quote:

Doesn't this mean that the Republicans should drive with their headlights off at night as well?

chesh posted:

I forgot to mention it earlier: The OP had bet my friend $100 last summer that Donald Trump would be the next president.

PTBrennan posted:

No according to the e-mail supporters of Republicans should put their headlights on during the day, so they'll be fine not only is it daylight but their headlights are on. Democrats should turn their headlights off during the night so they can't see where they're going, crash and die.

Thus solving all our countries problems because all democrats will be dead and a republican will be voted into office and he'll magically ride in on a majestic white unicorn and save this country from evil liberals and socialists stealing their money and giving it to the undesirables and all will be well in 'Merica Land ........ or something like that I'm sure.

Mr Darcy posted:

Ohhhh! Sorry, I'm just a stupid Brit!

I thought it was a thing where Rep's would only have their lights on in the day and the Dem's would only have their lights off at night.

Which would be the same thing.

Sarion posted:

So her complaint is that the post office started having trouble when the government abolished it as a part of the Federal Government in 1970 and tried to force it to behave like a private corporation?

"Welcome to the Democratic Party."

Kosmonaut posted:

I went from libertarian to socialist so there is definitely hope for anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty.

The Soul of Man Under Socialism posted:

Private property has crushed true Individualism, and set up an Individualism that is false. It has debarred one part of the community from being individual by starving them. It has debarred the other part of the community from being individual by putting them on the wrong road and encumbering them.

constantIllusion posted:

I know this has been covered in here but this pic has been making the rounds on facebook:

HipGnosis posted:

Welfare recipients on drugs is so small of an issue that only someone willfully ignorant would...oh...

quote:

I wish... my clients paid their dealers with groceries they bought with their ebt card

quote:

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Shhhiiit Uncle Sam got his hands all UP IN my check!!!!!!

quote:

They KNOW the people that should be tested though. I think since it's too expensive to test them, they should cut down on all the fraud that goes on with welfare and food stamps! And there should be a time limit. Makes no sense for a single working parent, who's doing everything in his/her power to take care of their kids to not be eligible but this wench that has been on welfare for 20 years with no ambition to sell his/hers and use the money to get a tattoo of shoe on their arm! Jussayin

"constantIllusion" posted:

...there is already a time limit for welfare assistance set a 5 years TOTAL for a life time. This has been in place since 1997. Also most people on welfare are not able bodied adults but children and the elderly.

quote:

Can I ask why people feel entitled to food stamps? College students or drug addicts. I'm so tired of the entitlement that everyone seems to think they deserve. If your a college student, not every single hours is devoted to school, get a part time job! If you can't pass a simple drug test, you lose your food stamps! There are consequences to every action that people do, or didn't anyone learn that when the were young? I have been teaching my children that life is not fair, and that you need to work for what you want..nothing in this life is guaranteed. So, If the people who work to provide the money for food stamps have to have a urinalysis to keep their jobs, then those who receive this benefit, needs to also pass the test! So SHUT UP, and PEE in the CUP!

constantIllusion posted:

Also, to anyone in here who is retardedly screaming "GET A JOB!", you have to be hired. No one is guaranteed a job anywhere, you cannot walk into a business fresh off the street one minute, and come out with a written job offer the next. It doesn't work that way. Nearly all businesses have an application and interview process, and when there is an average of 6 applicants for one job opening, there is no "getting a job" in the way you can get a loaf of bread from the grocery store.

quote:

I know that getting a job is tough. My husband has been unemployed for 2 years without benefits. You can't expect to walk into a business and be made manager! You do the menial jobs first, that's why they're called entry level. As to the expense of drug testing..Walmart has a proven way to cut cost, buy in bulk! The more you buy, the cheaper it is.

constantIllusion posted:

Clearly you enjoy being willfully ignorant. Apparently you weren't paying attention when McDonald's held a job fair and 1 million people applied for 20,000 jobs. 50 applicants for one job.

I also find it cute that the people who oppose welfare the most are people who are two paychecks away from being on it. It's almost like you're Rich people's Stans (Think of the Song by Eminem). 'Cause, you know if you refuse needed help enough and shuck and jive through hard work at some entry level job long enough, they'll accept you as one of their own. And then you'll be a rich person yourself.

It's not like a wealthy person who owns stocks in Walmart (sells groceries), Target (sells groceries), or Safeway(corporate grocery chain), would look stupid as hell opposing food stamps when the government reimburses stores every time an EBT card is used to pay for anything on the store's shelves.

Doc Hawkins posted:

And now, time to send the essay to my whole contact list with "forward if u agree" at the bottom.

Albert Einstein posted:

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society.

constantIllusion posted:

And the willful ignorance continues...

quote:

Can I ask why people feel entitled to food stamps? College students or drug addicts. I'm so tired of the entitlement that everyone seems to think they deserve. If your a college student, not every single hours is devoted to school, get a part time job!

