Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Serious question. They claim to be the voice for the poor and oppressed, yet many of the biggest voices are swimming in money. Why? They cant spend all of that money. Why let it sit when you can cut a check an extra check to the government or give it to the poor?
Or is the point really that its other peoples money you want to demonize and be used?
IMO, its not about their bs "cause" at all. Its about money and power. They dont give a damn about the causes they preach of, they care about themselves. If they really, really believed a lot of the crap they say, they would feel guilty about having so much money and would give most of their wealth away and live more middle class like. But they wont, they're hypocritical deceivers.
They do give a lot to charity. They just don't brag about it.
They do give a lot to charity. They just don't brag about it.
They make mega millions per movie yet they support Obama in taking money from the doctor, small business or double income hard working couples making $200k.
It is nothing more than wanting to fit into hollywood for their own benefit. Hollywood are a bunch of hypocrites.
I actually do, because I'm honest, intelligent, and socially
conscious. You probably do, as well, but apparently work very hard to suppress
your understanding of your obligations, and actively deny them, in the interest
of promoting the self-centered, antisocial perspectives of the right-wing,
probably because you value your own comfort and luxury more than the basic needs
of others.
Wow you are one lost soul. You have no right to attack my character in that manner.
I do not have to disclose any of my charitable givings or my generosities to society to retort a miserable ignorant post such as this. The last thing I look out for in my life is the accumulation of luxury at the expense of others. Maybe you just have a guilty conscience and need to project? Sounds like you are a rather angry person and hold yourself to such low standards you must lash out at those you feel have oppressed you.
Wow you are one lost soul. You have no right to attack my character in that manner.
I do not have to disclose any of my charitable givings or my generosities to society to retort a miserable ignorant post such as this. The last thing I look out for in my life is the accumulation of luxury at the expense of others. Maybe you just have a guilty conscience and need to project? Sounds like you are a rather angry person and hold yourself to such low standards you must lash out at those you feel have oppressed you.
Good post. And honestly, I'm not a materialistic individual either. But apparently anyone who asks for fiscal responsiblity from our government, as well as doing the right thing and looking out for their family as priority #1 as opposed to making society do it, is accused of being greedy and living in luxury.
Good post. And honestly, I'm not a materialistic individual either. But apparently anyone who asks for fiscal responsiblity from our government, as well as doing the right thing and looking out for their family as priority #1 as opposed to making society do it, is accused of being greedy and living in luxury.
The poor poster must still be living in mom and dads house after graduating with a degree in 16th century european sculpture.
No one, not even government can grant to another what it does not own.
There is no bar code on the back of my neck.
Wow, you're in for a surprise if you try carrying a gun in Canada or England or any other country thinking your second amendment rights follow you around. I'm sure the lack of a barcode on the back of your neck will make a compelling argument.
So you're going to just lie about what I posted? Your decision to post this lie instead of attempting to post a legitimate response to what I wrote shows your intention to rely on deceit rather than on the strength of any arguments you may have to defend our corrupted perspective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan
but you still haven't answered the question of where those who are able bodied yet refuse to get off of their a**es are utilizing their civic responsibility to better themselves, and be productive members of society.
Turn your comment here into a specific question, with proper grammar. I don't want to misconstrue what you wrote, giving you a petulant means of whining about my misunderstanding the question, because you've made clear that that's one of your favorite tactics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1brownsfan
Furthermore, since my income is taxed already to pay for this stuff, you'll have to excuse me if I don't have enough left over for you to take.
More clueless nonsense. I'm not taking anything. Why lie about this?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomBen
Wow you are one lost soul.
Says the poster who bombastically promotes a thoroughly self-serving perspective, rife with immoral inconsideration for those most vulnerable in society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomBen
Quote:
the self-centered, antisocial perspectives of the right-wing
You have no right to attack my character in that manner.
But I do have the right to attack the character of the perspectives you promote, which is what I did. And very effectively.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomBen
I do not have to disclose any of my charitable givings or my generosities to society to retort a miserable ignorant post such as this.
