgore says:

              If you think all or even most liberals are down with Obmacare, you don’t know many.

            103. Wrabble says:

              The biggest complaint I hear from leftists is that the ACA isn’t single-payer.

            104. Rick Kilgore says:

              Most liberals I know, and many conservatives too, favor single payer health care. I and most of my liberal friends hate the ACA, and have done since before it ever went into effect. Because we saw it not as socialized medicine, but a watery compromise that favored big pharma and health care corporations over the needs of the people. It’s been good for a lot of people, but it’s not what we need.

            105. Wrabble says:


            106. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              AMEN AND AMEN!

            107. Red47 says:

              That made me laugh out loud. Now my dog is staring at me.

            108. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              There’s no way these people live on their own.

            109. Jed says:

              Yeah, we get to provide for them.

            110. Rick Kilgore says:

              Great response.Didn’t address what I wrote, just attacked me. And I expect nothing more.

            111. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              It appears that you couldn’t comprehend anything more.

            112. Rick Kilgore says:

              You may as well make a macro for that and make your trademark argument. Because, after all, that’s really all you ever say.

            113. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Now there’s no excuse for that much laziness on your part.

            114. zonmoy says:

              at least we are better than a fascist twisting Christianity to be able to abuse the poor.

            115. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              You’re not better than anyone. You’re a boil on the ass of humanity.


              Main Entry:fas£cism
              Pronunciation:*fa-*shi-z*m also *fa-*si-
              Etymology:Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces

              1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
              2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control *early instances of army fascism and brutality — J. W. Aldridge*
              –fas£cist -shist also -sist noun or adjective , often capitalized
              –fas£cis£tic fa-*shis-tik also -*sis- adjective , often capitalized
              –fas£cis£ti£cal£ly -ti-k(*-)l* adverb , often capitalized

              Merriam-Webster’s Eleventh Collegiate.

              See if you can come up with a demonizer term not left over from the 60s. Oh, and get a job.

            116. Wrabble says:

              Speaking of fascism (where industry and government are in cahoots):

              John Doerr is an Obama Bundler and advisor. He was a member of Obama’s Jobs Council. Doerr is a partner in the iconic Silicon Valley venture capital firm of Kleiner Perkins.

              Doerr advised Obama as to which firms should receive funds under the Stimulus Act of 2009.

              Sixteen of the 22 firms in which Doerr had partial ownership received money from the Stimulus Act.

              What a coincidence!

              Doerr was helping Obama choose which firms to support and somehow 16 of Doerr’s 22 firms were selected! And Doerr is a BIG contributor to Dem politicians, especially Obama!

              Wait, there’s more!

              Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) invested $1M with Doerr three weeks before the Stimulus Act passed. Her investment tripled in value in less than one month.

              Isn’t that another AMAZING coincidence?

              That’s how this corrupt Administration works: they give BIG rebates to their contributors who in turn line the pockets of powerful Dem politicians.

              When all this started, Doerr’s net worth was about $1.7B. He is now worth $2.7B, thanks in part to his sweetheart deals with Democrat politicians.

            117. Red47 says:

              I wonder if these enfants know that your list is deeply abridged,

            118. Wrabble says:

              They believe that whatever their side does is acceptable.

            119. Red47 says:

              The ends justify the means.

            120. Red47 says:

              Marxist “Christianity” is all the rage in the Seminaries now. Don’t criticize the kids. They are into a fad. It will pass. Remember the seventies? Never mind. I was in high school and didn’t buy their nonsense even then. These kids don’t even know they aren’t original.

            121. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Forty-nine years ago, Red, at a retreat, the sponsors of the retreat were blowing that crap. We even sang kumbaya at the close of the retreat. In the Midwest and during the mid-60s. Can you believe how debased the country has become, thanks to the stupids?

            122. Jed says:

              A great illustration of that point was made in the play (and film) Mass Appeal when the young seminarian complains of a choir singing Leaving on a Jet Plane during mass on the Feast of the Ascension. Vatican II became far too great a celebration of the emotional at the expense of the foundational.

            123. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              True dat, M’ Bruvva.

            124. Red47 says:

              I was just thinking about how heavy the frustration of being in the 2-almost-1% weighs on me some days. It can be a curse. the other 98-ish % gets to lqy claim to my percentage if they feel like it and I am forced to watch them do damage in my name while excoriating me for objecting. Kumbaya, Dude, kumbaya.

            125. Jed says:

              If if makes you feel any better, I’m closer to the bottom of that 98% and I still don’t want a penny of your money. Ain’t got much to show for it, but it has been a glorious journey!

              “I am treated as evil by people who claim that they are being oppressed because they are not allowed to force me to practice what they do.” ~ D. Dale Gulledge

            126. Red47 says:

              Sorry, Jed. When ir comes to net worth, l am little more than a poseur. You appear to share in the percentage of which I speak. 😉

            127. Jed says:

              Ah, but we have, to crib from the Moody Blues, “riches more than these.” Reminds me of the great Neil Diamond song, The Boat that I Row. From that work:

              I don’t have a lot, but with me that’s fine
              Whatever I got, well, I know it’s mine
              I don’t go around with the local crowd
              I don’t dig what’s in so I guess I’m out
              I’m saying these things
              So you know me, baby
              So, you understand what I’m all about

              The boat that I row won’t cross no ocean
              The boat that I row won’t get me there soon
              But I got the love and if you got the notion
              The boat that I row’s big enough for two
              Just me and you

              There ain’t a man alive
              Can tell me what to say
              I choose my own side and I like it that way
              I don’t worry about all the things that I’m not
              There’s only one thing that I want I ain’t got
              You know that I’m talkin’ about you, baby
              But you better know before you come along …

            128. Red47 says:

              Neil, the one and only.

            129. Doctor Hook says:

              Back then it was known as liberation theology. There really is nothing new under the sun.

            130. Red47 says:

              That “theology” is just as stupid and enslaving as the Catholics used to be. I know this is embraced by some of today’s Catholics. ( I think this Pope shows elements)
              It is being broadly accepted as a real theology. Christians should be embarrassed.

            131. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Yes, they should.

            132. Doctor Hook says:

              This. Argentina has long been an economic basket case filled with those who believe that a Magical Money God will whisk away all their woes without any particular effort on their part. (Nothing says “failed economy” quite like taking on the UK’s 1980’s-era military over their phony claim to the Falklands — and losing.) Francis is a product of this mindset. One would think that, after a dozen various Constitutions, debt defaults and dictatorships in the postwar era, they might start to question this paradigm. But then again, the Argentine mind is filled with much the same rot as we can read hereabouts, so I guess not…

            133. Red47 says:

              I was being gracious to Mr. Pope. O:-)

            134. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Do you have a location , date and time here in 2015 wherein Christians are meeting together and experiencing the same miracles as what happened according to the record of Acts, zonmoy? That would be really neat to see.

              What was the aggregate government tax rate in the Roman Empire during 30-40 A.D., zonmoy?

              Meanwhile, why all of the hate on Cletus? He isn’t wearing purple and that plaid surely isn’t fine linen. Why all the hate on Cletus, zonmoy, since you are so compelled to reference a book on ‘don’t hate’?

            135. Red47 says:

              How do you reconcile that with God not caring how much money one had? In the Bible He GAVE wealth to individual people.

            136. Red47 says:

              I cannot believe you guys jumped into this pile of kids. You must have been bored. 🙂

            137. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha. “Was” is the key word. “Done” is the new key word. :o)

          3. williamdiamon says:

            “I have never understood why it is “greed” to want to keep the money you have earned but not greed to want to take somebody else’s money.”
            Thomas Sowell

            1. Rick Kilgore says:

              Since we’re discussing the Christian response, the answer is “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s.” And when you know that “Caesar” is using what you’ve rendered to feed the poor, to choose at that point to say,”Fuck the poor. Give me my money,” means you re not willling to love your neighbor, that you are guilty of the love of money (because you choose it over love for the needy). But honestly, this is just one of those things that, if you have to explain it, it’s not going to be understood anyway.

            2. williamdiamon says:

              So if you want to give to the less fortunate, it’s good, right?
              If a government agency wants to give your money to the poor, it’s good, right?
              What happens when you want to do something else with the money you have worked so hard for? That’s bad? It IS your money, isn’t it. While minted by Caesar, it was paid to you in reward for your labor, therefore belongs to you. Considering it to be Caesar’s is like saying your car belongs to the manufacturer, even though you acquired it by your labor, isn’t it?
              The love of money? No, no one has the right to steal the fruits of your labor, pretty face of a government agency, or not.
              You are carrying the water for thieves and propagating communism.

            3. Rick Kilgore says:

              Bottom line, your money being taken from you to feed the hungry is a greater travesty to you than people going hungry. So I question your values and understanding of Christianity. Not everyone who says “Lord, Lord” will enter the kingdom. For many will say< I busted my ass for you!" And I will say, "You saw me living on Food Stamps that were being funded by a very small portion of your tax money, but you denied me those Food Stamps and chose to keep the pittance for yourself. Depart from me, I never knew you."
              Yeah, it's paraphrase, but if you don't think it's valid, just keep voting for those tools of the oligarchy who want to increase the suffering of the poor.

            4. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Bottom line, you don’t actually know, but you sure like to project dramatic imaginations.

            5. zonmoy says:

              I would tell you to get behind me Satan but Satan doesn’t need the insult. I would love to see your face as the god you claim to serve turns you away to hell.

            6. williamdiamon says:

              So, I’m going to hell because I say the fruits of your labor belong to you?
              You certainly have a fancy imagination to conflate “thou shall not steal” into “don’t complain when someone steals from you”.

            7. Rick Kilgore says:

              Jesus did say that. He said, “If someone takes your cloak, give to them your coat as well.” And “Do not try to get back what has been stolen from you.” So yeah, he was pretty clear about not attaching yourself to the things of this world.
              But the fact that the Christian Right in the US and other places think that preemptive strikes, carpet bombing, sanctions and being more concerned about “the fruits of their labor” over the plight of the poor shows me that it’s not lack of information, because we all have the same Bible, that is the heart of the problem, but a value system that places the self above others.

            8. williamdiamon says:

              Yeah, we carpet bomb, when we find target rich environments. Are you trying to associate that with burning people alive in a cage?
              Have an issue with America’s history in the world? Feel free to name another Nation who has used it’s blood and treasure in more benevolent way…I’ll wait.
              Yeah, we will fight tyranny and evil anywhere we can. If no one did, all that would be left are murderers and tyrants.
              My dad was unloading the trailer of his semi early one morning, he look up to see someone standing in his truck asking him for money. He thought for a second and replied that if he had any extra money, he’d give it to his kids, not him.
              I have never understood pacifism, really think it’s a good idea to let thieves and bullies have free run of society? Think that’s reasonable?

