Others' money

Anthony wrote:

<quoted text>Ah, but there lies the rub! I see the Federal government as wasteful(Bush and the Middle East wars included!) I see Congress, past and present, overstepping the Constitution because their puppetmaster lobbyist controllers demand they do. I see in Washington politicians on both sides whose allegiance is not to the people, but to their respective parties and each other, and to a maintaining of their individual power.
So how can I possibly support a systemically corrupt Federal government to tax me MORE? Under the guise of helping those less fortunate, when odds are that the money will be used for some politicians personal lobbyist payback, or ridiculous pork barrel spending on who-knows-what?

Sorry that you have issues with our system of government. I suggest that you write and complain to your Congressman!

What wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, I do have a job for now. But you obviously have a better one if you make $300,000 or more per year. And that is just not the Kommunist way, is it? We must level the playing field, yes? I give a little to those more unfortunate than I am, and you give a lot to those more unfortunate than you, namely What. That's just fair. That is what you have been saying anyway.

Plenty of well off people support helping the less fortunate! It seems that some of you middle class fools are the most opposed to it, even though you are far more likely than us wealthier folks to have to use those services someday!

OMG wrote:

<quoted text>
The "Middle East war" as you call it is so YOU can put gas in YOUR car. Also, lest we forget, was started by the invasion of Kuwait, not "Bush's War"
Also, show me where the constitution legitimizes "Medicaid, Medicare, Food Stamps and Section 8", if they take a portion of my money so YOU can feel good, it's wrong. If you don't have a problem with that, you shouldn't have a problem with "Bush's War".
As long as the "Government" sponsors it, it's alright. By your arguement, Big Brother knows best, right?

I thought that your hero Bush's BS war was NOT supposed to be about oil!! In fact, it actually caused the price of fuel here in America to skyrocket! And don't give me that BULLCRAP about Constitutionality. If those programs were in any way unconstitutional, they would have been legally challenged and defeated years ago!!

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> Plenty of well off people support helping the less fortunate! It seems that some of you middle class fools are the most opposed to it, even though you are far more likely than us wealthier folks to have to use those services someday!

You have no idea what I give to charity, Obama'sfool. Most often, it is the poor who give the most to the poorer. The rich, like you (supposedly anyway) give from your extras, which does in no way infringe on your extravagant lifestyles. The poor are more generous in spirit since their giving often means they do without what little luxury they might have enjoyed. So you act like you're some saint, but in reality you aint!!! LOL!

Charity is from the heart and raising taxes to fund all these bloated entitlement programs is NOT CHARITY. It is communism which does nothing to elevate humanity and everything to demean it.

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> I thought that your hero Bush's BS war was NOT supposed to be about oil!! In fact, it actually caused the price of fuel here in America to skyrocket! And don't give me that BULLCRAP about Constitutionality. If those programs were in any way unconstitutional, they would have been legally challenged and defeated years ago!!

Your the one feeding the Bullcrap here Uh-bama fools. If your such a big beliver in "big Government", whatever Bush did should be OK, since "Government" is YOUR hero.

Your "legal challenge" argument has been worn into the ground and been answered, try another one, you just don't want to listen to the answer.
The original predication of the '91 war was the invasion of Kuwait, but the underlying reason of why we do ANYTHING in the Middle East is oil. If it weren't for oil, they would still be riding camels and living in tents. The '03 intervention is because Saddam would not live up to the terms of the surrender.

Any other fact you would like to distort????

What wrote:

<quoted text>
You have no idea what I give to charity, Obama'sfool. Most often, it is the poor who give the most to the poorer. The rich, like you (supposedly anyway) give from your extras, which does in no way infringe on your extravagant lifestyles. The poor are more generous in spirit since their giving often means they do without what little luxury they might have enjoyed. So you act like you're some saint, but in reality you aint!!! LOL!
Charity is from the heart and raising taxes to fund all these bloated entitlement programs is NOT CHARITY. It is communism which does nothing to elevate humanity and everything to demean it.

