I Just Disowned All Liberals.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by longtime, Mar 11, 2010.

  1. longtime

    longtime Well-Known Member

    155
    0
    :mad::mad:I have had it with the current administration actions. As a result I called or mailed all my liberal "friends" and relatives and informed them that I blame them and they are no longer welcome in my home. Since I am the major source of money for many in my family this is a real problem for some of them. I told them to go see obama not me. I have also stopped all charitable donations and now send that to Conservative political organization (not necessarily the RNC since more republicans are liberal).:mad::mad:

    I am PISSED. If you are a liberal I have no use for you. I want a real war between real Conservatives and liberal and I have taken my first shot!
     
  2. DocWard

    DocWard Well-Known Member

    113
    0
    But wait... Liberals are for gun control... so they will be unarmed...:surrender:
     

  3. HozayBuck

    HozayBuck Well-Known Member

    3,183
    16
    :D:D Gonna be a short war Doc!!! :beercheer:
     
  4. longtime

    longtime Well-Known Member

    155
    0
    I know this is a joke. But we let people get away with a lot because we don't want to make waves, well I am tired of that. You FXXX me, I'll do what ever I legally can to return it.
     
  5. mosquitomountainman

    mosquitomountainman I invented the internet. :rofl:

    3,698
    70
    As I've gotten older I've narrowed down my circle of "friends." Life is too short to waste time with people who only remember you when they need something.

    I've also become more outspoken. Again, life is too short to waste it on morons.
     
  6. pdx210

    pdx210 Well-Known Member

    320
    0
    i have a diverse group of friends conservatives, libertarians, Christians, atheists, even a couple Muslims and of course liberals some to the point of me considering them socialists. I don't agree with many of these people But, the worst thing you can do for yourself is narrow the people you hang with based on political, social & religious ideals.

    You cannot open some of these people (maybe it will never happen) to other thoughts if you don't communicate with them and you fail to challenge yourself on what you believe and why. IMO....this is a sign of being insecure with ones own ideologies.


    That said, some of the most narrow minded people I've ever been around are actually "open minded liberals" because they do much of what has been said above they hang with only people that reinforce their failed ideologies which also allows them to objectify others that don't see it their way. I've found people live their lives this way liberal or conservative are also the easiest to beat down in an argument because they have rarely been challenged because of that their ideologies are flawed they sit around with other like minds agreeing all day.


    Please don't let yourself become this !
     
  7. Expeditioner

    Expeditioner Well-Known Member

    482
    0

    Well said pdx210! :soapbox1:
     
  8. Woody

    Woody Woodchuck

    3,347
    25
    I’m with mosquitomountainman. I don’t base my small circle of fiends on religion, political views, race or what have you. I base it on their outlook to life and their ethics. I’ve known plenty of morons, takers and such and have no need to waste my time with them. They are free to do whatever they like to whoever will put up with it as long as it is not around me. I let them know too, right up front, I ain’t shy.
     
  9. DocWard

    DocWard Well-Known Member

    113
    0
    I suppose I am somewhat in the middle. Like pdx210, I have friends with a wide variety of beliefs and belief systems. I generally consider them friends because of some commonality, despite our differences. However, one thing we tend to have in common is a strong personal work ethic and a sense of individual responsibility.

    I want to challenge my beliefs. I want to think, contemplate and to grow. I am willing to discuss, debate and even argue, if I think there is a learning or teaching opportunity. However, I have no desire to waste my time attempting to defend and argue my beliefs and actions with those I know are incapable of "getting it."
     
  10. set2survive

    set2survive Active Member

    35
    0
    The US is a polarized nation, every one is listening to their own like minded circle of friends and watching their news channel, etc. There is a game being played with us and that game is called "divide and conquer" and it is played for the purpose of promoting chaos which can only lead to martial law and eventual dictatorship, for the "good of the people" of course.
     
  11. pdx210

    pdx210 Well-Known Member

    320
    0
    set2survive

    I agree with that it's our country not theirs government should be mindful even fearful of us not the other way around
     
  12. kogneto

    kogneto The Skeptic

    280
    0
    your friends must think you're a real jerk

    if you lost your job I can understand you being mad at Obama, but then why would you align yourself with a party that expects you to save yourself when the bottom falls out? When you actually need to use food stamps and government subsidies just to provide a roof over your head you start to look at "liberals" and the social programs they support a little different.