            9. Rick Kilgore says:

              Thou shalt not kill, lest thee first establish target rich environments. Is that how your Bible reads? The murder by fire of an enemy combatant cannot be compared to carpet bombing civilians. I’m more than just certain that many of the victims of US air strikes have caused more than one person to burn to death. The fact that it wasn’t done intentionally is no excuse.
              Your second paragraph is a simple tu quoque fallacy. Just because someone else does it, or does it in a worse way, does not justify similar behavior.
              You want to fight tyranny and evil, start by unelecting the people who want to starve the poor, bomb cities, give corporations a bigger voice in politics than human voters, pollute the environment, bring religious doctrine to bear on legislation, mitigate the horrific crime of rape, deny women reproductive rights, imprison people for nonviolent and victimless crimes, put higher education out of reach for most people… but no. You won’t do that, will you? Because you think that Jesus is a capitalist and cares more for your career than for the growing numbers of suffering people in this country and worldwide.

            10. williamdiamon says:

              Where do you see “carpet bombings” of civilians?

              Perhaps you desire to live in a Nation that does not partake in international engagement. Mexico or Switzerland is more your preference? The US however will not change it’s policy of defending it’s interests, or the interests of it’s citizens for you. Get used to it or contact a travel agent, just sayin.
              Hmmm, you were just saying we should give away all our treasure because God wants us to, now you think religious based legislature is wrong? Make up your mind.
              You are projecting a preordained image of my concerns without knowing what they truly are. This habit will not help you understand other’s comments or effectively convey your sentiments. Don’t jump to conclusions, it makes you look like a frog.

            11. Rick Kilgore says:

              I’ve learned a lot over the years debating with people like you. The main thing I’ve learned is that it’s an exercise in futility.

              Yet I persist.

              OK. I have not personally witnessed carpet bombing of civilians. But the fact that we have done carpet bombings over cities where civilians live is not contested by anyone. The figures show that the majority of casualties in our military operations are non-combatants. Whether by bombings, daisy cutters, land mines, air strikes, cruise missiles, what have you.

              Now you bring out the tired old “America: Love it or leave it” fallacy. What it really means is, if you don’t share my vision for America, get out. This isn’t the place to go into an argument about why the wars we engage in are wrong, but they are, and they are not waged in defense of our freedoms. Yeah, some paranoid types might imagine that they are, but it’s not the basis for our wars of aggression around the world.
              I’ve never said or believed that we should give away all our treasure. And the Bible doesn’t teach that. Jesus said that to one person, and while it might be advisable for many, and many have followed that advice, I don’t see it as a command to every believer. My Bible based arguments for not abolishing Food Stamps is in response to self proclaimed Christians trying to justify it in a Christian context. I’ve no desire for a theocracy and believe strongly in the separation of church and state. However, I’m also not simplistic enough to reject a principle merely because it’s also a doctrine of a particular religion.

              A preordained image of your concerns? I have been responding specifically to specific statements that you have made. Please indicate where I have attempted to second guess you. There’s no need. You’ve made your concerns crystal clear. You care more that a paltry pittance of the fruit of your labor is given to the poor than you do for the disproportionate amount of suffering that abolishing the safety net would inflict. Yet our military budget is larger than the combined military budgets of the next 10 highest spenders combined. Our priorities are wonky.

            12. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Actually what is wonky is that the USA is the country that is expected to answer most of the rest of the world’s military needs. You go get all of your favorite off-shore marxist utopias to pull their fair share so that we can decrease the military need and then let’s balance out that in-house military expenditure.

            13. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Wouldn’t that be sweet?

            14. Barack'sGotYourBack says:


            15. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              That’s totally rich, Rick Kilbaby.

              You start out with “Thou shalt not kill…” and can’t even get to the end of your rant before you demand women ‘reproductive rights’. So the innocent unborn according to Rick Kilbaby are wide open season with no bag limit while murderous muzi despots should be handled with kit gloves.

              And then you ice the cake with higher education being put out of reach for most people when you know that these same institutions are liberal bastions of the American political Left. And why is it that your university leftist indoctrinators professors aren’t doing their daily work for free and protesting that their universities should give away administrative costs as well?

              Back to your padded cell, hypocrite.

            16. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              While the (you call yourself what?) Left goes mute, warm and / or fuzzy for ISIS and all of the other mohammedan despots in the middle east, thinking that surely these islamic murderers are more virtuous than the “Christian Right”.

              You sure have some strange sense of reality.

            17. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              They don’t make them any crazier than marxists caught in their attempts to twist religion…

            18. cargosquid says:

              Jesus said nothing about GOVERNMENTS helping the poor. He spoke about charity.

            19. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Ditto that.

            20. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              That’s quite presumptive of you, seeing as how you have no actual idea what any of us have or have not done in helping the poor out of our own volition and with our own funds left over after your government already confiscates an amazingly large percentage of our income in order to fund numerous things including helping the poor.

              Also, you have not yet volunteered openly to us to get behind the concept of limited government that would go so far as to make all of the entitlements programs and their related taxation disappear. Such a social experiment would provide the true basis for seeing whether or not any of us would give more directly to the poor.

              If you are going to attempt to demonstrate some integrity, then get on board with that and let’s see what you, Cletus and I are really made of. Until then, your accusations of not helping the poor while the truth of the matter is that this government liberally grants excellent social parachute programs from indirect giving of our exorbitant taxes is ludicrous, disingenuous, and unintelligent.

            21. Rick Kilgore says:

              This has absolutely zero-nothing to do with personal giving. It’s about whining about Food Stamps and the safety net and the significantly greater damage to the poor that abolishing that net would cause than the horrific circumstances in which you must be living due to the robbery you are enduring at the hands of big government.

              There are poor people whose families would do without most of the food they’re getting now if the safety net were abolished, and the fact that that doesn’t bother you definitely calls your values into question. You want to subject them to some social experiment on the off chance that they’d somehow prosper once deprived of sustenance?
              And where am I required to join in the extremely dubious effort to “get big government off our backs”? I’m highly suspicious of that movement, and not because I favor big government. Philosophically, I’m an anarchist. I believe that we’d do better in anarcho-syndaclist communities, but I live in the USA and I’m content to submit to our government so long as it governs in the interests of its citizenry. When it does not, I am entitled to protest, research candidates who will represent my interests and vote accordingly. Which I do.
              Stop making this about your ego, but understand, when you say, “I’m a Christian but I’d rather the poor starve than have some of my money which is being taken from me in the form of taxes being given to them so they can eat,” I’m going to address you personally. Otherwise, we can discuss this impersonally. I don’t care. It’s the issues that matter, and so long as they are addressed, who cares if one’s personal integrity is questioned? Unless, of course, they’re an egoist.

            22. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Hold on a minute. I’m dialing one for English.

              I would enjoin you to dial 0 for reading comprehension.

            23. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Ahhh – ego – the organized, realistic part that mediates between the desires of the id and the super-ego.

              What’s your problem with my organized, realistic part, Ricky Kilbaby? My ego gets in the way of your set of uncoordinated instinctual trends ?

              Stop being a hypocritical double dipper and then we’ll take it from there.

            24. Rick Kilgore says:

              The ego is fine. So long as it’s not calling the shots. I don’t want to argue with your ego. I want to argue with you, the awareness that perceives the ego. But that’s asking a lot, and I don’t have high hopes.
              And I don’t debate with people who use words like Kilbaby. I feel like I’m in the elementary school playground listening to bullies make fun of my name. Whether I’m mistaken or not, the impression I get of you is egotistical, mean spirited and juvenile. So this is probably the last time I’ll answer you until you can converse like an adult.

            25. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              You are welcome to take every opportunity to clarify whether or not your backing of “women reproductive rights” is simply typical leftist code for abortion on demand, and if it is, then part of your ‘gore is killed babies. It’s quite simple; even for one on your level.

            26. Rick Kilgore says:

              Five upvotes, huh? Gee, maybe I’m wrong after all. Maybe I should tell some people that we don’t need no big government, and others, I’ll tell to trust Big Brother with their most intimate life choices.

              One thing prevents me from doing that, I guess, above all other reasons, and that is not something that I care to argue with you, because it’s what makes me a liberal (compared to you, anyway) and so you wouldn’t understand.

            27. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Your liberalism is definitely a mental disorder. Get help.

            28. Jed says:

              Pity that Rick won’t consider that advice.

            29. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Have you ever seen a one of them say “Why are there so many people ‘needing help?'” I guess that requires “thinking outside of the box.”

            30. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              ….while they continue to vote for politicians dead set on increasing government dependency. Nope, can’t say that I have seen any of them wonder about that.

              Most of them laugh at the idea of all boats being lifted in a rising tide, but physics isn’t their strong suit either.

            31. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              ‘Not fore a second considering the reality that the two main reasons anyone’s poor in this country is bad government policy or lack of personal responsibility or a mix of both.

              I guess I’ll never get a handle on human beings wanting their fellow human beings being treated like pets and wanting everyone else to be the bill-paying owner. Common sense sure is rare these days.

            32. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              I’d wager that there’s hardly ever been a dog and pony show more morose in the history of mankind than today’s regressives spurring on poverty as you describe and then blaming conservatives for not emptying their wallets fast enough to correct regressive mistakes.

            33. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              They really do seem to be a sullen bunch, don’t they? I suspect it irritates the hell out of ’em that we’re resisting… finally. They weren’t expecting that.

              I sure hope I get a chance to step over some bodies because I’ve sure had enough of their stupidity.

              Well, I think I’m done with this bunch. ‘Hope I didn’t lead you into the nettle… :o)

            34. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Oh I’m moving on too. Many dears to check up on like Infra, Conservative Mom, SM, and PJ, as well as exciting swashbucklers like Shep, Doc, Peter and the rest.

            35. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Happy hunting!

            36. PJ4 says:


            37. Jed says:

              Physics? Hell, they can’t even handle addition!

            38. Wrabble says:

              Psychics yes, physics no.

            39. Jed says:

              I see great wisdom in your future.

              That’ll be $5.00 please. EBT cards are accepted.

            40. Red47 says:

              no sh”t.

            41. Red47 says:

              Just to add, one must notice that the govt skims off what they define as “extra”. We have heard that out of Preezy’s own mouth. That “extra” is what people use to build their wealth. The Statist fears personal wealth because it threatens the Collective. as you know.

            42. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Yes it does, especially since pallet loads of useful caliber blammo has entered into the realization of survivalists, preppers and many others who recognize this form of wealth as a pragmatic resource with great versatility….just sayin’ of course….

            43. Red47 says:

              Just sayin’

            44. j says:

              We already had “this experiment”. Before programs like social security and Medicare, elderly people would die alone, starving and penniless. You can make a strawman argument that in good times, people will provide charitable support to those they see “fit”. When the economy takes a dive, it typically impacts some groups of people more than others, almost nobody is going to take that into account. Are you also really so sure that when the economy gets worse that people will actually give more? No they are going to “keep to their own” and white Christians will watch black children starve before they give up their iphones. Your experiment is a myth and if you thought through the consequences of what would really happen under such an “experiment” you’d realize it would be terrible for anybody making less than the median income (that’s half the country).

