Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-22-2010, 12:43   #1141
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,640


Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
I think the right tactic is to eliminate the identified fraud. Paying substantially less to those who have legitimately qualified isn't teh way to go.
.
"paying less to those who legitimately qualified" for WHAT? What are you talking about here?
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-22-2010, 21:25   #1142
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,640


Quote:
Originally Posted by quake View Post
First, I confess up front that I haven't read this entire 46-page thread, and so am operating at a disadvantage and possibly under wrong assumptions.

That said, if it's just a question of "give an example of something (or things) I would define as conservative principles", that seems simple enough and not really some kind of trick or trap.

1 - I believe that each segment of government (federal, state, local, etc) should operate under, and within, the scope and paramaters of their written charters. IE, the U.S. constitution for fedgov, U.S. constitution and state constitution for a given state's govt, etc.

2 - I believe that the U.S. constitution should be read as written, and any changes to it or faults found with it should be addressed as laid out in the constitution itself; thru amendments if and when necessary. (And they can at times be legitimately necessary.)


That wasn't so hard, actually. Is it out of place to ask if you agree with those concepts, TC, or if not, what specifically in them would you disagree with?

Not a trap or setup, just a simple inquiry.
Essentially.........

Over the 46 pages he's expressed strong support for a progressive tax structure, a large, strong Federal government, unfettered majority rule democracy. The Socialist and Communist party platforms for the last 100 years, basically.

At the same time he described himself as Conservative and a member of the Conservative Party in New York, even though everything he's championed in the thread contradict the CP platform.

When asked to explain how he can possibly be conservative, he refuses and says that those who want a limited Constitutional government are extremists.....that he IS conservative, just not the kinds that believes in conservative principles.

So we're left to believe that he's a Marxist because he's offered no evidence to the contrary.

That's basically the 46 pages.
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-23-2010, 00:28   #1143
kirgi08
Silver Membership
Watcher.
 
kirgi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Acme proving grounds.
Posts: 28,388
Blog Entries: 1


Dewd,you forgot the fact that there is a ton of useful info in this thread.'08.
__________________
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

If you look like food,You will be eaten.

Rip Chad.You will be missed.
kirgi08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 03:29   #1144
tc556guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 4,774
Send a message via ICQ to tc556guy Send a message via Yahoo to tc556guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
All this back and forth and you won't list out a simple half dozen principles you agree with. Wow. That's kinda pathetic.

Since you claim to be a member of the conservative party, maybe you could just take from the party platform?
Not pathetic. I simply choose to not define myself for your personal amusement, since I know that there are a few people posting who would claim to consider a true conservative to be only one who supports seeing 90% of the gov't going away. I'm not playing that game.
__________________
*Post contains personal opinion and should not be considered information released in an official capacity*
tc556guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 03:32   #1145
tc556guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 4,774
Send a message via ICQ to tc556guy Send a message via Yahoo to tc556guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
"paying less to those who legitimately qualified" for WHAT? What are you talking about here?
While there are those who fraudelently misuse the system, there are those who throud legitimate need are the raeson the system was created in the first place. Slashing the benfits of those types of people is not the answer. Tightening up qualification standards, going after fraud, etc is the way to handle problems in those types of programs
__________________
*Post contains personal opinion and should not be considered information released in an official capacity*
tc556guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 03:41   #1146
tc556guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 4,774
Send a message via ICQ to tc556guy Send a message via Yahoo to tc556guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by quake View Post
That said, if it's just a question of "give an example of something (or things) I would define as conservative principles", that seems simple enough and not really some kind of trick or trap.

1 - I believe that each segment of government (federal, state, local, etc) should operate under, and within, the scope and paramaters of their written charters. IE, the U.S. constitution for fedgov, U.S. constitution and state constitution for a given state's govt, etc.

2 - I believe that the U.S. constitution should be read as written, and any changes to it or faults found with it should be addressed as laid out in the constitution itself; thru amendments if and when necessary. (And they can at times be legitimately necessary.)


That wasn't so hard, actually. Is it out of place to ask if you agree with those concepts, TC, or if not, what specifically in them would you disagree with?

Not a trap or setup, just a simple inquiry.
Most of the existing government can point to some sort of justification for their existence and operation under existing Constitution, charters, etc, as you put it. Many posters here want to put out the claim that 90% of the existing gov't could go away with no adverse effect on the American nation or its population. Such a claim is ridiculous, in my opinion. Yes, there are places that expenses can be tightened up, but not to the tune of 90% of the gov't.