Charity IS from the heart, but when you have heartless greedy bastards who don't give a damn about the hungry child on the other side of town, then the wonderful heart of our government comes in to help all those poor souls.

OMG wrote:

<quoted text>
Your the one feeding the Bullcrap here Uh-bama fools. If your such a big beliver in "big Government", whatever Bush did should be OK, since "Government" is YOUR hero.
Your "legal challenge" argument has been worn into the ground and been answered, try another one, you just don't want to listen to the answer.
The original predication of the '91 war was the invasion of Kuwait, but the underlying reason of why we do ANYTHING in the Middle East is oil. If it weren't for oil, they would still be riding camels and living in tents. The '03 intervention is because Saddam would not live up to the terms of the surrender.
Any other fact you would like to distort????

You have no answer to the legal challenge comment, because no constitutional attorney would agree with your absurd position. BILLIONS of dollars have been spent, and are being spent, on these programs over the last half century, yet NO moron from the right has successfully challenged their constitutionality in court! The BULLCHIT Iraq war was Bush's way of getting back at Saddam for his comments about Bush senior, and also a great way to put Clinton's surplus taxpayer money right into the pockets of Bush's corporate cronies, and right into his sidekick Cheney's beloved Halliburton!! You morons on the right are so far removed from reality, that it's a wonder you fools can even think at all!

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> Charity IS from the heart, but when you have heartless greedy bastards who don't give a damn about the hungry child on the other side of town, then the wonderful heart of our government comes in to help all those poor souls.

Did you read my post #1156? The giverment is not handing out all these entitlements because it has a wonderful heart!!! You talk about the "right" not being able to think, well you need to dig a little deeper than what you have been because the giverment does not have its citizens best interests in mind. You are seriously deluded if you think so.
Giverment is not a charitable organization, Churches are. People give voluntarily, but when it is stolen from them by taxes, they tend to get angry. Why can't you get that???

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> Sorry that you have issues with our system of government. I suggest that you write and complain to your Congressman!

Nice cop out! The SYSTEM is fine. The distortion and corruption of the system by partisan hacks, lobbyists, and the politics of power is where I take issue. And you should, too!

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> You have no answer to the legal challenge comment, because no constitutional attorney would agree with your absurd position. BILLIONS of dollars have been spent, and are being spent, on these programs over the last half century, yet NO moron from the right has successfully challenged their constitutionality in court! The BULLCHIT Iraq war was Bush's way of getting back at Saddam for his comments about Bush senior, and also a great way to put Clinton's surplus taxpayer money right into the pockets of Bush's corporate cronies, and right into his sidekick Cheney's beloved Halliburton!! You morons on the right are so far removed from reality, that it's a wonder you fools can even think at all!

Your "legal comment" challenge was answered long ago, you just won't listen to the answer.
As far as the rest, I don't want to argue with a moron who won't listen because I don't want to be confused with one at a distance.

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> Sorry that you have issues with our system of government. I suggest that you write and complain to your Congressman!

Psychosis is medically defined as out of touch with reality or responsive to stimuli of an imaginary nature. With the current trend liberalism has taken and the people who follow it this diagnosis is apt. The hook,line and sinker swallowing of Obamamania last year by those too mentally feeble to discern rhetoric from reality or flowery oratory from factual observation shows the wide spread temporary loss of mental faculties by people who bought the idea of "hope" and "change",but not questioning what the promises entailed.

What wrote:

<quoted text>
Did you read my post #1156? The giverment is not handing out all these entitlements because it has a wonderful heart!!! You talk about the "right" not being able to think, well you need to dig a little deeper than what you have been because the giverment does not have its citizens best interests in mind. You are seriously deluded if you think so.
Giverment is not a charitable organization, Churches are. People give voluntarily, but when it is stolen from them by taxes, they tend to get angry. Why can't you get that???