            45. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Looks like you have all of the strawman bases covered already.

            46. Red47 says:

              That is the least logical thing you have said. You have said some fairly illogical things in this thread.

            47. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Stick with him. He keeps giving… :o)
              Or… save yourself!

            48. Red47 says:

              That’s the only crumb I’m tossing this goofball. The author of the post already had me laughing from the intensity that she uses to display her ignorance. I am not in the mood to play with these little squirts tonight. You know it only takes about 5 sentences to refute this idiotic notion that Christ was the original socialist, so I will spare everyone the reread. These people are embarrassing themselves. They will likely grow up eventually.

            49. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              “They will likely grow up eventually.”
              I hope you’re right but the stupid seems to be awfully ingrained.

            50. Red47 says:

              Whoa, Neck, as if it weren’t obvious, there is a freak on this thread. He personifies insane. I knew he was a loon, but the screed he just unloaded on me shrieks of maladjustment. He sounds exactly like a guy I used to work with. he hated me (he was an admitted misogynist) and I used to love rattling his chains. That was 30 years ago. Now it is just crazy and it’s probably best for me to avert my eyes as the train details.

            51. Cletus B Neckbeard says:


        3. Keldroc says:

          Cognitive dissonance is when you think God is personally concerned with the outcome of NFL games but not the 1440 children who die of starvation and malnutrition worldwide in the span of the average game’s runtime.

          In the case of the Super Bowl, this would include roughly half of all Americans. That is a level of self-involvement and willful ignorance that is frankly dizzying to consider.

          1. Jed says:

            So what are you doing about it? Right now, today, what are you doing about it?

            Note: working on more ways to steal other people’s money is not an acceptable answer.

            1. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Another call to accountability goes unheeded. What a surprise. Isn’t that always the way?

            2. Jed says:

              Certainly is the pattern with most of this lot.

            3. William Lanteigne says:

              Genesis 28:20 – 28:22

              20 And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, If God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on,

              21 So that I come again to my father’s house in peace; then shall the LORD be my God:

              22 And this stone, which I have set [for] a pillar, shall be God’s house: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.

              2 Corinthians 9:7 –

              Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, [so let him give]; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

              Malachi 3:10 –

              Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that [there shall] not [be room] enough [to receive it].

              Malachi 3:8 – 3:12

              8 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.

              9 Ye [are] cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, [even] this whole nation.

              10 Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that [there shall] not [be room] enough [to receive it].

              11 And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the LORD of hosts.

              12 And all nations shall call you blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land, saith the LORD of hosts.

              Mark 12:41 – 12:44

              41 And Jesus sat over against the treasury, and beheld how the people cast money into the treasury: and many that were rich cast in much.

              42 And there came a certain poor widow, and she threw in two mites, which make a farthing.

              43 And he called [unto him] his disciples, and saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That this poor widow hath cast more in, than all they which have cast into the treasury:

              44 For all [they] did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, [even] all her living.

              2 Corinthians 9:6 –

              But this [I say], He which soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he which soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.

              Luke 6:38 –

              Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

              Malachi 3:8 –

              Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.

              Matthew 6:4 –

              That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

              Hebrews 13:5 –

              [Let your] conversation [be] without covetousness; [and be] content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.

              Acts 20:35 –

              I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.

            4. William Lanteigne says:

              You go first, since you asked. I’ll wait.

            5. Jed says:

              It was you who raised the point. How typical of a Leftist to dodge and divert rather than stand by their positions. What has become of your concern for the children?
              By the way, you need to gain a better understanding of “cognitive dissonance.” The use of the name of Festinger’s now almost 60 year old hypothesis has become quite in vogue of late, but as is often the case with fads, the term is used without understanding.

            6. J C Leslie says:

              Right. So supporting American capitalism is the wrong answer. Got it.

          2. Wrabble says:

            I get it.

            Eschewing professional sports saves lives.

            “It’s for the children.”

            1. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Well! You obviously don’t have science! :o)

        4. UseOfFarce says:

          Cognitive dissonance is when you have a “pro-life” bumper sticker, when you really just have patriarchal Daddy issues and are “pro-” men having power and control over women and girls, which ends up really really just being about “the upper cla$$” having power and control over everyone else. So, be honest about that then. Oh that’s right, CONservatism is essentially a fundamentally dishonest scam.

        5. ge205 says:

          Being delusional is when you think there such a thing as a Department of Peace.

        6. Paul says:

          I once had a bumper sticker on my car when I lived in the peoples republic of Santa Cruz (right next to the Duchy of Santa Claus) It Said:
          “Visualize whirr-led peas” Don’t think I have ever heard so much vile condemnation and down-right threats. It was beautiful.

      2. Fanfare Ends says:

        “authoritarian” = Obama who now wants to REGISTER US ALL TO USE HIS INTERNET.

        1. Brian FitzGerald says:

          Cite please????

        2. ge205 says:

          What????? Is that the new Republican scare slogan?

        3. Kate217 says:

          Obama just wants the internet to be classified a public utility so it’s covered by the appropriate laws. This would mean that your cable company wouldn’t be able to jack up your internet rates in the triple digits any time they want to. It doesn’t mean that you HAVE to sign up for internet any more that you are required to have an electricity or water provider.

          1. Fanfare Ends says:

            Obama wants it like a utility SO HE CAN CONTROL WHO ACCESSES AND HOSTS ON IT, and the day that happens you better run for the hills.

            1. Kate217 says:

              Wow. I don’t even know how to respond to that level of paranoia.

            2. zonmoy says:

              your projecting what you christofascists want to do with the internet onto Obama.

    4. Bobloblaw67 says:

      Reality like more elected members of the GOP than anytime since 1928.

      1. zonmoy says:

        yep, and elections with worst rigging since Hitler won power.

    5. Bobloblaw67 says:

      Like the GOP having more elected officials thn anytime since 1928

      1. Red Mann says:

        And here you are, proving her points, a classic exemplar of what is wrong in America.

        1. mikeconstitution says:

          The point is you are bigoted and uninformed and don’t have a clue that it is the ideas you support that are what is wrong with America.

          1. Red Mann says:

            I do know what’s wrong with America, it is the clueless right that base their decisions of false and distorted information.

      2. ge205 says:

        Low turnout and extreme gerrymandering will do that. Can you account why a million more people voted democratic over republican congressional candidates in the 2012 elections, yet still kept control of Congress?

      3. David Ward says:

        Even as more votes are cast for democrats…let’s ignore that fact and cheer because “yay! gerrymandering still works!”

        1. Allah Carte says:

          I don’t know why you’re trying to post facts for, you are talking to a republican.

    6. WrennS says:

      Back before last Christmas, while having dinner with my father, he moaned about how negative my oh so conservative Republican middle brother was. ‘I don’t know why he’s so negative all the time’ was what he actually said.

      I damn near snorted my iced tea.

    7. Fred Beloit says:

      My favorite is Number 3. ”
      “You use Biblical scriptute…”
      You may be from the South now, Madam, but I think you must have been educated at an Ivy League school where they got no carin’ for scriptutes of any kind, except maybe the

  2. Robert Meyers says:

    Yes Tiffany, you said it all.

    1. libamericaorg says:

      Thanks, Robert!

      1. Plakman says:

        You’re quite hateful, Tiffany.

        1. Duckbudder says:

          Project much?

          1. Plakman says:

            You tell me, Duck. I didn’t say anything about liberals good or bad. Tiffany had all of the hateful rhetoric.

  3. Andy Sprouse says:

    I would love to share this on Facebook, but without the title. Im not excluding people from my life for having a different opinion. Yes, my friends and family often support candidates that do not have their best interests in mind. But they still have a right to their opinion.

    1. Sam Oranger says:

      Everyone has the right to determine which politician has their best interests in hand. My liberal friends often support people who do not have their best interests in mind. With all do respect your post sounded arrogant and disdained.

      1. ge205 says:

        How does Andy Sprouse’s post sound arrogant and disdained? And how about providing an example of your liberal friends voting against their best interest?

      2. tracey marie says:

        says the arrogant and rude troll

        1. Plakman says:

          Please explain what was rude about Sam’s reply, Tracy.

  4. Dorothy Thomas says:

    I could have not said it better. I will use your essay to tell my conservative friends how dumb they really are.

    1. libamericaorg says:

      Go for it!

    2. Colleen says:

      If you are successful in getting them to read it, please share here how you did it. I have a brother-in-law who is probably one of the most ignorant right winger I have met. ALL ideology and ZERO common sense or actual facts and he is not interested in learning anything or being correct in anything he says. He once told my husband that he would never work for our local garage collection company because they (like pretty much every company here in Portland) have committed the sin of being ecologically conscious and he said “I don’t believe in going green.” So, if you get through to someone I would love to hear how you did it! 🙂

  5. pauly says:

    That was KICK ASS! Thank you!

    1. libamericaorg says:

      Thank you!

      1. jeani says:

        I have taken notes! I’ve had to burn some bridges with old school friends. We all grew up affluent. Smoking pot, skipping school, makeout sessions, cheating on tests ect. Apparently it was ok for us but no one else. I don’t remember any of them being bullies, but a bunch of them are now!

        1. Jed says:

          That comment speaks volumes.

          1. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

            Hahahaha fancy seeing you here, Jed.

            1. Jed says:

              Indeed, but playing with the children has gotten more than a little past boring. How did any of these clowns get through high school?

            2. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              It’s a mystery. Good idea, though; time to move on to some more interesting activities, like checking out the rest of the crew’s posts….

            3. Red47 says:

              Jed, it is a necessary part of growing up.

            4. Wrabble says:

              “How did any of these clowns get through high school?”

              They got A’s on their book reports about “Timmy Has Two Mommies” and “Why Capitalism and the USA are Evil.”

            5. Rick Kilgore says:

              I learned that apostrophes don’t pluralize anything.

            6. Wrabble says:

              Notational agreement.

            7. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              If he hadn’t done that, would you have chastised him for capitalizing a word mid-sentence?

            8. Rick Kilgore says:

              He had made a typo of mine the focus of his answer. It gave him an excuse to avoid responding to the meaning of the comment. I do that concessions have to be made, and I’m fairly tolerant of poor spelling, punctuation, syntax and the ubiquitous apostrophe.

              So when he made some comment about making “A’s” in high school, I remembered learning that it’s written As, unless using lower case letters (a’s), then the apostrophe can be used to avoid confusion, but not due to its pluralizing function.

            9. Tigernan Quinn says:

              So you’re a giant child is what your saying. Thanks. Also I deliberately left a misused word here for you so you have something to do.

            10. Rick Kilgore says:

              I’m a child for expecting a response to my actual argument instead of making a red herring out a typo? Well, color me childlike.

            11. Joe Sensor says:

              otherwise it would have looked like he got “ass” in high school, which may not have been the case.

            12. Malaprop says:

              An error in grammar isn’t a typo.
              She almost makes her point when you see your denial of facts.

