On Feb 6, 3:43 pm, "Gregory Hall" wrote:
"marcia" wrote in message

...



On Feb 6, 3:14 pm, "Gregory Hall" wrote:
"marcia" wrote in message

...

Or, people who don't rely on welfare or medicaid, but whom Jack
doesn't approve of receiving SSDI because his crystal ball says
they're too healthy to get it. Also in Jack's world: Once on
disability, always on disability.

Once on disability = always a leach. Even if you can't work because of a
disability it's your family's responsibility or the responsibility of
church
and charities if you have no family members. Why has it become your RIGHT
to
force me as a taxpayer to take care of you because you are disabled, in
many
cases self-inflected either by stupidity or sloth. (I use 'you'
figuratively
speaking this isn't necessarily meant as a personal attack.)

How about you liberals reach into your OWN pockets for money and take
your
filthy hands out of mine?

--
Gregory Hall

Why is it conservatives' arguments always seem to assume liberals
don't practice what they preach? *Everyone* who works pays into Social
Security, not just Republicans. I pay into it; disabled people (in
most cases) paid into it before they became disabled.

You don't like welfare and disability; I'm not particularly happy
about how much money we spend on the military, particularly on the war
in Iraq, where we never should have gone to begin with.

I'm not happy about underwriting corporate welfare, or the fact that
my tax dollars were partially used to subsidize year-end bonuses for
the financial "geniuses" who were largely responsible for the current
state of our economy.

We individual taxpayers don't get to pick and choose how our dollars
are spent. We're all stuck paying for some programs and policies we
don't personally support.

Why is that, Marcia? Well, the answer is simple. It is liberals and
socialists who forced these welfare programs on everybody. Conservatives
want nothing to do with them but are forced to contribute anyway.

So when I say take your filthy hands out of my pocket and reach into your
own instead you liberals say, "**** you - we're gonna make everybody pay
whether they want to or not." In other words charity doesn't start at home
for a liberal. Charity starts by reaching into somebody else's pocket. It's
all too easy being generous with somebody else's money, isn't it. But when
it comes to donating your own you liberals are such a stingy lot.http://digg.com/politics/Conservativ...e_30_more_than...

That's the difference.

--
Gregory Hall

Okay, Greg. Take my money out of Iraq. Get it out of the pockets of
the right-wing bankers who tanked the economy. Give me back my portion
of the money that went to the oil companies who continue making record
profits every quarter, without reinvesting in refineries, etc., and
instead invest in green energy.

See where I'm going with this? The Republicans initiated a few
programs/policies/wars I don't approve of, but still have to finance.

You are aware of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act
of 1996 (PRWOR, aka "welfare reform") that took place under Clinton,
limiting the amount of time an individual can be eligible for welfare,
and enforcing work and/or education requirements on most recipients,
right?

On Fri, 6 Feb 2009 12:57:31 -0800 (PST), marcia
wrote:

Get it out of the pockets of
the right-wing bankers who tanked the economy

Didn't realize that Franklin Raines of Freddie and the other idiot at
Fannie were right-wingers.

Not to mention the Fed. Govt, pressuring the right-wing bankers to
make home loans to deadbeats.

And it was Jimmy Carter's "Community Reinvestment Act" that started
the ball rolling. Willie kept it rolling when he rewrote regulations
that would have prevented much of the abuse.

You are aware of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act
of 1996 (PRWOR, aka "welfare reform") that took place under Clinton,
limiting the amount of time an individual can be eligible for welfare,
and enforcing work and/or education requirements on most recipients,
right?

Yeah, a conservative Congress compromised with Willie into changing
AFDC into TANF, but abuse still prevails.

"marcia" wrote in message
...
On Feb 6, 3:43 pm, "Gregory Hall" wrote:
"marcia" wrote in message

...



On Feb 6, 3:14 pm, "Gregory Hall" wrote:
"marcia" wrote in message

...

Or, people who don't rely on welfare or medicaid, but whom Jack
doesn't approve of receiving SSDI because his crystal ball says
they're too healthy to get it. Also in Jack's world: Once on
disability, always on disability.

Once on disability = always a leach. Even if you can't work because of
a
disability it's your family's responsibility or the responsibility of
church
and charities if you have no family members. Why has it become your
RIGHT
to
force me as a taxpayer to take care of you because you are disabled,
in
many
cases self-inflected either by stupidity or sloth. (I use 'you'
figuratively
speaking this isn't necessarily meant as a personal attack.)

How about you liberals reach into your OWN pockets for money and take
your
filthy hands out of mine?