The US Constitution cannot be simply "read as written"...its way more complex than that. People are always going to dispute what the meaning of a particular section means or how a particular activity fits into what is written. You need someone to settle those disputes, and that someone is the courts.

The reality is for both the liberal and conservative camps that when the courts rule the way they personally like, they are fine with the ruling. When they disagree with the courts, BOTH sides will rant about activist judges. As an example, the left now is going on about Heller and McDonald being the product of activist judges. You don't hear that claim on gun boards. The reverse is heard on other issues such as abortion cases.

Society and its issues are complex. There are no simple answers.
__________________
*Post contains personal opinion and should not be considered information released in an official capacity*

Last edited by tc556guy; 10-25-2010 at 03:41..
tc556guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 04:19   #1147
Snafu
Registered User
 
Snafu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: PA
Posts: 705
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawman800 View Post
All of us working folk feel the pain... everytime we get what's left of our paycheck, we feel the pain... everytime we see the welfare queen in her brand new SUV with 24" chrome rims and new $500 cell phone with her 7 kids in tow while we are struggling to feed our 1 kid while driving our 10 year old POS daily beater to work... we feel it.

And here is the difference between tc556guy and many others here: he clearly is someone without real world experience in these matters.

For the last 24 years I have dealt with the welfare frauds, section 8 abusers, food stamp sellers and those who get drunk/high until 0730 during the week on a near daily basis. They have late model cars with huge chrome rims and shined to a high gloss. But they can't take care of their kids or get through a day without government intervention that they DEMAND. Their housing is nicer than apartments I've lived in and still they complain. They steal, cheat and lie...and think nothing of it.

Welfare and the assorted other freebie programs have enslaved generations of people who do so willingly. In fact, they again DEMAND it. My question is: how much or how long do we give to someone until they decide to do for themselves? I'll answer it, you can't give enough or give long enough. It just doesn't happen. Sure, you'll see the very rare example where a person who was on welfare rose above it, but that is few and very far between.

I grew up working on a farm for a man who barely got by. He was proud and always felt others needed to be taken care of before him. In fact, he even paid me (when he could barely afford to live himself) to travel elsewhere in the state to assist in cleaning up after a particularly bad flood. Why? Because he was not self centered and he was a giver, not a taker.

So, tc556guy, what are all the government handouts doing to build guys like this farmer? Nothing. They are growing generations of self centered takers.

How can any country survive if we grow legions of takers? And take from legions of givers?
Snafu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 04:27   #1148
kirgi08
Silver Membership
Watcher.
 
kirgi08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Acme proving grounds.
Posts: 28,388
Blog Entries: 1


Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
Not pathetic. I simply choose to not define myself for your personal amusement, since I know that there are a few people posting who would claim to consider a true conservative to be only one who supports seeing 90% of the gov't going away. I'm not playing that game.
FAIL,"true" conservatives,demands that "big" government goes away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
While there are those who fraudelently misuse the system, there are those who throud legitimate need are the raeson the system was created in the first place. Slashing the benfits of those types of people is not the answer. Tightening up qualification standards, going after fraud, etc is the way to handle problems in those types of programs
EPIC FAIL,those that work the system have been on it fer so long that they know more about than those they are stroking,those that hit a "bump" are run over by it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
Most of the existing government can point to some sort of justification for their existence and operation under existing Constitution, charters, etc, as you put it. Many posters here want to put out the claim that 90% of the existing gov't could go away with no adverse effect on the American nation or its population. Such a claim is ridiculous, in my opinion. Yes, there are places that expenses can be tightened up, but not to the tune of 90% of the gov't.

STUNNED

If the fed/gov paid attention ta the COTUS,by the way,it's the law of the land.We wouldn't havta worry about the useless 90%

The US Constitution cannot be simply "read as written"...its way more complex than that. People are always going to dispute what the meaning of a particular section means or how a particular activity fits into what is written. You need someone to settle those disputes, and that someone is the courts.

Sir,your above is one or the most treasonous things I've ever read.

The reality is for both the liberal and conservative camps that when the courts rule the way they personally like, they are fine with the ruling. When they disagree with the courts, BOTH sides will rant about activist judges. As an example, the left now is going on about Heller and McDonald being the product of activist judges. You don't hear that claim on gun boards. The reverse is heard on other issues such as abortion cases.