            13. Rick Kilgore says:

              I have no recollection of the exchange in question, but it was nothing to do with apostrophes.

            14. MeiTow says:

              I wouldn’t have because he didn’t. I would have noted that one does not need to italicize and use quotation marks to denote written material. It is one or the other. Longer works should be italicized and shorter works should have quotation marks around them. 🙂

            15. Holly Parker says:

              ?????? is this a joke or…

              I have a pair of 10’s
              I got A’s on each of my book repots

              two examples of perfectly-used apostrophes ^^^^

            16. Rick Kilgore says:

              Not a joke. And while I understand that an apostrophe can be used to make plurals, your examples are incorrect.

            17. Robert Eckert says:

              Holly’s examples are correct. Apostrophes are only used to form plurals on symbols.

            18. Holly Bilski says:

              Actually, those are incorrect.

            19. Ellis8118 says:

              I “have” learned. 😉

            20. Rick Kilgore says:

              It was a reply to the question, “How did any of these clowns make it through high school?” So I need to use the past tense, not the present-perfect.

            21. suburbancuurmudgeon says:

              Capitalism is evil. Where you been living, son?

            22. olcurmudgeon says:

              In the USA where we have a mixed economy.
              You all love socialism so long as you are the ones to benefit

            23. wink says:

              No child left behind.
              It’s also why they’re still surviving.

            24. Jed says:

              Indeed. Terrible piece of legislation. But the dumbing down and social promotion have been going on for decades.

            25. Paul says:

              Over a century

          2. Red47 says:

            You don’t have to answer and get drawn back in here. I just thought you might find the numbers interesting.
            Do you remember this blog post? I was pulled back by curiosity because someone flagged a comment. It has 228894 shares and almost 5300 comments. I find that hilarious. I read through a bit of this again. There were tangents on religion and Trayvon Martin even. It was a slog. I would like to suggest that this post and the comments are representative of the basic differences between the Left and Right as well as the similarity in humans.

            1. Jed says:

              Most interesting. Thanks.

        2. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

          What’s amazing is that you think those were markers of a kid growing up in affluence, as if the less affluent kids weren’t as self-indulgent. Suffering much from delusions of specialty? Is it the narcissism driving your delusions?

          1. PJ4 says:

            Most liberals have given me the impression that they live in a world of narcissism and delusion.

            1. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              All part and parcel, fo’ sho’.

            2. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              explain this delusion

            3. RonzoL61 says:

              Funny how these stats never mention who was in control of Congress at the time.

            4. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              it DOES provide the facts as2 whom signed the legislations— ergo: that PRESIDENT gets the ‘credit”

            5. RonzoL61 says:

              So, Clinton gets the credit for spending cuts and a surplus, which never would have happened if the Republicans hadn’t had control of Congress at the time, and Republicans get the blame for increases in spending, most of which happened while under a majority Democrat Congress? Talk about fuzzy math!

            6. Jed says:

              That’s far more disingenuous than the simple ignorance of fuzzy math; it is what the old Soviet Union would have called pravda.

            7. stopthelies1 says:

              It was the raised revenue, from raising taxes and generating a tremendous amount of taxable income for EVERYONE that made the difference. Get a clue.

            8. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              actually yes,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, funny how when Obama has positives done on HIS watch he doesn’t get credit; but the ‘downgrade’ is attributed to him? shall we look at Reagans presidency and that congress? or should we claim BUSH2 doesn’t get “credit” for the garbage which illustrated HIS administration??

            9. Jed says:

              And you offer yet another well researched and thought out argument. It boggles the mind.

            10. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              dispute it————– I come with us treasury and CBO facts
              and YOUR “facts”???

            11. Jed says:

              You got nothin’ numb-nuts. Your posts consist of nothing but bad artwork and even that you don’t understand. If you have anything of value to say, try saying it — like a rational human being, not a two-bit hack on the party line payroll. Let me refresh your limited memory with my earlier comment:

              To ascribe to the president alone all the factors you raise is simplistic in the extreme. The argument you bring is nothing but specious noise. It may have impressed your friends in high school, but it fails to persuade even in an internet discussion forum such as this. If you have a legitimate case to make, a far more detailed and comprehensive analysis must be presented.


            12. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              hey crybaby,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
              when good or bad *( see: gw bush) has ‘happenings ‘ on that presidents watch,,,,,,,,,,,,
              THAT president gets the credit; dubious or otherwise
              shall we dig up some REAGAN facts which were under a democrat congress?
              NO? geeee,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ya’ might be a white trash regressive scumbag
              then again,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,you evidently have far more socio-economic knowledge then the CBO and us treasury!
              after all; when those 2 put out numerical facts which U don’t like/agree with….
              ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, well; I suspect U get the idea
              enjoy the facts below ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

            13. Jed says:

              Not only do you lack intelligence, you lack coherence. Light another number, sit back, and chill. After all, ignorance is bliss.

            14. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              you just spun away,,,,,,,,,,
              classic white trash regressive playbook
              I don’t “chill”…………I use no drugs of any type
              ,,,,,,,and I love watching U collapse —
              care 2 dispute CBO and treasury?
              no?? have another drink,,,,,,,,,,,,,

            15. Red47 says:

              Pot is legal lots of places now. Have you read the scientific literature that is (finally) coming to light about the effects of that garbage on the brain? It’s harsh. Go easy on ‘im.

            16. Cufmann says:


              regressive admits to not reporting his cash income to the IRS. He brags about it and tells others to do it in order to get free health insurance.

              He also admits to fathering a child and skipping out on the mother if his child. Then brags about his superior genes because his daughter that he abandoned has large breasts, which he freely posts her pictures of her along with her bra size.

              He never posts facts, he just says he’s going to, and then afterward claims he did post facts.

              He’s a low-life deadbeat.

            17. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              ‘Sorry… what?

            18. john Diamond says:

              Congress balances budgets and spends the money , as per the constitution, not the President. I am sure you knew that,though. Clinton also signed the DADT( dont ask dont tell) laws and the DOM (defense of marriage )act and NAFTA which sent jobs overseas.

            19. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              correct— which goes against Clintons legacy
              that being said; that which occurs-good or bad– on a presidents ‘watch’ is attributed to that president. Democrats do better with Americas finances than republicans; as also found in the states run by either.
              5.5% unemployment now– using the same metric (U-6) as repubs fawn about regarding Reagans time as pres

            20. Jed says:

              To ascribe to the president alone all the factors you raise is simplistic in the extreme. The argument you bring is nothing but specious noise. It may have impressed your friends in high school, but it fails to persuade even in an internet discussion forum such as this. If you have a legitimate case to make, a far more detailed and comprehensive analysis must be presented.

            21. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              Very well stated, as usual!

            22. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Given who’s in the White House now, are you sure you want that to be the de facto narrative?

            23. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              his administration has helped America far more than the white trash regressive GOP PRIOR administration
              or did U forget this?

            24. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Helping those on whom you’ve inflicted the need for help is called “manipulation.” Or, as the exceptionally ignorant like to say, “being played.”

            25. stopthelies1 says:

              Congress did not raise taxes and they did not invest in the economy.

            26. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              They pretty conspicuously have to ignore lag time and cyclicity in spreading their blather, too. Well, that, or they’re just too stupid to understand that hitting “Enter” is a little more immediately discernible than the effects of economic policy on economic events.

            27. Paul says:

              A point I wish more were aware of. Market forces have mass and velocity and therefore inertia. Ignoring the resonant frequency and time constants is another way to reduce economic arguments to black magic. It requires shamans and chicken-feet.

            28. Jed says:

              Not unlike James Bond, I’ve always preferred my chicken feet boiled, not fried.

            29. Paul says:

              Sorry brother, you go to that war alone. I can’t get my mouth around anything that spends its existence walking in chickensh*t.

            30. Paul says:


              I have never understood the wisdom of seperating “that with toenails” from “prime cuts” and then eating “that with toenails”. Of course I do like pork rinds. I have finally experienced the thing often called “Cognitive Dissonance”. Is that all there is to it?

              Back in the old days we used to call it discrimination before that word was PC’d out of useful application.

            31. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Good points, too, Paul. They don’t want to know any of these things. IMO, they see economics as something they can’t possibly understand so they hired someone to be smart “on their behalf” (The ORoosevelt crew) and have ceded their will in as childishly submissive a fashion to their god as the Bible commands we do to its god.

              Creepy. I guess they’re unaware of the democidal body count of just the last century.

              Regressive motto: “Screw History!”

            32. Paul says:

              “Screw History!”
              Not quite, They embrace and apply it subjectively and asymmetrically.

              Ever notice that a theory is only common-sense when they consider it common? Most of their arguments can be reduced to popularity contests.

            33. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              “Most of their arguments can be reduced to popularity contests”

              True that. Even where there may be a million idiots, consensus constitutes reality.

              Regressives We’ll see it when at least most of us agree it exists!

              Sanes: We’ll believe it when we see it!

            34. Paul says:

              True Dat!

            35. Paul says:

              If we had a movement (No scatological riffs please) we would need a flag. I propose Pavlov’s Hammer and Occam’s Razor on a field of red. I tire of this hammer and sickle thingy.

            36. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              It’s arduous, for sure. When I consider what I have to show for trying refute their BS…

            37. Paul says:

              Well, at the risk of sounding self-comforting, you have my admiration, freely offered. It’s the only thing they haven’t figured out how to seize and re-distribute… but their workin on it.

            38. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha. Thanks, and the same to you, Paul.

            39. DH1642 says:

              Guest and Paul, I think there may be a time slot for you guys on TV (using the word “guys” generically not genetically in case the PC cops are about) for a program called, Truth and Humor, Where Lemmings Can’t Go! Great natural chemistry (probably created some greenhouse gases) between the 2 of you, without a script (as far as we know, but we haven’t read all Lois’ emails yet). Thanks for the laughs!

            40. Red47 says:

              They are trying to seize the innerwebs. that’s a great way for them to start.

            41. Red47 says:

              Movement–scat, I see what you did there. Nice.

            42. Jed says:

              We can always count on Paul for a solid rearguard action.

            43. Shep Schultz says:

              Maybe he can bring the phasers to my “hate whitey” conversation.

            44. Peter Gibson says:

              Damn, there’s a ‘hate whitey’ conversation brewing up and I’m about to hit the sack? Jeez, my timing right sucks.

            45. Shep Schultz says:

              He’s moving away now with a severe butt-hurt gimp in his step. Thanks anyway.
              I seriously doubt he’ll be spouting his incorrect Native history anywhere soon.

            46. Peter Gibson says:

              Oh well… like any quality Leftist Derpity, he might just come back tomorrow basking in a sea of cleverly rehearsed profundities. My eye will be peeled no doubt. 😉

            47. Red47 says:

              They do take breaks to go gather those profundities. It is amazing how what sounds profound to them sounds like something we learned and threw out in our freshman year of high school.

            48. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha Tru all dat.

            49. Jed says:

              Phasers are good, but the photon torpedoes have such a cool sound effect to go with them!