Dradien posted:

A few gems from her (She posts from her phone, so the grammar/formatting isn't always the best).

"Any entity that taxes us while in debt should be ended. If it is needed and someone is willing to pay for it, someone will provide it. It's only worth what you are willing to pay unless it's mandated.

Choadmaster posted:

The funny thing is, she'll say "Well, they should get jobs that pay better than minimum wage!" How do they do that? By going to loving college. Edit: I just noticed that she did say something about "entry level" jobs, and people should work their way up.

chesh posted:

Additionally, I want to point out MIkeRoweWORKS where my favorite dirty boy advocates for an laments the fact that we have lost the working class education that keeps this country moving. A big part of that is the loss of practical classes in high school: shop class, car class, wood working, even home ec: classes that show you the importance of and how to FIX YOUR OWN poo poo.

xwonderboyx posted:

Today was the first time I've actually defriended someone. He went full bore racist and started talking about how interracial couples were wrong and it's only done to look different from everyone else. While claiming to be not racist because of having black and asian friends. He went so far as to create a group. poo poo it's an open group so just click: https://www.facebook.com/groups/142518329170394/

euphronius posted:

I doubt plumbers earn 100 an hour. They may charge that much.

Sarion posted:

I think its a perfectly legitimate point to make. The issue is that our educational system stops at 18, and up to that point doesn't really provide anything that would allow you to make a living. It provides the basics everyone needs (reading and simple math) and then it either prepares you for college, or babysits you till you're 18. Its an incredible waste.

I would rather public education was reformed to include more of those shop/home ec type of classes. And that society invested in cheap/free adult education. We should not expect people to go into massive debt in order to get jobs that are beneficial to society; nor should we assume that university is the right path for everyone.

BrotherAdso posted:

The problem with this vision is that we have to make room, in a modern civic society, for education which enhances the social, political and historical literacy of citizens and enhances their ability to think and communicate critically. A re-emphasis on practical and technical education might critically endanger our civic and democratic society in an era where public policy questions are more complex and more glibly presented than in any previous era.

Now, in previous eras, this did work out -- the technically educated working classes and lower classes of the early 20th century used unions and mass movements to define policy agendas and move a civic society -- but I am not convinced that a re-emphasis on technical education in the modern world would produce an even remotely similar result.

chesh posted:

I'm not singling you out, just using this bit to hopefully illustrate a point:

I wish we could have a serious discussion in this country about college, and about how not everyone needs it. It's nearly required for any job above fry cook, and shouldn't be. Anyone should be able to learn and apply a skill, and to change professions based upon skill level, determination, and interest, but we like to pretend that everyone in this country at 18 knows exactly what they want to do in life and then pay vast amounts of money in order to do that thing, but the sad fact is that I know a lot of people with english and philosophy degrees in the tech industry and more than a few unemployed computer scientists.

Facebook posted:

Original Posta posted:

For the racists who insist on testing people for drugs that are on welfare: looks Like you don't save a dime, on top of violating basic Constitutional rights.

Wall Photos

This is one of the MANY reason why drug testing welfare recipients is a bad idea...
Being Liberal Wall Pictures
By: Being Liberal
Like · · Unfollow Post · Share · Friday at 11:59am ·
3 people Like this.

Person#1 posted:

The only reason I think drug testing should be used for welfare is to look for drugs Like crack, cocaine, heroin. I know many people who would be able to support themselves off welfare if only they dropped the hard habit. They have jobs, bank, but also have every type of state and federal aid available, because their habits come first. I don't consider weed or tobacco to necessarily be drugs, but people need to prioritize.
Friday at 12:18pm

Person#2 posted:

i totally disagree with the numbers....especially the percentages. note that there's no referral sources as to where the info came from. i think...ESPECIALLY IN DETROIT....i KNOW the number testing postive would be MUCH MUCH MUCH higher!
Friday at 12:55pm

Original Posta posted:

http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/floridas-welfare-drug-testing-costs-more-than-it-saves/
Friday at 12:56pm

Original Posta posted:

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/9-investigates-welfare-drug-testing/nFPB3/
Friday at 12:57pm

Original Posta posted:

‎4th Amendment: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Friday at 12:58pm

Person#2 posted:

that has nothing to do with drug testing for people who the PEOPLE are SUPPORTING....
Friday at 1:03pm

Natas Dog posted:

The only thing that bugs me about that inforgraphic is it plays pretty fast and loose with the numbers. It completely neglects to tell you how many people actually participated in the program so you can do the math yourself. While I'm against this bill on 4th amendment grounds, I'd prefer to have the numbers sourced. Otherwise it feels as intellectually dishonest as the random right wing forwards/posts I debate regularly. The 178 million number especially gives me pause, as that would mean 5 million people would have applied for welfare and passed, if we go with $35 per test reimbursed. I don't think there were that many people in florida on welfare.
Friday at 1:05pm

