- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,519
- 2,165
- Banned
- #81
Soggy and eflatminor are " just angry little folks who cherry-pick very specific tenets of conservatism, radicalize them and then use them as a bludgeon to vent their impotent rage."
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Soggy and eflatminor are " just angry little folks who cherry-pick very specific tenets of conservatism, radicalize them and then use them as a bludgeon to vent their impotent rage."
You try to suggest that 1959 to 1969 is long term decline, for starters. It's not.
Your arguments have been clearly and absolutely refuted above
You are engaged in immoral stubborn ignorance and arrogance.
Johnson's Great Society in practice: a program to keep blacks poor and dependent upon the Democrat Party.
75% of black children born out of wedlock, education system a mess, etc., etc., etc....
To libs.. a grand slam!
1959 to 1969 is not a long term decline
which has nothing to do with the amazing progress from 1965 to 1969.
You continue to project your immoral stubbornness and arrogance though you have been repeatedly and firmly refuted above. You have fail on this thread.
eflatminor plays the same old broken chord.
If '64 to '69 was so damn amazing, why not go back to that level of entitlement spending that worked so damn well to lower the poverty rate?
Hmm????
The question has been conclusively answered much to your own loss.
If '64 to '69 was so damn amazing, why not go back to that level of entitlement spending that worked so damn well to lower the poverty rate?
Hmm????
simple, liberals see a ton of moral hazard in bailing out banks but none in bailing out individuals even when their welfare bailouts have obviously destroyed the American family and exacerbated poverty !!
If '64 to '69 was so damn amazing, why not go back to that level of entitlement spending that worked so damn well to lower the poverty rate?
Hmm????
simple, liberals see a ton of moral hazard in bailing out banks but none in bailing out individuals even when their welfare bailouts have obviously destroyed the American family and exacerbated poverty !!
It's more than welfare bail outs. An entire "poverty industry" exists to feed off the movement of transfer payments.