            50. Paul says:

              Shep ripped of a good torpedo on Bloomberg the other day about cranial explosion containment.

            51. Jed says:

              Shep’s good at stuff like that. There’s one man I would never want to fight in any way.

            52. Paul says:

              Ya, He’s got that about him.

            53. Paul says:

              Phasers? Did Someone say Phasers?

            54. Shep Schultz says:

              Wake up Cap’n!

            55. Paul says:

              Well, I tried. My posts are being “Identified as Spam” and removed.

              It’s a gift I have 🙂

            56. Red47 says:

              Someone may be flagging them.

            57. Shep Schultz says:

              There post count went from 150+ to 31 last I checked.
              A “flaggot” arrived.

            58. Red47 says:

              That pretty much means that the person who posted this article is being damaged by the lowering of the numbers. Someone cares more about controlling speech than about the quantifiable “success” of the blogger.

            59. Shep Schultz says:

              Yes Ma’am, it does.
              Probably another victim of gummit schooling.

            60. Paul says:

              You mean water is wet?

            61. Red47 says:


            62. R_Swift says:

              Just reply, yes.

            63. Red47 says:

              Now I am laughing out loud. My smart-aleckery has caught up to me on this one.

            64. Paul says:

              Welcome to my world.

            65. Paul says:

              Sorry, I often turn without signaling.
              “Someone cares more about controlling speech than about the quantifiable “success” of the blogger.”

              I was opining that this is a self-evident fact.

              I wish I knew how often I am as clever as I think I am. Sometimes I wonder.

            66. Red47 says:

              Wait…what? is a kids’ smart ass comeback. My other favorite along those lines is “could you repeat that middle part?” Levity is the intent. I followed you well (as a woman should). Lol

            67. Paul says:

              I have added you to my smart-ass list. We shouldn’t have any problem in the future:-)

            68. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              LOL I despise replacing worn out flasher units also….

            69. Jed says:

              In my case over at Charisma News I’ve been banned entirely. That POS who moderates that pagan dump has even taken to removing my up-votes — now that’s funny.

            70. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha ha…cheez…

            71. Jed says:

              The best part is that he hasn’t figured out how to keep me from doing it, so every few hours I go back and up-vote away again. The boy that runs that site is one sorry SOB.

            72. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              It’s our boyish good looks… the green-eyed monster’s getting to them.

            73. Jed says:

              Best laugh of the day — gracias amigo.

            74. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              I know where regressives “live.”

            75. Doctor Hook says:

              He must be a slow one. Bloomturd and RealUnclearPolitics dropped the banhammer so hard that we can’t even upvote anyone’s at either. Disqus confirms the upvote, but it disappears as soon as the page is refreshed.

            76. Jed says:

              It is now as you say for me also — first site I’ve been blocked from! Yeah!

            77. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              MY SON, TODAY, YOU ARE A MAHN!

            78. Shep Schultz says:

              Four more bans and he earns his Eagle in posting.

            79. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Is this a good time to take him to a bordello?

            80. Shep Schultz says:

              Let’s wait tell he gets to five. That way we can save up for a pretty one.

            81. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Aww man. Dat’ jus’ wrong.

            82. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              expect resistance Mr. G. 14 minutes ago

              It’s fine. I will hang out with my hubby tonight. He said he would give me a back massage because I have horrible menstrual cramps.

              see more 1 Reply ViewView in discussion

            83. Shep Schultz says:

              She has been more sensitive today.
              Best that she not visit ROK tonight.

            84. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              LMAO Make it so, #1!

            85. Jed says:

              Have a heart!

            86. Shep Schultz says:

              Get busy Jed. It isn’t going to happen on it’s own.
              While your at it, tell Paul it is time to get rowdy.

            87. Jed says:

              Will do. We’ve both got a shot at it over at Truthout, I’m thinking. What a load that drivel is!

            88. Jed says:

              It is, it is.

            89. Doctor Hook says:

              Congratulations! Since you stand for something, you can expect that this won’t be the first time.

            90. infadelicious says:

              It never gets old -Congrats!

            91. Shep Schultz says:

              Morning Mom!


              It seems Jared thinks you and I are figments of Wrabble’s imagination.


              Feel like schooling him? Jared must think Wrabble does a spectacular imitation of a Joisey Jewish lady.


              Progressives just don’t understand that people can really have friends.

            92. infadelicious says:


            93. Shep Schultz says:

              I sent you and Proud Conservative Mom the same message.
              Sorry about that.

            94. infadelicious says:

              No apology necessary. Just don’t call me grandma. 😉

            95. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              You’re not kidding! In all probability, that will be ME, in less than five years! I don’t think I will ever be ready…. I would opine that it kind of hits you like a truck. Gary Larson, the creator of “The Far Side” had a fantastic strip of being run over by the “Old Age Truck.” It makes me smile every time I think of it. 😉

            96. Paul says:

              Wow, good dodge.

            97. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              Jared, is by far, one of the most lame trolls I have ever dealt with. The genius does not even remember the recent pearls of wisdom that he posts.
              If you are short of entertainment, you can check out our latest intellectually stimulating discourse.

            98. infadelicious says:

              I better check. I probably got banned as well because I mocked the mods

            99. Jed says:

              The boy does seem to be a thin skinned SOB — feel free to quote me.

            100. Shep Schultz says:

              You’ve taken the first step, Paduan…
              Now your should strive to join the 5-timer club. Infa was probably the first lady member.
              It is pretty easy to get banned from TRScoop, especially by that punk moderator K-Bob.

            101. Jed says:

              May I use you as a reference?

            102. Shep Schultz says:

              Sure, but it helps if you just develop you own special brand of nastiness. Save it up and unleash it all at once when the moment is right.

            103. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              : D !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

            104. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              : D !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
              That was really great! It really tickled a huge “funnybone!”

            105. Red47 says:

              Like the parade clowns with shovels.

            106. Paul says:

              It depends.

            107. Jed says:

              Sorry, but depends are not uniform issue. You’ll just to grin and bear it.

            108. Paul says:

              Suggested edit:
              “We’ll see it when at least most of us”

              “We’ll see it when the most least of us”

            109. suburbancuurmudgeon says:

              Who was in control of Congress is pretty much irrelevant. The GOP controlled Congress during Dubya’s first term and there was a net loss of jobs. We all do better with a Democratic administration. Everyone except very rich people do poorly during Republican ones (with the exception of the Eisenhower years).

            110. RonzoL61 says:

              Yeah, I can see how poorly the rich are doing under Obama…

            111. Will Deegan says:

              Just like how the GOP blames Obama for the economic crisis, even though it was in full swing when he took office?

            112. RonzoL61 says:

              If it makes you feel better, we can blame the Dems, since they were in control of Congress when Obama took office!

            113. white trash regressive scum says:

              which president was in power when 9/11 happened? or medicare part D? or the housing bubble collapse? or the wars which killed 4400 PLUS americans and spawned ISIS? or collapsed our economy ( losing 750K jobs per month at end of GW presidency)? Hmmmmm????

            114. RonzoL61 says:

              Really? It’s all Bush’s fault? That’s the best you’ve got?

            115. white trash regressive scum says:

              that my friend is a delightfully feeble comeback!!!

            116. white trash regressive scum says:

              he was pres; he signed the papers,,,yep- dat beeee da’ best I got

            117. Paul says:

              I have MSpaint too.

            118. Oliver Grayson Eckert says:

              Funny how your chart shows that the deficit PBO primarily inherited in 2009 is down by more than half now. Oops.

            119. Paul says:

              You have a funny definition of “inherited deficit” Sounds to me like “inherited excuse”, that It isn’t “his” because he was “forced” to do it. You mean yes doesn’t always mean yes? Just had to do a 1 trillion dollar spendulous package?

              Get back to me when something IS his. Current employment stats? It will only be his in your eyes until they go south again. I’m sure it will be someone elses fault.

              There are other things to be seen in that graph besides Inheritance such as the turn-over in the house and sequestration. But those weren’t his fault either.

            120. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              shall we look at deficit INCREASES ( see: PCT%) attributed to presidents?? Hmmm?

            121. Paul says:

              You can look at anything that has meaning for you.

            122. regressive whitetrash GOP scum says:

              yes sir,facts have meaning- and white trash regressive GOP policies screw all of America..IKE was most recent good GOP president– numbers socio-economically showcase that. since IKE? scumbaggery in the GOP

            123. Guest says:

              I would explain that if the source for the data was clear. How are the numbers for “democrats” and “republicans” calculated? The years there was a democrat or republican president? Who has control of congress? The number of partisans who endorsed a bill? It’s easy to throw up a graphic without context. That’s probably the most vague source citation I’ve ever seen.

              Source: New York Times – Encyclopedia Britannica – God himself
              ^ See how easy that was.

            124. Mark says:

              Those years marked as Democrats were the terms of Republican Presidents – like Reagan. Likewise, the Republican category was when there was a Democratic President. That’s usually how it works.

            125. Cufmann says:


              Why did you turn tail and run away from Forward Progressives when you were exposed for being a serial fabricator and a pathological liar?

              Why do you cheat the IRS out of what you owe them? Why do you cheat other liberals here when you boast of not paying your fair share, but scream for others to pay theirs?

            126. white trash regressive scum says:

              name ONE THING I (a) fabricated and (b) lied about
              ,,,,,awwww,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, U cannot as I don’t lie!!!
              PRAI$E JEEEEE$U$!!!

            127. We do! Especially right now with this current republican led congress who decidedly went around the President in an attempt to steer US foreign policy by inviting the Prime Minister of Israel. While it is true the Speaker can invite anyone he or she wishes, there is such a thing called protocol, especially when the purpose – as now admitted by the current Speaker – is to change the minds of Americans regarding what they perceive to be a greater danger than what the President has already said they were.

            128. PJ4 says:

              Oh yes, because this current president never circumvented congress–ever

            129. My apologies! The last I looked, previous Presidents did so as well, however they did not do so to alter United States foreign policy as these Republicans did. Perhaps you did not see the latest polling on this issue: the Country is with the President on this one.

              Finally, what you speak of – circumventing Congress – is called an Executive Order. As stated, previous Presidents have done so, just as this one will continue to do so, as long as the hill continues sending him bills they know will be vetoed. I suggest a refresher course on government; specifically relating to the appropriateness of Executive Orders, especially since this President has far less than the previous! Thanks for the exchange!

            130. PJ4 says:

              You mean this polling?
              http://www .peoplespunditdaily. com/latest-polls/presidential-job-approval/
              Doesn’t seem like voters are so on board with him
              Or this one
              http://m. rasmussenreports. com/public_content/politics/current_events/israel_the_middle_east/voters_think_americans_more_supportive_of_israel_than_obama_media_are
              Do you have anything more current?

              I suggest a remedial course on being less pretentious and more charming for you

            131. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              Very spot on!

            132. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Apparently your mind manager’s had enough of me. I’ll see if leaving the pic out, too, helps.