Person#1 posted:

I have to agree with Dawn. These people I know are as my dad says 'living off the fat of the land'
It's one thing to deny them money based on the drug pee, which I agree with, but they can't jail these people from the results either I don't think. If anything, rehabilitate them. I'd rather see my money being used to rehabilitate, instead of handouts.
Friday at 1:06pm

Person#2 posted:

if they have money to spend on illegal drugs...they can support THEMSELVES....we don't need to give them anything. especially when half of them are SELLING it too...
Friday at 1:07pm

Original Posta posted:

Sources are linked. Took me what? 10 seconds on Google maybe. I'm in a pretty foul mood right now and I've heard nothing supporting this that doesn't sound racist. That is something I won't tolerate. Guess what, poor people do drugs. Maybe if we didn't institutionalize pverty for people who lack white skin it wouldn't be a problem.

Again tread carefully, less you sound Like bigots
Friday at 1:08pm

Original Posta posted:

Who is "they"? Do you wanna say black people?
Friday at 1:08pm

Original Posta posted:

The amount of people who abuse "handouts" is so small compared to those who use them as intended, there is no logical reasons to spend millions of dollars to weed them out. The local news stations investigation speaks for itself. There is always gonna be abuse in social programs but I would rather have 5% abuse and 95% gain then have none at all.

And don't even get e started on "my taxes" paid for this, because if you got any sort of refund your taxes didn't pay for it. Only 47% of Americans pay income tax, the rest of us get ours back.'
Friday at 1:12pm

Natas Dog posted:

There are plenty of reasons to be against this policy, my main objection is with the numbers themselves. The math just doesn't add up.
Friday at 1:14pm

Original Posta posted:

If you wanna be outraged at something, get pissed off about something that matters. Like 49 states taking a 25 billion dollar settlement for foreclosure abuses from banks. I'm sure that's gonna help the 11-15 million Americans who are underwater on their morgages
Friday at 1:15pm

Original Posta posted:

We usually see eye to eye on issues Natas. I get so angry about this not because of whatever money it costs, because most of the people complaining are suburban white people. To say most of the complaints aren't racially motivated is whatever witty adjective you Like. Then ya, 4th amendment
Friday at 1:17pm

Original Posta posted:

also: mortgages*
Friday at 1:20pm

Person#1 posted:

By they I mean ex-friends who were most certainly white. Actually, I don't know a single african American on welfare. They refuse to be a number. Mostly white folks who think they are entitled. I also don't get tax refunds. I think the system needs a revamp, because a lot of the people I know who should be on welfare, hard working people of all colors, aren't.
Friday at 1:25pm

Natas Dog posted:

It's not you I'm neglecting to see eye to eye with, it's the dishonest feel of the chart itself. I'm quite liberal when it comes to social policy. In fact, here's the reply I gave a FB 'friend' of mine when he posted that stupid Urinalysis 'motivational poster' that was making the rounds:

I would agree with this sentiment if we were to apply it to anyone receiving government money, not just welfare. Big banks should have been forced to take piss tests, and if they failed they shouldn't have gotten bailout money. Farmers should be forced to drug test themselves, and if they fail they lose their subsidies. Churches should be forced to test and lose their tax exempt status if anyone fails. But, in reality, we feel Like somehow the poor are a bigger burden on society despite my above examples. There was a proposal in Indiana that failed because the bill was amended to require their congressman and senators to take a drug test too. If that doesn't illustrate the ridiculous double standard we have towards the poor, I don't know what does.

This also assumes that we're only talking about 'illegal' drugs, which is a stupid line in the sand to begin with. I know plenty of alcoholics and smokers who would happily back this policy despite the hypocrisy inherent in backing it. Drug abuse is a social problem that has farther reaching implications than this short sighted policy would address. Would we prescribe treatment to drug abusers excluded by this policy? Would we just let them die in the street? How about their children? The only winner in this scenario is the company administering the drug tests. Meanwhile society as a whole will pay the extraneous costs that this short sighted policy neglects to address.

The reality of the situation is that roughly 2% of welfare recipients would be excluded by this policy. At a cost of roughly 50 dollars per urinalysis, it would cost more to administer the tests than you save in payments. This is just a backwards way of doing things, and only a terrible person with terrible social views would support it. The whole argument boils down to "I hate poor people and think I know better than they do" despite poverty in this country being a generational issue and those advocating these policies having never really experienced true poverty themselves; walk a mile in another man's shoes, as the saying goes. We Like to pretend that hard work and perseverance is all it takes to get ahead, but the reality is we don't live in a meritocracy and the just world fallacy is just that, a fallacy. Everyone Likes to pretend that the privilege they enjoy is a product of their hard work and dedication, but as a rule their lot in life a a direct product of generations of familial privilege, it's more about who you know and not who you are, so to speak. Unemployment is the highest it's been in a long time and instead of heaping scorn on those who are in a position to take advantage of the programs designed to soften their fall from grace, maybe we should be pressuring those at the top to improve the employment situation and provide opportunities.