Given that I've said many times that civic responsibility isn't charity, you've now proven that you're not actually reading anything I write for understanding. That's surely one good way of insulating yourself from having to face the immoral nature of that which you support.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoomBen
Sounds like you are a rather angry person and hold yourself to such low standards you must lash out at those you feel have oppressed you.
Maybe you're just scrambling to try to deflect attention away from the moral repudiation of what you support by lashing out at me personally, instead of trying to defend the egoistic avarice that you support.
Look I know it has to be frustrating to be in the position of trying to defend the indefensibly self-centered claptrap of the right-wing and libertarian perspective. But if you adopt perspectives that fail to place the world's most ubiquitous ethics, like the ethic of reciprocity, above your own personal comfort and luxury, then you have to just live with the fact that your perspective is going to been seen as immoral. Some of your cohorts have already realized this - that the attempts to defend your perspective on moral grounds is a lost cause. The perspective you support is corrupt; it's immoral. If you want to defend it, fine, but to defend it legitimately against moral repudiation you're going to have to defend it by claiming that there's nothing wrong with placing your own comfort and luxury over the basic needs of the most vulnerable in society. It'll be hard to make a good argument, but it's the only play you've got.
So you're going to just lie about what I posted? Your decision to post this lie instead of attempting to post a legitimate response to what I wrote shows your intention to rely on deceit rather than on the strength of any arguments you may have to defend our corrupted perspective.
Turn your comment here into a specific question, with proper grammar. I don't want to misconstrue what you wrote, giving you a petulant means of whining about my misunderstanding the question, because you've made clear that that's one of your favorite tactics.
More clueless nonsense. I'm not taking anything. Why lie about this?
Says the poster who bombastically promotes a thoroughly self-serving perspective, rife with immoral inconsideration for those most vulnerable in society.
But I do have the right to attack the character of the perspectives you promote, which is what I did. And very effectively.
Given that I've said many times that civic responsibility isn't charity, you've now proven that you're not actually reading anything I write for understanding. That's surely one good way of insulating yourself from having to face the immoral nature of that which you support.
Maybe you're just scrambling to try to deflect attention away from the moral repudiation of what you support by lashing out at me personally, instead of trying to defend the egoistic avarice that you support.
Look I know it has to be frustrating to be in the position of trying to defend the indefensibly self-centered claptrap of the right-wing and libertarian perspective. But if you adopt perspectives that fail to place the world's most ubiquitous ethics, like the ethic of reciprocity, above your own personal comfort and luxury, then you have to just live with the fact that your perspective is going to been seen as immoral. Some of your cohorts have already realized this - that the attempts to defend your perspective on moral grounds is a lost cause.The perspective you support is corrupt; it's immoral. If you want to defend it, fine, but to defend it legitimately against moral repudiation you're going to have to defend it by claiming that there's nothing wrong with placing your own comfort and luxury over the basic needs of the most vulnerable in society. It'll be hard to make a good argument, but it's the only play you've got.
I'm not even going to respond to the rest of your nonsensical jibberish in which you've posted, but I will comment on the bolded. You're accusing those who work hard and do the right thing by being productive members of society, and providing for their family, so that the rest of society doesn't have to, calling it selfish and placing one's luxury and comfort over others. Yet you still refuse to acknowledge the accountability of those living off of the system who are able to work, yet refuse to do so. It's a two way street. One has to want to help themself as well. You say it's immoral for one to place themselves and their family over everything else, yet you have nothing to say about those who abuse the system and continue to expect hand outs without any incentive to better themselves. At any rate, we're done here, so in typical progressive fashion, continue to spin away......
I volunteer and give my time. It is my choice, and no one should be forced to do anything they don't want to. It is charity to freely give of your time and money, and it is debatable how much is a civic responsibility. Most people want to choose who they help. I would rather help children with a terminal or crippling illness than people who can help themselves. It is my choice, and I do resent my taxes or money helping people that don't need it. I also resent someone on a forum trying to lecture the rest of us about helping people. This is an anonymous forum, so I wonder who is actually doing what or just blowing smoke. No one knows what I actually do or have in my life, and we don't know what any of you do or have either.
Also, I will place my family first because they are my responsibility. I am not responsible for people who continually make bad choices and look for a handout. No one, especially not a poster on a forum, will make me feel differently.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.....