"Stolen by taxes"?? LOL!! Taxes are a totally LEGAL way for governments to acquire funds from their citizens. Once you pay your taxes, it is our government that allocates how those funds are spent! You actually don't believe that our American government is charitable? Our government is probably the most "charitable" organization on earth!! America not only spends billions of dollars to aid its own citizens, but gives billions in aid to poor countries and people all over this earth!! What rock have you been sleeping under??

okimar wrote:

<quoted text>
Psychosis is medically defined as out of touch with reality or responsive to stimuli of an imaginary nature. With the current trend liberalism has taken and the people who follow it this diagnosis is apt. The hook,line and sinker swallowing of Obamamania last year by those too mentally feeble to discern rhetoric from reality or flowery oratory from factual observation shows the wide spread temporary loss of mental faculties by people who bought the idea of "hope" and "change",but not questioning what the promises entailed.

In that case, Republicans are a perfect example of delusional thought. They completely ignored the first 4 years of Bush's insane policies, and actually elected that psychopath into office TWICE!!! Hopefully Obamacare will allow all of you deluded Republican fools to finally obtain some psychiatric treatments and medications for your conditions.

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> In that case, Republicans are a perfect example of delusional thought. They completely ignored the first 4 years of Bush's insane policies, and actually elected that psychopath into office TWICE!!! Hopefully Obamacare will allow all of you deluded Republican fools to finally obtain some psychiatric treatments and medications for your conditions.

And we turned aroung and put another psychopath in office because of sheeple like you.
Out of the frying pan into the fire!

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> "Stolen by taxes"?? LOL!! Taxes are a totally LEGAL way for governments to acquire funds from their citizens. Once you pay your taxes, it is our government that allocates how those funds are spent! You actually don't believe that our American government is charitable? Our government is probably the most "charitable" organization on earth!! America not only spends billions of dollars to aid its own citizens, but gives billions in aid to poor countries and people all over this earth!! What rock have you been sleeping under??

And a few hundred years ago it was legal for the landowners to tax the serfs. Being "legal" doesn't make it right.
Problem is with government, they don't know when to stop taxing. I understand some taxes are necessary, but our government has become a self feeding beast that doesn't know when to stop. And it is NOT THEIR JOB TO BE A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION! To us OR the rest of the world.

OMG wrote:

<quoted text>
And we turned aroung and put another psychopath in office because of sheeple like you.
Out of the frying pan into the fire!

Excuse me, but Obama happens to be wonderful! You must be insane if you think that Obama is anywhere near as bad as your hero Bush was!

Anthony wrote:

<quoted text>Nice cop out! The SYSTEM is fine. The distortion and corruption of the system by partisan hacks, lobbyists, and the politics of power is where I take issue. And you should, too!

There is no such thing as a perfect politician or human for that matter! At least we have someone like Obama in office now, who knows what the hell he is doing, as opposed to that complete fool Bush!!

OMG wrote:

<quoted text>
And a few hundred years ago it was legal for the landowners to tax the serfs. Being "legal" doesn't make it right.
Problem is with government, they don't know when to stop taxing. I understand some taxes are necessary, but our government has become a self feeding beast that doesn't know when to stop. And it is NOT THEIR JOB TO BE A CHARITABLE INSTITUTION! To us OR the rest of the world.

Our government is quite compassionate, which is a lot more than I can say for many of its greedy citizens!

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> Our government is quite compassionate, which is a lot more than I can say for many of its greedy citizens!