We piss away (pardon the pun) far more money when it comes to federal spending every year on bigger boondoggles than welfare and this is a side issue that does nothing but distract from much larger examples of fraud that get pulled off on a daily basis. It gives people one more reason to heap scorn on the poor, despite them already being all but disenfranchised from the current system; and I find it to be in poor taste. Then again, it's always easier to pick on those who don't have a voice than to focus your ire on those with the money and power to fight back against any pressure you might lay on them. I've got plenty more I could use to elaborate my position, but I guess I'll stop here for now since I'll be surprised if this even gets read, let alone any thoughtful replies.

Here's the entire exchange, where I attempted to apply a non-confrontational debate technique to tackle the issue without making it too personal. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3186581&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=248#post400166388If you start getting personal, you end up alienating the audience you're trying to sway. This is not constructive in the least, and only forces those you disagree with the compartmentalize your arguments as the ramblings of a liberal nutjob who doesn't understand them. I highly recommend that thread for keeping up with the many right wing forwards that make the rounds as well.
Friday at 1:27pm

Original Posta posted:

Ya Natas. Everything you said is spot on exactly, I'm just an rear end in a top hat and get angry when I see disagreement. The poor get shat on from above, and I think that is on purpose. As long as we have someone else we can step on then we feel better about ourselves. I think this is why I saw Bush/Cheney signs in front of houses who's owners couldn't be making more then 30k a year. We'll vote against our our self interest, as long as it preserves the status quo and gives us a caste system where someone remains below us.

How dare we lift everyone in society up! For shame!

This is why I truly believe most of the flak about welfare abuses is racially motivated.
Friday at 1:35pm

Person#1 posted:

I'd willingly take a piss test for welfare, but i do see your point. Personally I want nobody below me, I'll state again that instead of welfare in some cases, rehab. We shouldn't have to fear the system... Sigh, this country. It sucks.
Friday at 1:48pm

Natas Dog posted:

It's not just racially motivated in my eyes, most people have an inherent bias against poor people regardless of race. While they may look on people within their own race with a slightly lower amount of prejudice than those outside of it, there's plenty of hate for the poor in general to go around. They see poor people as the problem itself, instead of the sign of much larger systemic problems. Part of it is conditioning, and part of it is the good old 'just world theory' that everyone Likes to buy into. "You're poor because you're lazy and shiftless, not because society's failed you; therefore you deserve every bad thing that happens to you"

Being an rear end in a top hat is all well and good, and I have the same tendency when I run into someone who's genuinely deserving of it. However, if your numbers are called into question you can't do that; otherwise you end up looking just as bad as the people who blindly forward every overtly racist e-mail that hits their inbox because it makes them feel better about their own poo poo sandwich that life has served up for them. Instead, take a look at any honest criticisms that are voiced and debate them calmly and honestly with facts. By doing that, you can usually get your opponent off balance and get them to start flailing around blindly throwing out straw man arguments for you to knock down or dismiss as being off topic and thereby irrelevant.

If there's one thing I've managed to figure out, it's that you can't change everyone's mind at once. It happens one mind at a time, and it happens by keeping your cool and being the voice of reason that doesn't go off the rails at the slightest hint of disagreement. There's a time and place for righteous indignation, but if you're looking to win hearts and minds you have to keep your cool and let the other guy look Like the raving lunatic.
Friday at 1:53pm

Natas Dog posted:

Also, I highly recommend The Authoritarians to anyone who wants to understand the right wing mindset that leads to these types of social views. Know you enemy, and all that. You can read it in its entirety for free at http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/.You may even learn something about yourself as well, I know I did.
Friday at 2:01pm

Person#3 posted:

Definitely NOT cost effective to test Welfare recipients... Now if we could just stop the drug testing by perspective employers... I found out that hospitals won't even hire you if you have Nicotine in your system! Sounds Like too much Government control to me.
Friday at 3:46pm

Person#4 posted:

@Person#3 - that is not government control, that is Insurance Company Control. The government doesn't mandate that employers do drug tests, their insurance companies do.
Friday at 8:01pm

Person#5 posted:

@Natas: I know we don't know each other but just wanted to say that I really enjoyed your copy/paste reply to your friend. I'm 100% for giving everyone a helping hand and a shoulder to lean on. This "class warfare" type stuff/veiled bigotry gets me furious.