              “Barack Obama has tried to avoid executive orders in order to obscure how much of a dictatorial President he is.

              Back in July, when President Obama was giving a speech in Austin, Texas, he defended himself from the charge that he was a dictatorial president:

              ‘The truth is, even with all the actions I’ve taken this year, I’m issuing executive orders at the lowest rate in more than 100 years. So it’s not clear how it is that Republicans didn’t seem to mind when President Bush took more executive actions than I did.’

              With that in mind, here is a civics quiz that might make it more “clear” to everyone:

              Which of these has the force of law:

              Presidential executive orders

              Presidential memoranda

              (Hint: There is no wrong answer.)

              That’s right, memorandums issued by the President have just as much the force of law as executive orders.

              Stay stupid, the revolution must go on!

              As Lenin would say, “Forward!!”

            133. Mary Shew says:

              Keep it up Obama your really getting to them now.

            134. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Wow! That was cruel! Why would you call me a name like that?!

            135. Jed says:

              They allow the most vile of profanity on this site.

            136. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Ha ha. Where’s the humanity?!

            137. Paul says:

              Right next to the banana-ty, Just to the left of the Doritos.

            138. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              LOL! ‘Careful! That was sounded enough like “Hannity” that you’ll start a new thread! :o)

            139. Paul says:

              When I think of all of the Liberal literature defending and justifying liberal agenda and then apply Occam’s Razor, I am left with the conviction that it is never wise to give governing authority to anyone with cotton-mouth and the munchies.

            140. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              LMAO Absolutely. Rocket scientists need not apply… :o)

            141. Jed says:

              Except for us, all the humans have fled. Top of the morning all.

            142. Paul says:

              Morning Jed, Just getting my morning itch before dirtying up perfectly good paper for a living. Good thing this place doesn’t pay by the post (at least not us). They’d be carpet bombed.

            143. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              ‘Morning, Jed. I’m well on my way to cerebral necrosis already this morning. ‘Think I’ll go out and change my oil…

            144. stopthelies1 says:

              Much less than Ruinnie Reagan & the bushes.

            145. PJ4 says:

              Much less than FDR (who holds the record for the most) but what’s your point?

            146. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              Far worse.
              The maniacal and petulant man-child, who sits in the Oval Office, brazenly ignores the rule of law all the time. For all intents and purposes, he shredded our Constitution and arrogantly and petulantly declares he has a pen and a phone and will do whatever the Hell he wants to do!

              I would love to tell that narcissistic and arrogant jackass where he could put his &%$#@ pen!

            147. Instead of just making the allegation, here is an idea for you; actually demonstrate from a source other than the conservative news media entertainment network, specifically where he circumvented congress. Then, when you have gotten that far, demonstrate where NO OTHER President has done the exact same thing. Hint: You don’t show me I shall post examples of Reagan and Bush with the exact totals in comparison to this President. Otherwise, you are providing nothing more than hubris or BS!

            148. PJ4 says:

              Lol, oh you would know all about hubris and BS “Dr”–that’s about all you have.

            149. Oh wow! You actually can Google a topic! Impressed! And not only that, but you were able to selectively pull up only those links which support your worldview, huh? Of course Judge Hanen (a Bush nominee ruled in the manner he did) and nearly every legal scholar will tell you the administration will prevail on appeal! See how that works?

            150. PJ4 says:

              Oh wow!
              You think you’re clever!
              Not so impressive, but it is predictable
              Good to know how condescending and arrogant liberals can be
              Ok genius, babe one legal scholar who believes the administration will prevail
              Show your work

            151. Forgive me, however I am not the one making the claim you made. I am merely defending a position and have already stated factual material while all you have done is provide the same old generalizations.

              BTW: If you would refrain from being so freaking condescending, perhaps I wouldn’t be the way I am, however I have come to learn throughout the previous five years as a political analyst and writer, published with four publishers, an educator, a pastor, that no amount of rational speaking with those who oppose this President suffices.

              By God, you are right and you are so out to prove so. Problem is this: I have been predicting since 2012 that the GOP would make an attempt to impeach this President, even if there existed no legitimate charges. See? You would have known that had you read my previous articles, but meh, you have been committed to all things conservative in the past several years (since the President beat the conservative machine TWICE). Have a nice day now!

            152. PJ4 says:

              I am merely defending a position and have already stated factual material while all you have done is provide the same old generalizations.

              You’ve not presented any facts or sources, just conjecture.

              If you would refrain from being so freaking condescending, perhaps I wouldn’t be the way I am,

              So now it’s my fault you’re so low on charm???
              *eye roll*
              Where does it end with you people???
              I mean really???
              For being such an “educated” and experienced man, you’re certainly not above the but he/she did it too!! line.
              But I think I already pointed out your child like behavior in an earlier post.

              however I have come to learn throughout the previous five years as a political analyst and writer, published with four publishers, an educator, a pastor, that no amount of rational speaking with those who oppose this President suffices.

              A wise opponent recently told me that anecdotal evidence doesn’t usually hold much water…but… I can’t refute life experiences, nor can you.

              However, I’m slightly shocked that with all your credentials (that you feel the need to tout–because it’s not like I can’t just click on your profile or anything) and life experiences still has not taught you to stop genenriazling and jumping to rash conclusions about individuals .

              By God, you are right and you are so out to prove so

              Are you talking about yourself right now?

              Problem is this: I have been predicting since 2012 that the GOP would make an attempt to impeach this President, even if there existed no legitimate charges.

              Problem is this: No one’s going to impeach him despite your charlatan attempts at clairvoyance or despite the predictions of top Democrats.

              It would a very foolish thing to do. I certainly don’t want Joey McMensa in charge for the remainder of the time… I mean really—I’m sure even a big liberal like you wouldn’t want that.

              You would have known that had you read my previous articles,

              I’ve never even heard of you till now, how would I have read your articles.
              Do you have any links to them?

              but meh, you have been committed to all things conservative in the past several years

              Interesting that you would presume to know what I’ve been up to these past several years…. have you revealed your awesome psychic powers to others?
              Or am I your first?

              Can you see what I’m wearing right now?
              What am I going to have for dinner tonight?
              What color are my nails?
              Can you see my dead aunt?
              Does she miss me?

            153. Dr. Bear is right you are condescending. Have a nice day PJ – Namaste.

            154. PJ4 says:

              Lol, I love how you’re so quick to point that out in people with whom you disagree but you’re willfuly blind to it when it’s Fiona or Gary or any of your other online “friends”

              You’re funny and biased

              I’m having a great day–hope you are too

            155. Both you and Thomas have been condescending and I find it annoying.

            156. PJ4 says:

              So, just to be clear, it’s annoying coming from Thomas and me, but it’s perfectly fine coming from your crazy “friends”?

              Oh wait, I forgot!
              Your friends are, in your eyes, as flawless as you


            157. No one is perfect, I just don’t pretend to be.

            158. PJ4 says:

              Nor do I
              I was being facetious
              Sorry that went way over your head

            159. “Sorry that went way over your head”

            160. Thomas says:

              “I’m also sorry you’re too stupid to understand why Netanyahu supports terrorism. Perhaps you should ask a Palestinian about that.

              The above is what Fiona exclaimed yesterday on these pages. If anything Fiona has been condescending to you and Plum (did she read this yet?). In fact you are condescending to yourselves not having called Fiona out on this yet.

              I have shared things about me with you that indicate on some level that I entrusted you with this information. How in the world is that condescending to you? Think ER.

            161. You have been condescending because you don’t listen to me, you assume things that are not true about me, and you belittled my academic studies. Why are we still having this conversation?

            162. Thomas says:

              You defend Fiona in regard to this statement she made. Look upthread. The only type of a person who makes such a statement is a disturbed one.
              Here we go again we the “women’s studies.” I have pointed this already to you that comparing the efficacy of your “women’s studies” degree to your Art Degree was not belittling and how you took it and still take as such is beyond me. Did I belittle you by pointing out that you did not get hired because of your “women’s studies” degree but Art? Is that it????
              We obviously disagree very much on the “importance” of “gender studies” in educating our young generation.

            163. fiona64 says:

              Tommy-toon and his teenaged groupie certainly do have bugs up their butts about me …

            164. When I have a bone to pick with Fiona, I will pick it with her directly.
              I engage no intermediaries in my life, you smarmy toad of a gossip.

            165. Thomas says:

              Engage away Plum 🙂 I am simply pointing out that you know better so take it as a compliment from a gentile instead of insulting. In other words I gave you credit, don’t waste it.

            166. fiona64 says:

              so take it as a compliment from a gentile

              Tommy-toon continues to insist you’re Jewish. He’s very funny.

            167. I saw that. Asshole has seen me type ‘I am a Catholic/Christian’ many times now. I am trying to ignore his BIGOTED SMARMY ASS.
              Want to bet he fights me on it? FLAMING ASSHOLE.

            168. fiona64 says:

              Tommy seems to think that whatever he says is so … which is just another symptom of his delusional illness.

            169. Oh yeah. Tiresome and annoying.

            170. Arekushieru says:

              No, you are the only one being condescending. If you assume that Netanyahu is not a terrorist without first asking a Palestinian, then you have been condescending. Thanks for playing, however!

            171. Thomas says:

              Only a true liberal would start off a response with whining about “being condescending.” Do you need a hanky or baby wipes for your crocodile tears?

            172. You do the same crap too PJ. What you posted is an example of your condescending behavior, referring to fiona or Gary as “disturbed” because YOU don’t agree with them. I’m far from perfect but I’m just sick of your high school girl behavior.

            173. PJ4 says:

              Hello Kettle
              Meet Pot
              It’s fine that Fiona tells Thomas that he beats his wife just because she doesn’t agree with what he says
              In fact, you’ll even upvote it

              Goodness, I’m tired of your hypocrisy and high school girl mentality

            174. “Hello Kettle — Meet Pot”

            175. PJ4 says:

              So do I take that as an admission of your double standard?
              Or just a sign of your immaturity?

            176. No PJ. I think you would do a lot better at arguing your point if you were less condescending. That’s all I’m saying.

            177. PJ4 says:

              You never did answer my question

            178. Sorry if that wasn’t clear, no and no.

            179. Demosthenes says:

              What do you think of:

              1. New Disqus design; and

              2. NRO’s redesign?

              M A and I hate both with a burning passion.

            180. The new Disqus fee is a train wreck. Most of the time I get an error message that say “Opps something went wrong.” It’s cluttered with a lot of information I don’t need. The NRO site redesign looks messy and cluttered. Is anyone doing usability studies on these site redesigns?

            181. Are you getting used to the new disqus design? I looked at it on my phone and it’s almost unusable. I’m using an iphone 4 with the teeny-tiny screen. It takes forever to scroll and half the time it just craps out. How frustrating.

            182. Demosthenes says:

              The new Disqus is not great. The new NRO is a train wreck.

            183. PJ4 says:

              Well it’s good to know that you feel your “friends” shouldn’t be so condensing and invective even if you publicly support them on it and even if you only criticize the people with whom you disagree when they mirror your “friend’s” actions.

