Liberals are just disgusting~!

[Sunshine]

What is disgusting is the person who posted the OP.
and ten bucks it wasn't liberals. 20 she made the whole thing up.

Of course being a welfare queen yourself you would know nothing about the St. Jude Dream Home raffles that take place all over the country.

St. Jude Dream Home winner named - Topix

Now, give me the 20 bucks. Never mind. I would just have to give it to you first. I'll just keep it.

You sure think you know all about me.
Such tolerance.

Just because I wouldn't spot her twenty bucks.

 

[Sunshine]

I doubt the doctor is in, either.

I think habitual lying is a good character trait for mods. And it's a good thing!

Dr. Porkchop.

 

[daveman]

It's funny watching you try to put words in my mouth.

You could maybe provide links proving me wrong.

Prove what wrong? That you've created value judgements in your head and assigned them to me?

Not at all. Do you deny the dichotomy exists? Are you unaware that liberals attack the Koch Brothers' involvement in politics and are silent or defensive about Soros'?

I was speaking generally, not of you specifically.

 

[regent]

Reminds me of the only church raffle ticket I ever bought. I must have been about twenty two. The prize was a new car and the drawing took place before a large church crowd, and lo and behold the church sextant won the car. Then the sextant told the crowd that he didn't drive, tee hee, and so he would give the car to the church. This was in Chicago.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You could maybe provide links proving me wrong.

Prove what wrong? That you've created value judgements in your head and assigned them to me?

Not at all. Do you deny the dichotomy exists?

No.

Are you unaware that liberals attack the Koch Brothers' involvement in politics and are silent or defensive about Soros'?

Of course I'm aware of it.

I was speaking generally, not of you specifically.

Sure. But you missed the context of my post entirely.

I'm not making any value judgements on whether or not either the Kochs or Soros should be spending so much money influencing politics - just pointing ou that it's pretty ridiculous to categorically deny that "conservatives" are vocal on how others should spend their money.

 

[Sunshine]

Reminds me of the only church raffle ticket I ever bought. I must have been about twenty two. The prize was a new car and the drawing took place before a large church crowd, and lo and behold the church sextant won the car. Then the sextant told the crowd that he didn't drive, tee hee, and so he would give the car to the church. This was in Chicago.

There is a big political rally at the Catholic church in Fancy Farm KY each year. Every year, they raffle off a car. I have bought tickets on it from time to time, but I've never won. I recall several years ago the same person won it two years in a row. I don't recall anyone ever giving it to the church.

I won a country ham and a bowling ball on the same day. My daughter drew out the first ticket and I wouldn't let her draw for the next. The little girl who drew next drew my name out. They also had Bingo. That year someone suggested they pay me and the kids to get out of the game because we kept winning and winning.

I have won several things in my life starting in about 5th grade, two little furry kittens for a dime fall festival ticket, the country ham and the bowling ball at a company picnic, a flower arrangement in a ladies day out, a huge basket of aroma therapy goodies from Bath and Body Works which was given away at a nursing convention. I won $50 worth of groceries once. That was back in the day when one didn't have to be paranoid. The little paper would draw out postcards with a SS number on it. You, then, combed through the paper to see if it was your number. I sent a postcard with a 'theme' of the holiday that month on it, and they drew mine out, so I got the groceries.

Sometimes, I think I should buy more raffle tickets than I do. I would not be surprised if one year I were to win the house. But I would just take the money and save it for things like medical expenses. I wouldn't live in it cuz I don't need a 3500 square foot house, nor donate it cuz right now, I'm the best charity I know!

I do remember a drawing at work. The boss wanted a particular nurse to do a particular job. She didn't want to do it and asked that a drawing be held. So everyone put their names on a piece of paper. He drew one out, opened it, called her name, and threw it back.

 

[koshergrl]

Long and short of it...

Progressives want to dictate to others how to spend their money.

Soros, who dictates how others should spend their money, spends his own (and others') in questionable manners...

And to QUESTION the legality/integrity of that makes US hypocrites, because we shouldn't be telling other people how to spend their money.

Is that about it?

Progressive/funny farm logic.

Newsflash, doc....pointing out the hypocrisy of your criminal masterminds, and the CRIMINALITY of your heroes...after repeatedly and steadfastly standing AGAINST thievery and chicanery is NOT "hypocrisy" itself.

I don't know how you people can muster up enough brain function to breathe. I'm serious.

 

[daveman]

Conceded.

Are you also defending her ridiculous broad-brushing of "liberals"?

Oh wait... you're as bad as she is with that shit. Of course you do.

I really don't see too many conservatives as passionate about their envy and covetousness as liberals seem to be.

Could you maybe point out a statistically-significant number for me, please?

This might be the funniest post I've seen in a while.

You make a ridiculous claim based on your own imagination and anecdotes, then ask me for hard data to "prove it wrong"?

What, exactly, am I imagining?

She claimed that liberals are posting envious nonsense about a guy who won a house. I said that liberals are known for being envious of those more well-off than they are.

You objected to that. You could prove the generalization incorrect by pointing out a statistically-significant number of conservatives who are envious of others' success.

So far, you haven't.