LoveMeDead posted:

It isn't just that they expect people to know at 18. My daughter is in 8th grade and has already taken tests to determine what careers she should be preparing for. She has to sign up for high school classes this week, and has to choose a academic path with a bunch of career options. Sure, it's only 4 classes in that path, but for an anxiety ridden kid who isn't sure what she wants to do with her life (besides be a rock star), it's a lot of pressure.

We live in a rural area so there are a lot of agriculture and trade-type classes available. It's good that they aren't just assuming everyone needs to go to college.

euphronius posted:

Food stamps are also one of the best economic stimulus programs around. Which make bitching about them even dumber.

I doubt plumbers earn 100 an hour. They may charge that much.

AFewBricksShy posted:

A union plumber might be close.

I work for a tile company, and our mechanics (the guys who set the tile) get about $38 an hour, but when you add in the pensions, taxes, fringe benefits, etc... it's closer to $70 an hour, and we aren't nearly as well paid as the plumbers. (I think electricians, plumbers and steam fitters are the highest paid).

Sarion posted:

I think its a perfectly legitimate point to make. The issue is that our educational system stops at 18, and up to that point doesn't really provide anything that would allow you to make a living. It provides the basics everyone needs (reading and simple math) and then it either prepares you for college, or babysits you till you're 18. Its an incredible waste.

I would rather public education was reformed to include more of those shop/home ec type of classes. And that society invested in cheap/free adult education. We should not expect people to go into massive debt in order to get jobs that are beneficial to society; nor should we assume that university is the right path for everyone.

Armadillos! posted:

Sorry NatasDogg, but...

no-one, not a congressman, senator, welfare recipient or freelancer getting a tax break, should have to have a drug test for it.

I just don't agree with it. Drug tests are one of the most horrendously misused things in existence. They screw people out of a lot of things, for no reason whatsoever.

So a drug test showed that a guy smoked some weed, or a college student took some adderall, or a hundred other things.

Only a rare few of these events ever actually matter and some even punish would could be positive actions.

So gently caress drug tests!

quote:

President Barack Obama was in the Oval Office when his telephone rang.
"Hello, President Obama” a heavily accented southern voice said. "This is Archie, down here at Joe's Catfish Shack, in Mobile , and I am callin' to tell ya’ll that we are officially declaring war on ya!"

"Well Archie," Barack replied, "This is indeed important news! How big is your army?"

"Right now," said Archie, after a moments calculation "there is myself, my cousin Harold , my next-door-neighbor Randy , and the whole dart team from Hooters. That makes eight!"

Barack paused. "I must tell you Archie that I have one million men in my army waiting to move on my command."

"Wow," said Archie. "I'll have to call ya back!"


Sure enough, the next day, Archie called again. “ Mr. Obama, the war is still on! We have managed to acquire some infantry equipment!"

"And what equipment would that be Archie?" Barack asked.

"Well sir, we have two combines, a bulldozer, and Harry’s farm tractor."

President Obama sighed. "I must tell you Archie, that I have 16,000 tanks and 14,000 armored personnel carriers. Also I've increased my army to one and a half million since we last spoke."

"Lord above", said Archie, "I'll be getting back to ya."

Sure enough, Archie called again the next day. “ President Obama ! I am sorry to have to tell you that we have had to call off this here war."

"I'm sorry to hear that" said Barack. "Why the sudden change of heart?"

Well, sir," said Archie, "we've all sat ourselves down and had a long chat over sweet tea, and come to realize that there's just no way we can feed that many prisoners."

Southern CONFIDENCE CANNOT BE SHAKEN
If you are a REAL Southerner, you won't even need to be told to pass this on!

quote:

Dhimmitude -- What does it mean? Mr. Obama used it in the health care bill so I think we the people need to know what it is since It is used in the health care law.

Dhimmitude -- I had never heard the word until now. Pretty interesting that it's found on page 107 of the healthcare bill. I looked it up on Google and yep, it exists.. It is a REAL word.

Your word of the Day: Dhimmitude

Dhimmitude is the Muslim system of controlling non-Muslim populations
conquered through jihad. Specifically, it is the TAXING of non-Muslims in
exchange for tolerating their presence AND as a coercive means of converting
conquered remnants to Islam.

ObamaCare allows the establishment of Dhimmitude and Sharia Muslim diktat in the United States .

Muslims are specifically exempted from the government mandate to purchase
insurance, and also from the penalty tax for being uninsured.

Islam considers insurance to be "gambling", "risk-taking", and "usury" and
is thus banned. Muslims are specifically granted exemption based on this.

Hmmmm, how convenient. So I, as a Christian, will have crippling IRS liens placed against all of my assets, including real estate, cattle, and even accounts receivables, and will face hard prison time because I refuse to buy insurance or pay the penalty tax.