There is a danger in compassion, if there is a bureaucracy that routinely approves claims, and trust individuals, who may be undeserving, or jut plain crooks. Tht is not just a problem with programs aimed at helpikng the poor, however. The big banks had their hands out for TARP money, in desperate need, they said, and then turned around and used the fact of the bailouts and the taxpayers guarantees to claim that they are profitable and doing well enough to give even bigger bonuses to executives. Government needs to be distrustful of the citizens who seek its benefits, in a very even-handed way - distrusting the potential rich crook, poor crook, and middle-class crook equally - but with special vigilance over the very rich whose greed could damage the economy. What is needed is more investigators at every level. Furthermore, it is fine to have more oversight by an honorable press, over government, and by one part of teh government over another - including Congressional oversight, and Inspectors General in each agency and sometimes jsut for certain programs (like TARP - where there is now both a good IG and a good oversight Committee chairman). But there is still plenty of room for local and community compassion, efforts by caring private institutions and businesses, and philanthropic groups, and religious groups. That is no substitute, however, for reform of defective systems - such as financial lack of regulation. Please check out the bills coming from the House Financial Services Committee, and the seante Banking Committee, that are attempting to restructure regulations so the crooks can't get by with all their manipulations another time, as Madoff did, and as so many private greedy rich financial institutions did. A fwe prosecutions would help. But a gulty verdit in that last case against the hedge fund guys would have helped too. What went wrong there? It encourages the crooks to think they can get by with it. I wish you were a little less simplistic and pollyannaish, and pro-government, pro-Obama and pro-liberal, and less enthusiastic. To the degree that I find it excessive, I don't fully trust you. A little more complexity and nuance would help, unless you are trying to make fun of the views you pretend to hold, and are some sort of imposter? Your name just runs up a red flag - or at least a yellow flag of caution - when I see it. Obama does not rule or reign. He is merely the President. He participates in a government with separation of powers, and in a world system where cooperation is essential. He seeks good advice from many, and delegates responsibilities to many more. Don't feed in to those who ridicule him and his supporters with this Messiah nonsense. It is the superstitious right-wing religious nuts who are into waiting for a Messiah - not the sensible secularists and centrist and sane religious people.

ObamaRules wrote:

<quoted text> There is no such thing as a perfect politician or human for that matter! At least we have someone like Obama in office now, who knows what the hell he is doing, as opposed to that complete fool Bush!!

Well, the first sentence is helpful! I think it would be wrong to assume that Obama or anyone else could be certain what to do in all the situations that face the U. S., at home and abroad. That is a good reason for him to take time, seek good advice from many sources, and also reason to let the committees of Congress do their work, and bring many ideas to the table in discussing major legislation. It was done on the health reform bill, and it is being done on the Regulatory Reform bills - from the House and Senate, where there is disagreement on some specifics, and room for more debate and suggestions, which is a good thing. I am glad he is taking his time in deciding about Af-Pak policy. I do not want some General or Holbrooke making the decision and pushing the President into a policy, even though the Republicans do not want Obama to be the commander in chief, but prefer some general to run the show. My regret is that Chuck Hagel and Jim Leach are not in the room when the big decisions are made on foreign policy, and Leach, Stiglitz, Krugman, Elizabeth Warren, and Barofsky in the room when the big decisons are made about the economy. Obama needs more wide-ranging advice, from folks who think out-side the box. I wish he would summon Jeff Flake and Ron Paul to the White House to hear their views, too. They do not have the usual partisan double-standard on many matters, but have principles - whether or not I agree with their policy views on certain matters. I also think Obama should ask Leon Panetta for advice on non-CIA matters where Panetta has special experience and expertise, such as the budget, and White House staffing matters. You need to not be complete cheerleader for Obama, or folks will either attack you, or suspect you! Give an example where you disagree with Obama's policy, or one of his appointments, for example, or are worried about what course he will choose, or how much time it is taking and whether momentum for the necessary reform is being lost. If you show more of a nuanced view, then that would help avoid both the attacks and the suspicion. I would feel much more comfortable with your comments if you would express some worries, doubts, disagreements, objections! something specific. Instead of Obama rules and knows what to do, and Bush was a fool, sorts of extremist alternatives. Cheney knew what to do, and he knew wrong! Knowing what to do is over-rated! Not knowing and trying to figure it out, with a sensible process, is the better attitude.