--
Gregory Hall

Why is it conservatives' arguments always seem to assume liberals
don't practice what they preach? *Everyone* who works pays into Social
Security, not just Republicans. I pay into it; disabled people (in
most cases) paid into it before they became disabled.

You don't like welfare and disability; I'm not particularly happy
about how much money we spend on the military, particularly on the war
in Iraq, where we never should have gone to begin with.

I'm not happy about underwriting corporate welfare, or the fact that
my tax dollars were partially used to subsidize year-end bonuses for
the financial "geniuses" who were largely responsible for the current
state of our economy.

We individual taxpayers don't get to pick and choose how our dollars
are spent. We're all stuck paying for some programs and policies we
don't personally support.

Why is that, Marcia? Well, the answer is simple. It is liberals and
socialists who forced these welfare programs on everybody. Conservatives
want nothing to do with them but are forced to contribute anyway.

So when I say take your filthy hands out of my pocket and reach into your
own instead you liberals say, "**** you - we're gonna make everybody pay
whether they want to or not." In other words charity doesn't start at
home
for a liberal. Charity starts by reaching into somebody else's pocket.
It's
all too easy being generous with somebody else's money, isn't it. But
when
it comes to donating your own you liberals are such a stingy
lot.http://digg.com/politics/Conservativ...e_30_more_than...

That's the difference.

--
Gregory Hall

Okay, Greg. Take my money out of Iraq. Get it out of the pockets of
the right-wing bankers who tanked the economy. Give me back my portion
of the money that went to the oil companies who continue making record
profits every quarter, without reinvesting in refineries, etc., and
instead invest in green energy.


It doesn't work like that, Marcia. When you agree to have taxes taken out of
your paycheck you have no say as to how they are spent. You can't vote for
taxes and then whine out loud that you expect to have a say in how they are
used. It's too late after the horse is out of the barn.

And you're totally wrong about it being bankers who tanked the economy. It
was left-wing policies, namely banks being supported by liberals like Barney
Frank assisted by the liberal CEO's of Fanny May and Freddy Mac, to lend
money for mortages to minorities and other people who could not possibly pay
back the loans. (Community Reinvestment Act - the root cause liberal
legislation) These bad loans were bought up by Freddy and Fanny and packaged
and sold on up the line. When it came to the point where these people who
could not possibly pay off loans they never should have been given in the
first place started defaulting in droves then the whole Ponzi scheme came
tumbling down. This was largely percipitated by oil going up to 150 dollars
a barrel and gasoline, diesel and heating oil prices skyrocketing so people
used up all their mortgage money paying for energy. This is also caused by
liberal polices that restrict drilling and exploration for new petroleum
reserves.

See where I'm going with this? The Republicans initiated a few
programs/policies/wars I don't approve of, but still have to finance.

Doesn't matter. The minute you approve of any taxes you give tacit approval
of all the things those taxes are used for. As long as you are for any
income taxes or payroll taxes you have lost total control of how and where
they are spent.


You are aware of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act
of 1996 (PRWOR, aka "welfare reform") that took place under Clinton,
limiting the amount of time an individual can be eligible for welfare,
and enforcing work and/or education requirements on most recipients,
right?

Was that the one the Republican majority in congress crammed down his
unwilling throat?

--
Gregory Hall

On Feb 6, 4:34 pm, Robb wrote:

Whiner, spray Tax and Fruitcake remover on your paycheck.

ROFL! That was the highlight of my day. I'm gonna steal that line.

"Robb" wrote in message
news
Gregory Hall wrote:

"marcia" wrote in message
news:b7697920-1841-4e1f-a97a-
...
On Feb 6, 3:43 pm, "Gregory Hall" wrote:
"marcia" wrote in message

news:e69fbbc4-28d9-4b44-
...



On Feb 6, 3:14 pm, "Gregory Hall" wrote:
"marcia" wrote in message

news:f70e74df-b388-404b-
...

Or, people who don't rely on welfare or medicaid, but whom Jack
doesn't approve of receiving SSDI because his crystal ball says
they're too healthy to get it. Also in Jack's world: Once on
disability, always on disability.

Once on disability = always a leach. Even if you can't work because
of a
disability it's your family's responsibility or the responsibility
of church
and charities if you have no family members. Why has it become your
RIGHT
to
force me as a taxpayer to take care of you because you are
disabled, in
many
cases self-inflected either by stupidity or sloth. (I use 'you'
figuratively
speaking this isn't necessarily meant as a personal attack.)

How about you liberals reach into your OWN pockets for money and
take your
filthy hands out of mine?

--
Gregory Hall

Why is it conservatives' arguments always seem to assume liberals
don't practice what they preach? *Everyone* who works pays into
Social Security, not just Republicans. I pay into it; disabled
people (in most cases) paid into it before they became disabled.