Society and its issues are complex. There are no simple answers.




"Quoted" for posterity.'08.
__________________
I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6

If you look like food,You will be eaten.

Rip Chad.You will be missed.

Last edited by kirgi08; 10-25-2010 at 04:28..
kirgi08 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 06:11   #1149
UneasyRider
C.D.B.
 
UneasyRider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,759
Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
The US Constitution cannot be simply "read as written"...its way more complex than that. People are always going to dispute what the meaning of a particular section means or how a particular activity fits into what is written. You need someone to settle those disputes, and that someone is the courts.
This is exactly what has brought us the Tea Party. You have rule by the majority of a panel of 9 on the key issues of the day and people do not like it.

If the COTUS can not be "read as written" than we are not living a constitutional republic and at some time all bets are off. The government can and will eventually cross a line of penciling in new "constitutional" powers until one last straw brakes the camels back or we are all slaves to a socialist state.

The COTUS and our willingness to defend it, both the parts we like and the parts that we do not personally like, is what has made us a great country and individually kept us free. Look at the people who wish to make law out of nowhere and ask yourself if that law is to give people more freedom or to take freedom away from people. This includes taking working peoples money and giving it to those who will not work, where I come from we call that stealing.
__________________
"Freedom ain't Free" Ted Nugent at the House of Blues in Orlando.

"Both oligarch and tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of arms." - Aristotle,
UneasyRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 06:54   #1150
quake
Senior Member
 
quake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Arkansas, USA
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
...The US Constitution cannot be simply "read as written"...its way more complex than that.
I'm neither a lawyer nor a "constitutional scholar", but COTUS is actually one of the more simple legal documents I've encountered. We're currently in the process of purchasing a new commercial building, and the real estate documents are more complex and weasely than the US constitution is.

I just can't buy into the "living document" argument, claiming that it means one thing this year, and something else next year. I don't think my wife would appreciate me treating our marriage license as a "living document", and I see COTUS as no less important than that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
...The reality is for both the liberal and conservative camps that when the courts rule the way they personally like, they are fine with the ruling.
That's true for a lot of people on both sides, but only dishonest or hypocritical people. Not all people; and by definition, not intellectually honest people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
...Society and its issues are complex. There are no simple answers.
?????
Every issue, whether criminal or civil, can be distilled down to principle. Principles are inherently simple and unchanging; at least (again) to the honest person.

There's no scenario where I have the right to rape your wife or daughter. Ever, period, none. That's extremely simple, yet completely applicable to society at large.
__________________
"The best a man can hope for is a chance to prove that the good lord didn't make a mistake putting him here in the first place." - Will Sonnett

"Only problem with women my own age, is they're so damn old." - my dad at 89...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
quake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 07:23   #1151
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,640


Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
Most of the existing government can point to some sort of justification for their existence and operation under existing Constitution, charters, etc, as you put it. Many posters here want to put out the claim that 90% of the existing gov't could go away with no adverse effect on the American nation or its population. Such a claim is ridiculous, in my opinion. Yes, there are places that expenses can be tightened up, but not to the tune of 90% of the gov't.

The US Constitution cannot be simply "read as written"...its way more complex than that. People are always going to dispute what the meaning of a particular section means or how a particular activity fits into what is written. You need someone to settle those disputes, and that someone is the courts.

The reality is for both the liberal and conservative camps that when the courts rule the way they personally like, they are fine with the ruling. When they disagree with the courts, BOTH sides will rant about activist judges. As an example, the left now is going on about Heller and McDonald being the product of activist judges. You don't hear that claim on gun boards. The reverse is heard on other issues such as abortion cases.

Society and its issues are complex. There are no simple answers.
This post is the very DEFINITION of modern liberal Progressive.

Forget discussing any conservative principles you believe in. You've made it clear that there aren't any. In this post you have violated the most basic and fundamental in the first two paragraphs.

What a joke.
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2010, 07:27   #1152
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,640


Quote:
Originally Posted by Snafu View Post
And here is the difference between tc556guy and many others here: he clearly is someone without real world experience in these matters.

For the last 24 years I have dealt with the welfare frauds, section 8 abusers, food stamp sellers and those who get drunk/high until 0730 during the week on a near daily basis. They have late model cars with huge chrome rims and shined to a high gloss. But they can't take care of their kids or get through a day without government intervention that they DEMAND. Their housing is nicer than apartments I've lived in and still they complain. They steal, cheat and lie...and think nothing of it.