    I also like the idea that the word social is associated with socialism, as if supporting your society is somehow weak or inferior
     
  13. DocWard

    DocWard Well-Known Member

    113
    0
    Where to begin, where to begin? First off, let's be clear, I am not aware of any Republicans arguing that we should do away with social programming such as food stamps, unemployment insurance, welfare, social security or the like. Republicans, especially those of a more libertarian bent, do often attempt to limit some of these programs and those receiving benefits, and to remove fraud from the system. They do so more as a way of controlling costs than of some desire to let people fend for themselves. However, in many respects, socialism is here to stay, so long as we don't run out of other people's money, to paraphrase Margaret Thatcher.

    That fact aside, there are many people out there who, when they find themselves out of work, make it their "work" to find a job. There are others who simply sit back and enjoy the dole being provided to them.

    This is a somewhat fallacious statement, or idea. The fact that words contain the same root does not mean they are necessarily similar in meaning. Nor does the fact that someone is not in favor of socialism, or more of it to be precise, mean they do not support their society. Our country has gone from a premise of "rugged individualism" to one of, for lack of a better description, "collective entitlement." Above, I mentioned Margaret Thatcher, but the idea that a democracy will only last until the public realizes they can vote themselves entitlements from the public coffers goes well back in history, being variously attributed to Franklin, de Toqueville and others. For many of us, that is exactly what we are seeing today. More and more burden is being placed upon the backs of those working to earn money, while those who pay little demand the most.

    The last I checked, somewhere around 97% tax revenues were collected from the top 50% of income earners. I am not saying the lower brackets should be paying more, but it should be a consideration when calling for "tax breaks for the poor," or middle class even. It seems our political class doesn't care about the difference between a tax cut and a tax credit, often insisting that a tax cut be applied to those who do not actually pay any income taxes.

    Finally, we WILL run out of money, and we WILL run out of people willing to pay for others to do nothing, to squander their time, to make more mouths to feed-for all of us to pay for, and to increasingly burden society. Perhaps we need more John Galts among us, to offset the the Lenins, Marxs and Gueveras that seem to be out there.
     
  14. kogneto

    kogneto The Skeptic

    280
    0
    I like your response Doc, always well thought out

    but since the lowest income earners are the lowest income earners, would you say their contribution would be significant or insignificant when you consider the top 1% of the richest people in the country dwarf all others in income?

    I say gut the big fish for the best caviar ;)
     
  15. bunkerbob

    bunkerbob Supporting Member

    1,733
    6
    This thread reminds me of a note sent to Chuck Norris in 2008...

    "Taxpayers are fed up with all the trillions of their hard-earned money being thrown to the wind! The following is a humorous way to describe what's happened in government and the downfall of America that's been created by the‘Tax and Spenders' just so they can get re-elected! I'm quoting: “I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back porch. I filled it with seed. I admired the beauty of this bird feeder, as I filled it lovingly with seed. Within a week, hundreds of birds were taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food. But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue. Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tile, the chairs, the table, even on gutters and window seals! Then some of the birds turned mean. They would dive bomb and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket. And others birds were boisterous and loud. The sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed all hours of the day and night and demanded that I fill the bird feeder when it got low on food. After a while, I couldn't even sit on my own back porch. So I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone. I cleaned up their mess. I took down the many nests they had built all over the patio. Soon, the back yard was like it used to be ... quiet, serene and no one demanding their “rights to a free meal!” Now let's see .... Our government gives out free food, subsidizes housing for illegitimates, having more illegitimates, free medical care, free education and allows anyone born to be an automatic citizen. Then the illegals come by the tens of thousands. Suddenly taxes are tripled just to pay for free services; small apartments are housing 5 families with illegitimates; Taxpayers have to wait 6 hours to be seen by an emergency room doctor; your child's 2nd grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn't speak English. Check you cereal boxes. They now come in a bilingual box. I have to 'press one' to hear my bank talk to me in English. People waving flags other than 'Old Glory' are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties. Just my opinion, but maybe it's time for Taxpayers to make government take down the bird feeder".
    Posted by: Shirley deLong
     