Meanwhile, Louis Farrakhan will have no such penalty and will have 100% of
his health needs paid for by the de facto government insurance. This means non-Muslims will be paying a tax to subsidize Muslims...that is Dhimmitude.

I recommend sending this on to your contacts. American citizens need to know about it.

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

Let me ask you this question. Will you ever sell your house? Many will not, but most will. Young families will want to increase the size of their present home or move to a better area to feel safer. Others will move to another city for their job and still others will move because it's time for them to move and they like the option/freedom that they can do so without government interference.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Did you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8%
sales tax on it? That's $3,800 on a $100,000 home etc. When did this happen? It's in the health care bill.

Just thought you should know THIS SALES TAX IS TO GO INTO EFFECT IN 2013 (Part of HC Bill). Why 2013?

Could it be to come to light AFTER the 2012 elections?

REAL ESTATE SALES TAX (So, this is the "change you can believe in"?) Under the new health care bill - did you know that all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax?

The bulk of these new taxes don't kick in until 2013. If you sell your $400,000 home, there will be a $15,200 tax. This bill is set to hurt the retiring generation who often downsize their homes.

Does this stuff make your November and 2012 vote more important?

Oh, you weren't aware this was in the Obamacare bill? Guess what, you aren't
alone. There are more than a few members of Congress that aren't aware of it either

http://www.gop.gov/blog/10/04/08/obamacare-flatlines-obamacare-taxes-home

Why am I sending you this?

The same reason I hope you forward this to every single person in your
address book

The so called "Health Care" bill is loaded with trash like this that has
nothing to do with health care.

Socialism means the government owns everything.

And now they do...DONT They?

quote:

Wish we had a leader that thinks like this.



FRIENDS: I SAY: "A BIG AMEN"

She Did It Again!!!

Australia

says NO -- Second Time she has done this!

She sure isn't backing down on her hard line stance and one has to appreciate her belief in the rights of her native countrymen.

A breath of fresh air to see someone lead. Australian Prime Minister does it again!!

The whole world needs a leader like this!

Prime Minister Julia Gillard - Australia

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.

Separately, Gillard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying she supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: 'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT... Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.'

'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.'

'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!'

'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'

'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'

'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.'

'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'

NOTE: IF we circulate this amongst ourselves in Canada & USA , WE will find the courage to start speaking and voicing the same truths.

If you agree please SEND THIS ON and ON, to as many people as you know...

quote:

I am sending this one out because so many do not know this truth...
And also because she was on 3 times this week talking about her new book...
And how good she feels in her 70's... She still does not know what she did wrong..her book just may not make the best list if more people knew...
Also...

Barbara Walters said:
Thank you all. Many died in Vietnam for our freedoms.
I did not like Jane Fonda then and I don't like her now.
She can lead her present life the way she wants and perhaps SHE can forget the past, but we DO NOT have to stand by without comment and see her "honored" as a "Woman of the Century."

(I remember this well)

For those who served and/or died. . .

NEVER FORGIVE A TRAITOR. SHE REALLY WAS A TRAITOR!!

And now President OBAMA wants to honor her......!!!!

In Memory of LT. C.Thomsen Wieland who spent 100 days at the Hanoi Hilton [Famous North Vietnam Prison]

IF YOU NEVER FORWARDED ANYTHING IN YOUR LIFE FORWARD THIS SO THAT EVERYONE WILL KNOW!!!!!!

A TRAITOR IS ABOUT TO BE HONORED.
KEEP THIS MOVING ACROSS AMERICA

This is for all the kids born in the 70's and after who do not remember, and didn't have to bear the burden that our fathers, mothers and older brothers and sisters had to bear.

Jane Fonda is being honored as one of the '100 Women of the Century.'

BARBRA WALTERS WRITES:
Unfortunately, many have forgotten and still countless others have never known how Ms. Fonda betrayed not only the idea of our country, but specific men who served and sacrificed during the Vietnam War.

The first part of this is from an F-4E pilot.
The pilot's name is Jerry Driscoll, a River Rat.
In 1968, the former Commandant of the USAFSurvivalSchool was a POW in Ho Lo Prison the ' Hanoi Hilton.'

Dragged from a stinking cesspit of a cell, cleaned, fed, and dressed in clean PJ's, he was ordered to describe for a visiting American 'Peace Activist' the 'lenient and humane treatment' he'd received.

He spat at Ms. Fonda, was clubbed, and was dragged away. During the subsequent beating, he fell forward on to the campCommandant 's feet, which sent that officer berserk.

In 1978, the Air Force Colonel still suffered from double vision (which permanently ended his flying career) from the Commandant's frenzied application of a wooden baton.

From 1963-65, Col. Larry Carrigan was in the 47FW/DO (F-4E's). He spent 6 years in the ' Hanoi Hilton'...the first three of which his family only knew he was 'missing in action'. His wife lived on faith that he was still alive. His group, too, got the cleaned-up, fed and clothed routine in preparation for a 'peace delegation' visit.