Welfare and the assorted other freebie programs have enslaved generations of people who do so willingly. In fact, they again DEMAND it. My question is: how much or how long do we give to someone until they decide to do for themselves? I'll answer it, you can't give enough or give long enough. It just doesn't happen. Sure, you'll see the very rare example where a person who was on welfare rose above it, but that is few and very far between.

I grew up working on a farm for a man who barely got by. He was proud and always felt others needed to be taken care of before him. In fact, he even paid me (when he could barely afford to live himself) to travel elsewhere in the state to assist in cleaning up after a particularly bad flood. Why? Because he was not self centered and he was a giver, not a taker.

So, tc556guy, what are all the government handouts doing to build guys like this farmer? Nothing. They are growing generations of self centered takers.

How can any country survive if we grow legions of takers? And take from legions of givers?
After Katrina, the residents of the NOLA housing projects were protesting and demanding that the projects be repaired and reopened. They had a "right" to come back to their home, that they didn't own.

If you haven't seen it, NOLA public housing is an absolute crime-ridden cesspool. Many of these residents have lived in their units for 2-3 generations. THE PROGRAM HAS KEPT THEM ENSLAVED FOR 3 GENERATIONS AND THEY WERE DEMANDING MORE!

It was well documented that the protests were being organized by out of state professional protesters. The truth of the matter was that they were trying to get the voting base back for the democratic machine. I wonder if tc556guy was part of the protests?
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 08:15   #1153
tc556guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 4,774
Send a message via ICQ to tc556guy Send a message via Yahoo to tc556guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snafu View Post
And here is the difference between tc556guy and many others here: he clearly is someone without real world experience in these matters.

For the last 24 years I have dealt with the welfare frauds, section 8 abusers, food stamp sellers and those who get drunk/high until 0730 during the week on a near daily basis. They have late model cars with huge chrome rims and shined to a high gloss. But they can't take care of their kids or get through a day without government intervention that they DEMAND. Their housing is nicer than apartments I've lived in and still they complain. They steal, cheat and lie...and think nothing of it....


So, tc556guy, what are all the government handouts doing to build guys like this farmer? Nothing. They are growing generations of self centered takers.

How can any country survive if we grow legions of takers? And take from legions of givers?
You honestly think I don't see fraud or deal with the people commiting the fraud? Why do you think I'm in favor of ferreting out teh fraud? Its because I see it.

As for farmers.....you want to talk about people getting handouts and you bring up farmers as an example of self-reliant people? Now, I grew up around farmers..they ARE a hard-working group. Probably among the hardest working career out there because its 24/7 with no break. But don't think that they aren't often getting handouts in the form of subsidies, payments to not plant, etc.

We agree more than you realize, but the answer isn't to completely eliminate every program out there. There ARE people in legitimate need. Please don't say that they can be helped solely by private charity. The nation tried that up til the 30s and private charity couldn't carry the burden alone.
__________________
*Post contains personal opinion and should not be considered information released in an official capacity*
tc556guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 08:16   #1154
tc556guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 4,774
Send a message via ICQ to tc556guy Send a message via Yahoo to tc556guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
This post is the very DEFINITION of modern liberal Progressive.

Forget discussing any conservative principles you believe in. You've made it clear that there aren't any. In this post you have violated the most basic and fundamental in the first two paragraphs.

What a joke.
You are so wrong. What I posted was truth. Apparently your definition of conservatism is to believe in fantasy.
__________________
*Post contains personal opinion and should not be considered information released in an official capacity*
tc556guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 11:06   #1155
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,640


Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post

We agree more than you realize, but the answer isn't to completely eliminate every program out there. There ARE people in legitimate need. Please don't say that they can be helped solely by private charity. The nation tried that up til the 30s and private charity couldn't carry the burden alone.
You've spewed this nonsense repeatedly.

The fact that people are in need does not justify unconstitutional federal involvement.

Eliminate the excessive tax burden on the People. Return the wealth to the people and the states. Then, charities can handle it. If they can't, the states can implement welfare programs or not, and be held closely accountable to the citizens of that state that can choose to have a reasonable chance to change things, or relocate to a state governed in a manner more congruent with their beliefs. AS IT WAS INTENDED.