You don't like welfare and disability; I'm not particularly happy
about how much money we spend on the military, particularly on the
war in Iraq, where we never should have gone to begin with.

I'm not happy about underwriting corporate welfare, or the fact that
my tax dollars were partially used to subsidize year-end bonuses for
the financial "geniuses" who were largely responsible for the
current state of our economy.

We individual taxpayers don't get to pick and choose how our dollars
are spent. We're all stuck paying for some programs and policies we
don't personally support.

Why is that, Marcia? Well, the answer is simple. It is liberals and
socialists who forced these welfare programs on everybody.
Conservatives want nothing to do with them but are forced to
contribute anyway.

So when I say take your filthy hands out of my pocket and reach into
your own instead you liberals say, "**** you - we're gonna make
everybody pay whether they want to or not." In other words charity
doesn't start at home
for a liberal. Charity starts by reaching into somebody else's pocket.
It's
all too easy being generous with somebody else's money, isn't it. But
when
it comes to donating your own you liberals are such a stingy
lot.http://digg.com/politics/
Conservatives_charitably_donate_30_more_than...

That's the difference.

--
Gregory Hall

Okay, Greg. Take my money out of Iraq. Get it out of the pockets of the
right-wing bankers who tanked the economy. Give me back my portion of
the money that went to the oil companies who continue making record
profits every quarter, without reinvesting in refineries, etc., and
instead invest in green energy.


It doesn't work like that, Marcia. When you agree to have taxes taken
out of your paycheck you have no say as to how they are spent. You can't
vote for taxes and then whine out loud that you expect to have a say in
how they are used. It's too late after the horse is out of the barn.

And you're totally wrong about it being bankers who tanked the economy.
It was left-wing policies, namely banks being supported by liberals like
Barney Frank assisted by the liberal CEO's of Fanny May and Freddy Mac,
to lend money for mortages to minorities and other people who could not
possibly pay back the loans. (Community Reinvestment Act - the root
cause liberal legislation) These bad loans were bought up by Freddy and
Fanny and packaged and sold on up the line. When it came to the point
where these people who could not possibly pay off loans they never
should have been given in the first place started defaulting in droves
then the whole Ponzi scheme came tumbling down. This was largely
percipitated by oil going up to 150 dollars a barrel and gasoline,
diesel and heating oil prices skyrocketing so people used up all their
mortgage money paying for energy. This is also caused by liberal polices
that restrict drilling and exploration for new petroleum reserves.

You wingnuts have perfect insight (by virtue of hindsight), I love the
way Repugs insist that people would rather have a car than a house.

Until winter, or the middle of summer. Yeah.


See where I'm going with this? The Republicans initiated a few
programs/policies/wars I don't approve of, but still have to finance.

Doesn't matter. The minute you approve of any taxes you give tacit
approval of all the things those taxes are used for. As long as you are
for any income taxes or payroll taxes you have lost total control of how
and where they are spent.

Whiner, spray Tax and Fruitcake remover on your paycheck.


You are aware of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act
of 1996 (PRWOR, aka "welfare reform") that took place under Clinton,
limiting the amount of time an individual can be eligible for welfare,
and enforcing work and/or education requirements on most recipients,
right?

Was that the one the Republican majority in congress crammed down his
unwilling throat?

Google hates you?


You're another of those liberal history revisionists, huh? Read it and weep:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...3133219AANXEA3

"Q: What about the political landscape in 1996-and the realities of the
welfare state-pushed welfare reform to the top of the agenda in 1996 and
made its passage possible?

"A: Then-governor Bill Clinton surprised Republicans by making welfare
reform a major issue in his 1992 campaign. His skillful use of welfare
reform was a key ingredient in his victory, especially in battleground
states like Ohio. But when President Clinton failed to push welfare reform,
Republicans in the House formed working groups to draft legislation that
they believed would revolutionize several of the nation's major welfare
programs and save money for taxpayers. With Congressional Republicans united
behind a revolutionary welfare reform bill, and with Clinton and the
Democratic Party badly divided on welfare reform, the shocking elections of
1994 gave Republicans control of both the House and the Senate. Another
factor pushing welfare reform to the top of the agenda was public support.
Polls showed that the public favored work over welfare by huge margins.
Another important factor was strong evidence that the old system, which gave
people cash without expecting anything in return, contributed to making
people dependent on welfare and to having babies outside marriage. When the
moment of truth arrived in 1996, the old welfare system had no serious
defenders."

Like I said, it was crammed down Clinton's throat. He used welfare reform to
get elected but never had the first intention of actually reforming it.
Typical lying liberal.

--
Gregory Hall