              At the very least, you feel your “friends” are just as wrong too.

            184. Only one emoticon in your post? Usually you’re so much more expressive.

            185. PJ4 says:

              Great rebuttal

            186. What am I not “committing” to?

            187. PJ4 says:

              To the fact that your “friends” are just as bad if not worse.
              You’ll never call them out on their bad behavior but you will with someone with whom you disagree

            188. Thomas says:

              “Bottom-up” processing (“small chunk”) is displayed by children from pre-school to about the 6th grade. After that, majority of these children transition to “top-down” processing (“large chunk”).

            189. Where to start? I have outlined a clear and concise position from the outset of this flame war. My suggestion? Go back to my original comment. If I can find it; so can you!

              Second, please spare me the republican talking point that nobody wants or will impeach the president. First, I have more than my fair share of republican lawmakers on record stating that they would like to do so. In fact, perhaps you can GOOGLE the following: GOP states they need to get Boehner and McConnell out of the way before going to the next phase.” Or, better yet: How about trying to GOOGLE the following:

              “President Gohmert will save Christmas.” While I admit the title is a bit confusing for a person of your caliber, try to focus. When you click that link on you will find the information I have just shared.

              Now, if you don’t mind, I have better things to do than to argue with you. And I think your Mom is calling you to do your chores!

            190. PJ4 says:

              Yes, “Dr.” Bear where to begin?

              How about with the fact that your “analysis” really just comes down to you commenting on other people’s analysis.

              How about the fact that you try to make yourself out to be much more important and impressive than you really are. Sounds to me as though you’re compensating for something–wonder what that can be.

            191. You write:

              “How about the fact that you try to make yourself out to be much more important and impressive than you really are. Sounds to me as though you’re compensating for something–wonder what that can be. ”

              See? THIS is why I do not wish to carry on with you on any dialogue. Anyone who professes to KNOW or implies they KNOW me or what is my heart is simply engaged in judging. Do yourself a favor: Get over yourself! You really do seem to place a high priority on your feelings. Typical!

            192. PJ4 says:

              *giggles with absolute glee*

              Did you seriously just write Anyone who professes to KNOW or implies they KNOW me or what is my heart is simply engaged in judging.??

              After writing to me, a not even a day ago this?

              You would have known that had you read my previous articles, but meh, you have been committed to all things conservative in the past several years

              Um.. yeah…. take your own advice “Dr”, and get over yourself. You seem to place a high priority on your ego.

            193. utah chick says:

              This thread is not complimentary to you.

            194. Well said. PJ can’t help but be condescending that’s her game.

            195. Arekushieru says:

              Uh, better in the Republican way? No. I assure you dear girl, it DOES matter who started it. If you punish both a bully and a victim equally, you’re only confirming to the victim that their actions are equally as heinous as the bullies which is why it’s no WONDER that victims rarely come forward about any kind of bullying, which includes rape. That’s the adultism that REPUBLICANS portray as ‘maturity’. And I do believe the good Doctor provided you with another idea that you just rambled on without reading, as well. The idea that REPUBLICANS do this FAR more often than ‘libruls’? Sorry, ‘sweetheart’, for not being sorry, I guess….

            196. PJ4 says:

              Do yourself a favor and step away from the keyboard before you hurt yourself or someone around you.

            197. Arekushieru says:

              No, that would apply to you, sweetheart, especially someone who thinks that a person can be hurt by merely typing on a keyboard.

            198. PJ4 says:

              That’s not what I meant
              You have no critical thinking or reading comprehension skills
              Get yourself an English tutor
              Actually no, just keep proving to everyone how big of an idiot you are
              If you do nothing else for me, that would be your greatest gift to me
              Thank you

            199. purr says:

              PJ4 wrote:

              In your absolute furor and fury to exact revenge upon me for calling
              out your hypocrisy and not allowing you to control my speech, you didn’t
              stop to think that perhaps you were making it easier for on line
              predators by doing his/her work for him/her, did you?
              No, your petty need for a “gotcha” moment superseded any iota of human decency you claim to possess.
              I don’t give out my exact location. I give approximations.
              Neither were inaccurate.
              Did you stop to think even once that you’ve made it easier for someone to find me?
              That they can narrow it down even further, because of your help?
              No, you didn’t
              Because you lack impulse control and you lack critical thinking skills.

              Thank you for showing all us the true malice in your heart.

              Hey, I did a bit of editing for you. I fixed your post up a bit – it’s a bit more factually accurate, PLUS I think it conveys your outrage a little better.

              Let me know if you need any similar help with your writings! I’m always here to help.
              In your absolute furor and fury to exact revenge upon me for calling out your hypocrisy and not allowing you to control my speech, you didn’t stop to think that perhaps you were making it easier for on line predators by doing his/her work for him/her, did you? Because, for your information, on line predators are 100% UNABLE TO READ MY PAST POSTS! You SICKOS are the only ones who can read my past writings of fiction! I mean fact!

              No, your petty need for a “gotcha” moment superseded any iota of human decency you claim to possess. Maybe if you weren’t a bunch of demented baby-murdering sickos, you’d THINK OF THE CHILDREN! Especially sixteen year old children like myself!

              I don’t give out my exact location. I give approximations. And I change them frequently, because I either a) forget what I said, or b) change my fantasies from time to time.
              Neither were inaccurate. I mean, I do, approximately speaking, live on the same planet as these locations. So if you think about my proximity to these cities in the greater context of the size and scale of the entire universe, I practically DO live there!
              Did you stop to think even once that you’ve made it easier for someone to find my nonexistant, fictional persona?
              That they can narrow it down even further, to basically “somewhere” in California, because of your help?
              No, you didn’t
              Because you lack impulse control and you lack critical thinking skills. Unlike me, who can clearly see that online predators are incapable of reading for themselves.
              Thank you for showing all us the true cluelessness in my brain.

            200. It’s sad that you have no intellectual rebuttal to what Arak said. To say that she has no critical thinking or reading comprehension skills, telling her to get an English tutor, and telling her she is an idiot is another example of your baseless ad hominem attacks.

            201. purr says:

              If PJ was as amazing as she claimed, with Maseratis, rockstar husband, member of the Hollywood 1%, she wouldn’t need to come to the internet and slum it, would she?

              What kind of 1pcter wastes their time, day in and day out, arguing about abortion on the internet? Wastes their time with apparent ‘losers’ like us.

              She has every resource imaginable. Money. Connections. She could be writing books, setting up her own organizations, donating thousands, even millions, to pro-life organizations. But no, she spends every day arguing on the internet, trying to impress people who are apparently ‘lower’ than her.

              If she is telling the truth about her fabulous Hollywood life with rockstar husband, priceless Louis XIV furniture, 100,000k cars, and multi-million dollar houses, then clearly, she is a total loser.

            202. Mitzi says:

              Lol I see now

            203. PJ4 says:


            204. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              The White House after throwing a temper tantrum, later admitted to being notified.
              Moreover, Boehner did NOT have to get Obama’s permission.

              Do you Libs not see the insanity of a president who breaks the law constantly and flaunts it, yet gets sanctimonious and self righteous about alleged PROTOCOLS?!

            205. Do you conservatives neglect to watch your own Speaker of the House? This past Sunday he openly admitted to “keeping the White House in the dark,” out of his supposed “fear of the White House ‘interfering.'”

              Now, I am no constitutional scholar, and we all can be grateful for that much, because if I were, I tell you right now I would be bringing charges of subversion against the Speaker for his complicit role in conspiring with not only the Prime Minister of Israel but also the man tasked with upkeep of our relations with that nation.

              Why? Because there is only one singular reason this man is coming to address the Joint Sessions of Congress; to effectuate change in the current United States foreign policy position regarding Iran.

              Finally, as conservatives do you not read nor understand the very constitution you folks yell at near shrill level to obey? It is quite clear in that document that the ONLY individual responsible for foreign policy is the individual in the Executive branch of the government; that is, the President of the United States. While I fully realize a robust percentage of republicans and conservatives persist in believing this President not eligible to hold office – a total of 69% stridently believe not with 34% stridently uncertain, – he IS the President. Get over it!

            206. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              It is beyond hilarious that YOU have the temerity to tell ME to “get over it.” Thanks for giving me a good laugh this morning.

              HELL NO! I will not get over this dictatorial, arrogant and piece of scum that is currently sitting in the Oval Office.
              The White House, after their full blown temper tantrum, admitted to being told about Netanyahu’s coming to speak. Get with the program!
              Moreover, Boehner DID NOT have to ask Obama’s permission to invite Netanyahu to speak before Congress. It is totally in Boehner’s purview and discretion to invite Netanyahu to speak. It is high time that the American people heard the truth of what is going on.

              Moreover, It is sheer and unbridled insanity that Obama breaks the law on a regular basis brazenly and arrogantly and gets away with it. He, himself, unlawfully creates laws. That is positively NOT in his job description, to say the least.

              Your President practically spits on our Constitution, for all intents and purposes on a regular basis, and you have the unmitigated GALL to speak about “PROTOCOLS?!
              You give tremendous credence to “Liberalism is a mental disorder” and “There are none so blind as those who refuse to see!”

            207. Much gratitude to you too, for providing me the laugh this evening. About the only funnier thing then Birdman winning the Best Picture over Selma is your uninformed commentary above.

              You use words such as “dictatorial,” “arrogant,” and “piece of scum,” to describe the man occupying the highest office in our land. But then again, you probably neglect to see the irony there, don’t you? First, if you really believe the President to be dictatorial, then do tell us all, oh enlightened one, how Congress continues to call the shots? Sort of difficult to marry those two ideas, don’t you think?

              Finally, you have the temerity to call that man a ‘piece of scum,’ with no penalty whatsoever, and rightfully so, because it is your first amendment right to do so. Unlike Natalie who simply stated her shame for being from the same state as Boy George, you get a free ride here. And yet, you would be the first one to call yourself a patriot? Right!

              As stated, get over it and yourself while scampering along Skippy!

            208. Oliver Grayson Eckert says:

              And you see, that’s what we think about conservatives. So there you are.

            209. PJ4 says:

              Guess that makes us all even then? 🙂

            210. Jed says:

              Does that mean you think your daddy can beat up her daddy?

            211. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              Very well said!

            212. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              But only one of you is correct and it isn’t you.

            213. Proud Conservative Mom says:

              Amen and Amen!

            214. Eponymous1 says:

              The higher up they are, the more that’s true : (

            215. eddie hutch says:

              Interesting conclusions since liberals tend to be concerned with society as a whole, injustices that affect us all, regardless of race, religion or social status whereas conservatives are much more concerned with themselves, those with the same beliefs whether religous, political or social. Liberals tend to read conservative publications both in an attempt to see if there is any truth to their claims as well as the pure entertainment value. I was glued to each and every republican primary debate leading up to the 2012 elections simply because all 9 candidates, with the possible exception of huntsman are wingnuts, lol. It was very telling that he was also the least popular. Far right media has completely screwed up the conservative mindset, yet you are often telling liberals to stop drinking the kool-aid. You people are fascinating from a psychological perspective!

