The God that failed

It is what the people who control the right want.

I wonder how long it will be before this thread just disapears?
The Right and Left have the same puppet masters. One day you may wake up and see that we are on the same side but we are being played against each other.

I agree. That is why the protection of Unalienable Right, which includes Individual Perspective, Conscience, and Voice, it so Important to Us, and such a threat to the Powers that be.
 
Ronald Reagan is God, at least in the hearts and minds of many Americans today.

links please?:lol:


For those who are not willfully ignorant, a study of 'current events', 1985 style might be worthy.

as opposed to those that are? :eusa_whistle:


The Drive to Kill Revenue Sharing - TIME

[of course Reagan didn't fail, nor did the presidents who superseded him, nor the Congress', in the sense that we can blame anyone person or anyone party. The critical issue today is we are a house divided and until the people begin to boo any pol who offers criticism after criticism, we will remain a nation divided.]

It's time for solutions and for all of us work together, for a house divided cannot stand. The real enemy to our Republic are those who hope the Republic fails, and there are many who do.

what is the point of your link as it applies to your post?

While politicians argue over comparative tax resources, fundamental questions about the appropriate federal role in local services seem unlikely to be resolved. City experts like the Urban Institute's George Peterson argue that the national Government should help out when it adds to local costs by establishing new standards, as it did in 1972 for water-treatment plants. Other urban advocates argue that welfare payments should be a federal responsibility, since many tightfisted communities export their poverty burden to more generous cities. New York City's Deputy Mayor Alair Townsend points out, for example, that about 14% of the homeless women and 8% of men living in the city's shelters are from out of town. Says Townsend: "These people gravitate to New York when things get really tough, knowing they will get a better deal here." Some analysts also place aid to higher education as a federal responsibility on the theory that students are highly mobile after graduation and their acquired knowledge is a national asset. Environmental problems that do not respect city and state lines, such as acid rain, air pollution and water contamination, clearly require federal help.

But when cities use revenue sharing to pay for local garbage collection, street maintenance, fire and police, rather than for capital improvements, health care, nutrition or housing, the program does not seem to be meeting its original purposes. Stanford Political Scientist Alvin Rabushka contends that city services in general have declined despite federal aid. "If we spent more and got worse--if spending increases didn't translate into better services--it's hard to prove that cutbacks will lead to any deterioration," he argues. That view may seem harsh to local officials struggling to keep their cities from sliding deeply into debt, but it was clear last week that revenue sharing, at least in its present form, was in deep political trouble.

:eusa_eh:

I can't believe you actualy asked for a link to support the statement "Ronald Reagan is God, at least in the hearts and minds of many Americans today."

That's hilarious!!
 
Ronald Reagan is God, at least in the hearts and minds of many Americans today. For those who are not willfully ignorant, a study of 'current events', 1985 style might be worthy.

The Drive to Kill Revenue Sharing - TIME

[of course Reagan didn't fail, nor did the presidents who superseded him, nor the Congress', in the sense that we can blame anyone person or anyone party. The critical issue today is we are a house divided and until the people begin to boo any pol who offers criticism after criticism, we will remain a nation divided.]

It's time for solutions and for all of us work together, for a house divided cannot stand. The real enemy to our Republic are those who hope the Republic fails, and there are many who do.

The US government has over stepped thier authority.

I dont give a damn what happens to the government. I dont need them.

I do agree they've overstepped their authority...I wouldn't go so far as to say I don't need them. I do need them for things like infrastructure (I like my roads and bridges) and for things like foreign relations and defense of our nation.

That being said I DON'T need them for much beyond those things. I will take charge of my education and the earning of my own money to support my family. I will take charge of my own health insurance and being sure I have the education and skills needed to find a job that will supply such to me. I will be responsible for my own retirement fund and arrangements to care for myself as I age. It is not the governments job to handle these things, it is MINE.

How will you take charge if for example the bank or other financial institution you choose to invest for you retirement fails (or simply takes your money and runs)? Or do you plan to keep your retirement savings in the mattress?
What if you get really sick, cancer for example, and your health insurer says, tough luck buddy, you had a smoke at age 14 and that caused the cancer. We won't cover you any longer.
What if a huge gang of thugs comes to you and says your business needs protection. We want 30% of your gross, or else. And, btw, meet your new accountant, Gino the Giant.
 
How sad the right is, I jsut came from a thread where they ignored the cold hard facts just to attack me personally.

This country is so fucked with people like them.

The attacks on you are not so much about your politics, but more your choice of words or focus.
 
The monied interests control the right.

That is why the new scotus decided that corporations can donate anything they want to in an election.

How much money do you think the little people can give even in total.

our democracy is now corporate owned, thank a right wing voter.
 
Your side is controled by the monied interests.

You can trade in Goods, or just take them by force and mandate. How is the alternative to value for value more beneficial to than free exchange? If you were walking along a beach and found something of value, who has the right more than you to claim it? Who has the right to take it from you against your will or without compensation?
 
Your side is controled by the monied interests.

You can trade in Goods, or just take them by force and mandate. How is the alternative to value for value more beneficial to than free exchange? If you were walking along a beach and found something of value, who has the right more than you to claim it? Who has the right to take it from you against your will or without compensation?

Ummm, the person who owns it.

If someone loses their property and you find it, it still belongs to them. Only a theif would keep something that belongs to someone else.
 
One of my all time favorite Metallica tunes. It's about James' experiences growing up in a family of Christian Scientists.

I always figured it was about worshiping worldly things other than God. Oh well, thats how art is isn't it? It's so personal that you can get your own interpretation of it.

[youtube]Cgrxgp2Jp94[/youtube]
 
Last edited:
The monied interests control the right.

That is why the new scotus decided that corporations can donate anything they want to in an election.

How much money do you think the little people can give even in total.

our democracy is now corporate owned, thank a right wing voter.

You are so delusioned its laughable. Big money runs your party, the exemptions for the health care bill more then prove the point. Plus your side didnt have the stones to even address big pharma, your side took too much cash.

But its just the repubs. LOL Stalin has a description of you.
 
Intense that link is an example of how easy it is to get people on the right to gang up even when the facts are against them.
 
Your side is controled by the monied interests.

You can trade in Goods, or just take them by force and mandate. How is the alternative to value for value more beneficial to than free exchange? If you were walking along a beach and found something of value, who has the right more than you to claim it? Who has the right to take it from you against your will or without compensation?

Ummm, the person who owns it.

If someone loses their property and you find it, it still belongs to them. Only a theif would keep something that belongs to someone else.

When there is nobody to claim the property, that is not the case, is it. When you divert the argument, what purpose does that serve? There are many different types of theft. As you continue to Troll these boards, insulting Members and diverting conversation, consider that. Adding or taking away from meaning in your translations generally have little to contribute in any meaningful way. I answer your post now, so that others may wake up to what you do, though you yourself refuse to. You need to work on your people skills Sangha, while you still have the opportunity. ;)
 
In the thread Dis clearly gets the facts wrong and then refuses to admitt it, she is then joined by a rabble on the right refusing to accept the facts.

It is not good for any country to have people who refuse facts.
 
Intense that link is an example of how easy it is to get people on the right to gang up even when the facts are against them.

It's easy to get any group to be reduced to an angry mindless mob, it's a human condition. I would ask the people that are so proficient at doing that, Why? To what end? On 8/28 at the Beck Rally, Sharpton diverted his march? Why? Foresight? Prudence? I applaud him for that. Why put people at risk? There are always forces beyond our control. People even get killed over sporting events. What better defense than practicing the Golden Rule?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top