They, however, had time and devised a plan to get word to the world that they were alive and still survived. Each man secreted a tiny piece of paper, with his Social Security Number on it, in the palm of his hand. When paraded before Ms. Fonda and a cameraman, she walked the line, shaking each man's hand and asking little encouraging snippets like: 'Aren't you sorry you bombed babies?' and 'Are you grateful for the humane treatment from your benevolent captors?' Believing this HAD to be an act, they each palmed her their sliver of paper. >

She took them all without missing a beat.. At the end of the line and once the camera stopped rolling, to the shocked disbelief of the POWs, she turned to the officer in charge and handed him all the little pieces of paper...

Three men died from the subsequent beatings. Colonel Carrigan was almost number four but he survived, which is the only reason we know of her actions that day.

I was a civilian economic development advisor in Vietnam , and was captured by the North Vietnamese communists in South Vietnam in 1968, and held prisoner for over 5 years.

I spent 27 months in solitary confinement; one year in a cage in Cambodia ; and one year in a 'black box' in Hanoi . My North Vietnamese captors deliberately poisoned and murdered a female missionary, a nurse in a leprosarium in Banme Thuot , South Vietnam , whom I buried in the jungle near the Cambodian border. At one time, I weighed only about 90 lbs. (My normal weight is 170 lbs)

We were Jane Fonda's 'war criminals....'

When Jane Fonda was in Hanoi , I was asked by the camp communist political officer if I would be willing to meet with her. I said yes, for I wanted to tell her about the real treatment we POWs received... And how different it was from the treatment purported by the North Vietnamese, and parroted by her as 'humane and lenient.'

Because of this, I spent three days on a rocky floor on my knees, with my arms outstretched with a large steel weight placed on my hands, and beaten with a bamboo cane.

I had the opportunity to meet with Jane Fonda soon after I was released. I asked her if she would be willing to debate me on TV. She never did answer me.

These first-hand experiences do not exemplify someone who should be honored as part of '100 Years of Great Women.' Lest we forget....' 100 Years of Great Women' should never include a traitor whose hands are covered with the blood of so many patriots.

There are few things I have strong visceral reactions to, but Hanoi Jane's participation in blatant treason, is one of them. Please take the time to forward to as many people as you possibly can.. It will eventually end up on her computer and she needs to know that we will never forget.

RONALD D. SAMPSON, CMSgt,
USAF 716 Maintenance Squadron,
Chief of Maintenance DSN: 875-6431 COMM: 883-6343

PLEASE HELP BY SENDING THIS TO EVERYONE IN YOUR ADDRESS BOOK. IF ENOUGH PEOPLE SEE THIS MAYBE HER STATUS WILL CHANGE.

quote:

Watch, and Let this sink in ! The person in this video is a professor (Ph..D.) at Yavapai College in Prescott , Arizona . He puts a different spin on what Obama is doing to Arizona must be why he's rated highly by his students - 3.8 on a 4.0 scale. This may be the best video produced on the illegal alien problems that are being experienced. http://www.youtube.com/embed/tsH8xvjTAlo Watch the video, it is short and makes a lot of sense. Forward the email to at least ten people you know. We need to get the word out.



http://www.youtube.com/embed/tsH8xvjTAlo

quote:

Yes, he told us in advance what he planned to do. Few were listening.

The following is a narrative taken from a 2008 Sunday morning televised "Meet The Press."

From Sunday's 07 Sept. 2008, 11:48:04 EST, Televised "Meet the Press" THE THEN Senator Obama was asked about his stance on the American Flag.

General Bill Ginn, USAF (ret.), asked Obama to explain WHY he doesn't follow protocol when the National Anthem is played.

The General stated to Obama that according to the United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Sec. 171...

During rendition of the national anthem, when the flag is displayed, all present (except those in uniform) are expected to stand at attention, facing the flag, with the right hand over the heart. Or, at the very least, "Stand and Face It".

NOW GET THIS !!

'Senator'Obama replied:

"As I've said about the flag pin, I don't want to be perceived as taking sides....." "There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression...." "The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air, and all that sort of thing."

(ARE YOU READY FOR THIS???)

Obama continued:, "The National Anthem should be 'swapped' for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song 'I'd Like To Teach the World To Sing.' If that were our anthem, then I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as 'redesign' our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It's my intention, if elected, to disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of waring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails - - - perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments ......."
"When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts . We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice, which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag, and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past."

"Of course now, I have found myself about to become the President of the United States and I have put my hatred aside. I will use my power to bring CHANGE to this Nation, and offer the people a new path. My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country's First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America."

WHAAAAAAAT,is that???

Yes, you read it right.