            216. suburbancuurmudgeon says:

              Funny, I get the same feeling about most conservatives. Correction, ALL conservatives.

            217. Estproph says:

              Most conservatives beat their wives and molest children.

            218. infadelicious says:

              most liberal men beat their husbands and most liberal women beat their wives. What’s your point skippy?

            219. Maureen Hechler says:

              No, sweetie, that’s you and your kind.

          2. Biolochic says:

            The less affluent kids were too busy working to be self-indulgent. I’m curious to know what you mean by “delusions of specialty”.

            1. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Odd. I often read that the so-called “inner city” (Leftist code-speak for “non-Whites”) kids are the ones hit hardest by unemployment.

              Self-importance is what I meant by “delusions of specialty.”

            2. Biolochic says:

              This “inner city” kid worked 2 jobs to help support my family and my dying father while still getting straight As in school. Do I view myself as special – of course I do? So should everyone. We are all special in one way or another.

            3. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              Even if I believed you, logical fallaciousness still precedes you. Assuming you’re not lying, you would be the exception, not the rule.

              BTW, “straight As” in an education system as corrupts as the American system is may not be the accomplishment your narcissism compels you to believe it is.

            4. Biolochic says:

              So because I don’t fit into your little narrow box I’m lying?? Because I worked hard to get scholarships I’m a narcissist? I think you need a dictionary. nar·cis·sism
              excessive or erotic interest in oneself and one’s physical appearance.

              How does helping my family make me excessively interested in my physical appearance??

            5. WH says:

              This is hypocritical nut job madness at its best, plain and simple. You are judging “conservatives” and want to lash out at them for having an opinion? That’s the whole point of America, we have the freedom to have our own opinions. I’m a proud conservative yet barely any of this relates to me or the majority of my conservative friends, even though you like to pretend it does. I’ll admit none of us are perfect and we all make mistakes (like me not being able to resist posting about the garbage article you wrote), but don’t act like you are perfect and know what is all right and wrong. This kind of thinking and misguided judgements are what’s wrong with the world because again we are all free to have our own opinion. Try being a part of the solution and not the problem. We are all faulty, but the bible clearly lays out right and wrong and you can’t choose what parts you want to follow. Yes conservatives, myself included, make mistakes because we aren’t perfect or even close, but we ask for forgiveness for those sins clearly laid out in the bible. We make bad decisions and realize our mistakes as we get older and try to help others not to make the same mistakes, what’s wrong with that? If God took the time to make sure something was included in the bible just once then it is important, six times must make it pretty darn important. And by the way, Texas is not considered part of South.

            6. Biolochic says:

              Your reply to my comment makes little sense. It’s obvious that you meant to comment to the author of this blog, not me. Try breathing, and then post it where it should go.

            7. Biolochic says:

              I’ve replied before but, Disqus doesn’t seem to be posting it.

              You’ve commented in the wrong place. Your rant is obviously directed at the author this blog. I was neither judging anyone, nor do I care if Texas is considered Southern or not.

              I’m neither a Liberal nor a Conservative – I make up my own mind by researching as much as possible from as many sources as possible. I am not a label, I am simply me.

            8. The above article doesn’t seem to be very op-ed to me? Would you like examples? Oh wait, the author posted several which you seem to ignore.

            9. Taffy Dugan says:

              What the hell does your comments have to do with Biologic’s comments??

            10. Mary Shew says:

              Hey you pompous ass, take your bullshit somewhere else.

            11. R_Swift says:

              Why didn’t you include the other definitions for narcissism?
              primary narcissism
              :the stage of a child’s primary concern with himself as an organism prior to awareness of external reality as a mediating factor

            12. Biolochic says:

              No matter which of these definitions of the word narcissism, none of them fit me so they are all irrelevant. I worked 2 jobs while in High School, taking care of my siblings, my mother, and my dying father (brain cancer due to Agent Orange while he served our country in Vietnam – now buried in Arlington). I worked hard and got scholarships. I did all of this in order to take care of my family, and I still do. I’m last on my priority list, with my kids and family at the top.

            13. Taffy Dugan says:

              What an amazing woman you are! Such strength and sacrifice! Don’t listen to these fools. They obviously have so idea about what you’ve gone through. They are so emotionally wrapped up in their labels of Liberal and Conservative that they can’t logically see past that. I love that you’ve completely stumped them – an African American woman who pulled herself and her family out of poverty. It’s blowing their tiny minds. And the fact that you’re not a Liberal nor a Conservative is driving them even more crazy, lol! Once again, you don’t fit into their narrow prejudgments. I’m loving this!

            14. Biolochic says:

              Thank you Taffy! Yes, when people don’t fit into other’s people’s little molds, it scares them. I’ve faced the prejudice all my life. It doesn’t bother me. My hope is that by breaking these molds we’ll begin to see each other for who we truly are – individuals, not stereotypes.

            15. R_Swift says:

              Another tome about yourself?

            16. Taffy Dugan says:

              Wow, what a ridiculous troll!! Thank you for the laugh!

            17. Biolochic says:


            18. Red47 says:

              Ouch. That left a mark.

            19. R_Swift says:

              Went right over her head.

            20. Red47 says:

              It is a tiny target.

            21. R_Swift says:


            22. Barack'sGotYourBack says:

              Even angels don’t bother trying to dance there.

            23. Oh, thanks for explaining! You mean like the guy from the tea party who said “they were not going to be disrespected and that they were going to get ‘something out of the government shutdown,” ya know the one they caused by holding the ACA hostage in order to keep the government running, only to try to pin the blame on the President? Got it!

            24. Cletus B Neckbeard says:

              I think you may have nested your reply incorrectly but if your point is what it seems to be, type in your search box “Thomas Sowell who shut down the government.” The one you’ll be looking for is a Townhall article.

            25. Mary Shew says:

              Don’t get yourself all riled up, Cletus. If your going to make these kind of statements please at least give us your source.

        3. R_Swift says:

          You just described barack hussein obama.

        4. MTS says:

          Of course you had to cheat on tests, ect.

          1. jeani says:

            No, why bother cheating when you know the material? Another assumption? I worked 25-30 hrs a week. Most of us bought our own cars. We all had some amounts of scholarship for college. My point? My friends and I grew up with opportunity and great schools. We all were normal highschoolers that went on to be successful. The gopbagger bullies are ungrateful for their fortune of our childhood. They forget mom and dad paid for their college. They had medical and dentistry. Yet the bullies consider the poor as second class.

            1. MTS says:

              My point was that you had to cheat on tests because you don’t even know the correct abbreviation for et cetera (hint: it’s not ect.). Good luck.

            2. jeani says:

              Transposed 2 letters, lol.

        5. I live in Brazil but it’s surprising how we have the same kind of people with the same kind of (infantile) arguments. In fact, I might say that I usually use this argument that you pointed out, but with people of my age that are STILL using drugs (and not only marijuana…). In fact, I found the worse hate speeches against poor people (calling them drug traffickers) and general minorities coming from people that blow them some “snow” or smoke weed in a daily basis. They want black people that are involved in the drug business (the infamous “thugs” – yes, we have equivalent insults here) to be arrested or even killed by the police, but I suspect that they imagine that their supply will fall from heaven when all traffickers “scum” were dead. Hypocrisy may be the most common human trace that we divide as species.

        6. Jacobs_43 says:

          …or as younger people they made more impulsive decisions, but have since matured and looking in retrospect would say that maybe the decisions they did make were not always the most prudent or safe. Are people not allowed to gain life experience and reform their perspectives using that experience?

        7. wisdomandtruth says:

          jeani You were quite a rough girl. Now you are a liberal who judges that you need to burn bridges with old buddies that have (suddenly) begun to look like bullies.

      2. John Masters says:

        I think I love you…

      3. Larry says:

        Why do you delete the posts that disagree with you? Is this string only for people that agree with you?

      4. Larry says:

        Really? no answer of any kind? No accountability?

      5. Not larry says:

        you are an awesome writer and I agree with everything you say.

      6. Alec j says:

        Right on girl.

      7. Larry says:

        Why do delete every question I ask you a question?

      8. Fuck you twat says:

        Stupid ni66er loving thunder cunt slut..

      9. Larry says:

        Are you ready yet for a grown up answer to your interesting opinion piece?

      10. MD707 says:

        I would add to that list…”You wave flags and call yourselves Patriots and think you support our military…BUT you vote for politicians that repeatedly voted against bills to help veterans with jobs, health care and suicide prevention. You should be ashamed of the people you put in office, if only for that.”

      11. Theresa says:

        You rock!

      12. Leslie Harrington says:

        I am an independent with close friends in both political camps. Not one of the conservatives that I know is racist or homophobic. Most of which are pro-life, two of which volunteer with people of all ages- including children, many of them are devoted parents. One of them teaches elementary aged children with developmental disabilities, and is passionately pro-education. Did you ever stop and think that your opinion of conservatives based on political identity alone is as bigoted and ignorant as an individual who is vehemently anti- gay marriage? If you can’t judge an individual based on their sexual identity, why would you think it’s acceptable to judge an individual on something so shallow as their political identity? You’re preaching against intolerance, yet you are exltessing far more intolerance than any conservative I’ve ever known.

    2. Carl Hartman says:

      That was bullshit, Thank You!

      More f—ing liberal lies. Thank you for your great amount of tolerance and open-mindness. Not!

      Uneducated fools.

      Burn those bridges. You can leave and never come back.

    3. dumbassedliberals says:

      You are pansy assed liberal pussy fuck-boy faggot! But Tiffany loves you!!

      1. purr says:


      2. pauly says:

        And your about as eloquent and one would expect from an
        avatar title such as your.

    4. Maureen Hechler says:

      You have said it all. Thank you so much.

    5. Krazy Joe says:

      Actually, it was stupid.

      1. pauly says:

        To each their own…

    6. Mary Stanley Mansour says:

      You took the words right off my keyboard. It is so true. I just attended today a soiree with family and friends. I was hard pressed for conversation.

    7. wisdomandtruth says:

      Thank you!

  6. mark wyatt says:


  7. Alethinos95 says:

    One should never bother with arguing with the ignorant. The only time I’ve done this is when I recognize there is an audience that are perhaps fence sitters… And that, in using the ignorance and prejudice of some member of the Rabid Right, I might be able to reach THESE people – I’ll do it. I’ve no intention of trying to win over people who are – in essence – souls that are desperate to HATE – who’s only self worth comes from hating the “other’.

    1. Sam Oranger says:

      To a liberal, anyone to the right of Karl Marx is ignorant. This is why i gave up debating liberals.

      1. Rick Kilgore says:

        Ignorance is determined by the amount of knowledge a person has. Interestingly, the more ignorant a person chooses to remain, the further to the right they tend to move politically,

        1. Sa