You say private charities can't handle it. You say the states can't do it alone. WHERE DOES THE FED GET ITS MONEY IN YOUR ESTIMATION?
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 11:10   #1156
certifiedfunds
Platinum Membership
Tewwowist
 
certifiedfunds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Caught in the Middle
Posts: 42,640


Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
You are so wrong. What I posted was truth. Apparently your definition of conservatism is to believe in fantasy.
Do you own a dictionary?

Quote:
Most of the existing government can point to some sort of justification for their existence and operation under existing Constitution, charters, etc, as you put it.
Quote:
The US Constitution cannot be simply "read as written"...its way more complex than that.
Quote:
Society and its issues are complex. There are no simple answers.
This is the truth when it comes to conservative principles? WTF?

Tell ya what.....instead of telling us what conservative principles you believe in, why don't you define modern conservatism in a sentence or two or a bullet point list?
__________________
“If Thomas Jefferson thought taxation without representation was bad, he should see how it is WITH representation.”

Rush Limbaugh
certifiedfunds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 13:48   #1157
tc556guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 4,774
Send a message via ICQ to tc556guy Send a message via Yahoo to tc556guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
You've spewed this nonsense repeatedly.

The fact that people are in need does not justify unconstitutional federal involvement.

Eliminate the excessive tax burden on the People. Return the wealth to the people and the states. Then, charities can handle it. If they can't, the states can implement welfare programs or not, and be held closely accountable to the citizens of that state that can choose to have a reasonable chance to change things, or relocate to a state governed in a manner more congruent with their beliefs. AS IT WAS INTENDED.

You say private charities can't handle it. You say the states can't do it alone. WHERE DOES THE FED GET ITS MONEY IN YOUR ESTIMATION?
And if we dismantle the fed programs and states and private charities can't handle it, what then..you going to admit you were wrong and stand the Fed programs back up? Doubtful.

You can consider it nonsense all you want.

How in the world is a poor person supposed to just pack up and go to a different state as you suggest.

Your "solutions" simply show that you don't live in any version of reality but in some oughtta coulda woulda shoulda world.
__________________
*Post contains personal opinion and should not be considered information released in an official capacity*
tc556guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 13:51   #1158
tc556guy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 4,774
Send a message via ICQ to tc556guy Send a message via Yahoo to tc556guy
Quote:
Originally Posted by certifiedfunds View Post
Do you own a dictionary?

This is the truth when it comes to conservative principles? WTF?

Tell ya what.....instead of telling us what conservative principles you believe in, why don't you define modern conservatism in a sentence or two or a bullet point list?
Actually, I'm the one who should be rolling on the floor laughing , that you seriously believe your beliefs are correct. Its pretty sad that extremists like you think that you are the only true conservatives, or that you claim to speak for all conservatives.

You go ahead and stick to your version of reality and keep being angry that the rest of the nation doesn't follow you into marginalism and extremism. I'll stick to looking for solutions that work in the real world.
__________________
*Post contains personal opinion and should not be considered information released in an official capacity*
tc556guy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 13:53   #1159
emt1581
Curious Member
 
emt1581's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Penn's Woods
Posts: 28,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post

Your "solutions" simply show that you don't live in any version of reality but in some oughtta coulda woulda shoulda world.
But it seems, in keeping with Communist traditions, that YOUR "solutions" are trying to let no one fail. So what if that bum goes hungry? Let him get a job and earn his keep!! So what if the ghetto dwellers get booted out of their (taxpayer) home! Let them wake up to a reality that involves them working for a living rather than being handed one and yes a few nights, weeks, months on the street will do them good!

Communism at it's finest!!

As I said initially, calling you a communist is NOT a derogatory thing...it's just the reality of the situation.

-Emt1581
emt1581 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2010, 13:54   #1160
emt1581
Curious Member
 
emt1581's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Penn's Woods
Posts: 28,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by tc556guy View Post
Actually, I'm the one who should be rolling on the floor laughing , that you seriously believe your beliefs are correct. Its pretty sad that extremists like you think that you are the only true conservatives, or that you claim to speak for all conservatives.

You go ahead and stick to your version of reality and keep being angry that the rest of the nation doesn't follow you into marginalism and extremism. I'll stick to looking for solutions that work in the real world.
Ok, so if he's not speaking for all conservatives...how would a conservative be speaking??

...or is that a game instead of a question?

-Emt1581
emt1581 is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply


Tags
tc tucked tail and ran, tcguy is a socialist
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 18:42.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,323
387 Members
936 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31