I, for one, am speechless!!!

Dale Lindsborg , Washington Post

EVERYONE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NEEDS TO READ THIS, KEEP IT GOING ! !SAVE AMERICA BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE !

euphronius posted:

That's amazing. Do you consistently work 40+ hour weeks? Who covers expenses?

eatenmyeyes posted:

Are you at all familiar with the educational system in Germany?

NatasDog posted:

THE GAYEST POSTER posted:

Declare War.

THE GAYEST POSTER posted:

Dhimmitude.

PPACA page 107 posted:

(5) EXEMPTIONS FROM INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS.—
In the case of an individual who is seeking an exemption
certificate under section 1311(d)(4)(H) from any requirement
or penalty imposed by section 5000A, the following
information:
(A) In the case of an individual seeking exemption
based on the individual’s status as a member of an exempt
religious sect or division, as a member of a health care
sharing ministry, as an Indian, or as an individual eligible
for a hardship exemption, such information as the Secretary
shall prescribe.

quote:

Did you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8%
sales tax on it? That's $3,800 on a $100,000 home etc. When did this happen? It's in the health care bill.

Just thought you should know THIS SALES TAX IS TO GO INTO EFFECT IN 2013 (Part of HC Bill). Why 2013?

Could it be to come to light AFTER the 2012 elections?

REAL ESTATE SALES TAX (So, this is the "change you can believe in"?) Under the new health care bill - did you know that all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% Sales Tax?

The bulk of these new taxes don't kick in until 2013. If you sell your $400,000 home, there will be a $15,200 tax. This bill is set to hurt the retiring generation who often downsize their homes.

Does this stuff make your November and 2012 vote more important?

quote:

Oh, you weren't aware this was in the Obamacare bill? Guess what, you aren't
alone. There are more than a few members of Congress that aren't aware of it either

quote:

AUSTRALIA

quote:

BARBRA WALTERS/JANE FONDA

quote:

OBAMA HATES THE AMERICAN FLAG

Sarion posted:

I also find in interesting that some (maybe many?) of the people I argue with on Facebook seem so close, but the pieces just don't all click.

For example, Person #1 from that conversation. Not only does he correctly recognize the need for the welfare system to be expanded to help more people ("I think the system needs a revamp, because a lot of the people I know who should be on welfare, hard working people of all colors, aren't."); but he wants to send addicts to rehab. But for some reason he's been convinced the way to do this is to spend millions catching drug addicts picking up welfare checks. He's so close, he just needs that little push to realize that drug testing welfare recipients is a really inefficient way to find people who need help (not to mention Unconstitutional). Ideally, they wouldn't drug test, they would expand Welfare/Food Stamps/Section 8 to help more working poor families (I'd also say Medicaid, but PPACA is already doing that in 2014). And then on the prison side of it all, send people to 1-2 years of rehab that includes reintegrating abusers into society, instead of throwing them in jail for 10-20 years and then telling them "BOOTSTRAPS" on their way back out to society.

NatasDog posted:

I agree, that's why I try to use kid gloves with people that are very close but not quite there when it comes to their disconnect between the issues and how they relate to the policies they're advocating. Most of them don't want to delve too deeply into the issues, and I'm trying to nudge them to the point where they either have to be honest with themselves and concede their position or recoil in a fit of cognitive dissonance when they finally realize that their position is terrible and they reject everything presented contrary to their ideals out of reflex.

It's a really tough line to walk because in most cases I'm just not familiar enough with the person I'm debating to know how receptive they are to simple reason. I've honestly found the debate thread that was posted in this forum a while back very useful for testing those boundaries with people in a careful manner. I used to be quite confrontational in my tone similar to the OP in my last facebook exchange, but I've since learned that it rarely helps and usually just alienates those who need to be reached the most.

myron_cope posted:

That flag one is great. So obviously false that I don't know how anyone can believe it.

Here's a transcript from January of 2007 Obama on Face the Nation:

"One time me and my wife went up to a veteran and knocked him down onto the ground. This was a world war 2 veteran, mind you. So we held him down and proceeded to urinate and defecate on him, while making him say that he loves Muslims and everyone in the middle east. Then we proceeded to tar and feather him , and branded him with "praise Allah"

I'm Barack obama, and I'd like to be president so I can take everyone's guns away and then make them pay more taxes"

Can you believe he said that!?!? Wake up people!!! There's an election coming up~~!!!!!!

Sarion posted:

I'm the same way, though sometimes I'll lose my cool. My wife posted an article to her Facebook wall about Santorum saying that people have no problem paying $900 for an iPad but won't pay the same for medicine. Someone replied, agreeing with Santorum, saying that if they can't afford the medicine then too bad, blah blah blah free market solution. I went off pretty hard on that. But, I don't think she was really the "almost there" variety anyways.