  16. DocWard

    DocWard Well-Known Member

    113
    0
    As I pointed out, I am not saying we should be insisting the lowest income earners pay more. However, it strikes me as distinctly odd that we would be punitive towards those who work hard to succeed, and it is also counter-productive. Think about it. Time and time again, under Kennedy, Reagan and G.W. Bush we have seen tax cuts geared toward the top 50% result in increased tax revenues. While that may seem counter-intuitive, it makes sense if you think about it. When tax rates get to the point of being burdensome, those who are able begin relying on very safe investments which may yield low interest, but given the sum total of wealth invested is enough for them to maintain if not grow their wealth. I believe if you would check, you would also see a shift towards things like tax free municipal bonds, which also limits exposure to risk and taxation. The thinking is reasonable. Are you going to risk your money if there is a possibility of loss and your return, if you get one, is going to be taxed at fifty or sixty cents of every dollar? The net result is less revenue to tax. It should also be remembered that it is those upper income brackets that also tend to create jobs for others. If they withdraw money from job creation to protect it, again, less tax revenues due to lost jobs.

    Just remember, you can only gut a fish once, regardless of how big it is.
     
  17. Vertigo

    Vertigo Member

    265
    0
    Well said Docward, as usual :)

    And to all people here proclaiming that a socialist US is a good thing, have a look at Europe...

    V.
     
  18. longtime

    longtime Well-Known Member

    155
    0
    I have never much cared for what people thought of me, so what.

    I look at liberals as one of three types of people, elitists they can go to hell; victims, they can follow the elitists to hell and the mommies. The mommies, I understand even if I think they are wrong. The trouble is these mommies can't figure out why they still have adult children at "home" or why the dependent in out society keep growing, it's their fault. I have an aunt that was complaining about a grown daughter because she wanted to retire and could not because she was supporting her daughter, my uncle got up looked at her and said " it's to late now you made her this way" and left. Well, I liked my uncle even if it was a little late. I have left.


    I am not unemployed, I retired at 50 years old very well off. I am one that has done as expected. I ran away at 14 after one last beating and lived on the street for over a year (one of the victims according to you, not me). I returned "home" after 30 to help my sibling. I have over $100,000 out in loans to them that I never expect to see again. I still see and support the responsible family members and I am finished with the one with their hand out and no effort, just like society.


    Just to set the story straight. Republicans are liberal. And I'll bet you are like my oldest brother, the last time I helped he DEMANDED more, as I said the last time.
     
  19. mosquitomountainman

    mosquitomountainman I invented the internet. :rofl:

    3,698
    70
    In Galatians 6:2 we are told to "carry each others burdens..." Verse 5 states that we should "carry our 'own' load. Verse 2 refers to times of catastrophe when a person is overwhelmed by conditions beyond their control. In this case those who are able should help them. Verse 5 refers to the day-to-day struggles of life. In this case their responsibility is to shoulder the load themselves. In 2 Thessalonians 3:10b we are told that if a man won't work (meaning he is able but refuses to work) don't give him food (my paraphrase).

    It's good advice to live by.

    Longbine; it sounds like you've gone well beyond the call to duty. And you are right about "mommies" (and government) "helping" children into total dependancy. They are really doing a dis-service to their children/subjects.
     
  20. HozayBuck

    HozayBuck Well-Known Member

    3,183
    16
    I went out one night with my lady to meet some friends for dinner, they brought along some guy I'd never met, before the meal was even ordered he started *****ing about not getting a job he wanted... So I asked him what he did, his reply was " I'm a professional carpenter " I was kind of stunned at this and without thinking I said, "Uh, Montana is experiencing the biggest building boom in it's history, why are you having trouble getting a job?" He replied..." I'm a professional carpenter"! , still not understanding I asked what he meant by that... He said "I'm a UNION carpenter" !! I'm not a scab!! and me being me I said,," So, you'd rather sit here crying in the beer I bought, eating a meal that I was planning to pay for and your not going to work without having a Union to back up your every move on the job? sounds like you don't want a job you want a nanny..."....

    Well we almost came to blows but he just stormed out and our "Friends" never really talked to us again...Fk EM !!!!

    Maybe I was wrong, but if you need a job and jobs are there to be had then you can't complain when your hungry because you won't take one...

    There is a big difference in being your brothers helper and being his "KEEPER"..