So...is the generalization correct, or isn't it? If it isn't, where is your proof?

 

[daveman]

You've been a poster for as long as I have. You've seen them.

Pretending they don't exist isn't going to work.

Oh, you mean like pretending the attacks on the Koch brothers don't exist.

Are you confusing conversations in your head with reality? Where have I "pretended" that the Kochs aren't attacked?

Of course the Kochs are attacked. Constantly, all the time. I get 10 emails a day from Liberal organizations attacking the Kochs.

But that doesn't change the fact that Conservatives attack Soros for how he spends his money - which is all I said.

 

[koshergrl]

I guess you're telling people how to spend their money when you tell them not to steal.

I guess when you notice that the people who want to take your money from you aren't obligated to give their OWN money up, you become a hypocrite.

Shocker. The single most consistent tenet of progressivism...accomodate criminals, criminalize behavior that is honorable.

 

[daveman]

Prove what wrong? That you've created value judgements in your head and assigned them to me?

Not at all. Do you deny the dichotomy exists?

No.

Are you unaware that liberals attack the Koch Brothers' involvement in politics and are silent or defensive about Soros'?

Of course I'm aware of it.

I was speaking generally, not of you specifically.

Sure. But you missed the context of my post entirely.

I'm not making any value judgements on whether or not either the Kochs or Soros should be spending so much money influencing politics - just pointing ou that it's pretty ridiculous to categorically deny that "conservatives" are vocal on how others should spend their money.

Soros and the Kochs are fair game for discussion due to their influence in politics.

The guy who won the house? What did he do to earn such vitriol?

He bought a ticket a lot of people couldn't afford, and won a prize even more people couldn't accept due to the tax liability -- but somehow, it's not "fair".

And which side is more concerned about "fairness"?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Not at all. Do you deny the dichotomy exists?

No.



Of course I'm aware of it.

I was speaking generally, not of you specifically.

Sure. But you missed the context of my post entirely.

I'm not making any value judgements on whether or not either the Kochs or Soros should be spending so much money influencing politics - just pointing ou that it's pretty ridiculous to categorically deny that "conservatives" are vocal on how others should spend their money.

Soros and the Kochs are fair game for discussion due to their influence in politics.

Agreed.

The guy who won the house? What did he do to earn such vitriol?

Nothing.

He bought a ticket a lot of people couldn't afford, and won a prize even more people couldn't accept due to the tax liability -- but somehow, it's not "fair".

And which side is more concerned about "fairness"?

"Fairness" doesn't exist.

 

[daveman]

No.



Of course I'm aware of it.



Sure. But you missed the context of my post entirely.

I'm not making any value judgements on whether or not either the Kochs or Soros should be spending so much money influencing politics - just pointing ou that it's pretty ridiculous to categorically deny that "conservatives" are vocal on how others should spend their money.

Soros and the Kochs are fair game for discussion due to their influence in politics.

Agreed.

The guy who won the house? What did he do to earn such vitriol?

Nothing.

He bought a ticket a lot of people couldn't afford, and won a prize even more people couldn't accept due to the tax liability -- but somehow, it's not "fair".

And which side is more concerned about "fairness"?

"Fairness" doesn't exist.

Perhaps you need to sign on to the Paducah Topix board and remind those who are hating on the winner of that.

But, please, answer the question: Which side is more concerned about "fairness"...liberals, or conservatives?

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

[MENTION=1322]007[/MENTION]

They use that quote from the Bible about giving what you have to the poor to try convincing us that we owe them something, that the world owes them something. But we do not, and the world does not. At he end of that passage, he tells them that giving everything they have to the poor will increase their wealth 100 fold. And it was Judas who had the gut wrenching envy of the woman who could afford the expensive perfume.* .Man, they really take a pen knife to the Bible when it comes to someone else's wealth.

I saw a show on H2, I believe it was, about Jesus. Many people have a misconception that he was poor. But Mary's husband Joseph was a carpenter, and so was Jesus before he started his ministry. Carpentry was and is still a respected trade, and carpenters do well and unless they just sucked at their trade, always did.

*I have always loved that passage about the woman using the most expensive vial of perfume to anoint Jesus' feet. That is why I buy expensive perfume. That has really my only truly big splurge. When I was in my 20s I bought perfume which cost more for an ounce than I made in a week's time. I still buy the absolute most expensive that I can. If Jesus returns in my time, I will use it to anoint his feet. And those with the gut wrenching envy can be onlookers for they will have nothing to offer but their demands. But the deeper meaning is that the vial must be broken before its aroma can be released. Many people, when broken, abandon their beliefs. Those who do not are the true believers and their essence is the expensive perfume.

(You know what else? Men notice perfume that expensive.)

I suspect Jesus will have other business to conduct with you rather than letting you anoint his feet with perfume. Yes, I suspect you'll have some explaining to do.

 

[Sunshine]

[MENTION=1322]007[/MENTION]

They use that quote from the Bible about giving what you have to the poor to try convincing us that we owe them something, that the world owes them something. But we do not, and the world does not. At he end of that passage, he tells them that giving everything they have to the poor will increase their wealth 100 fold. And it was Judas who had the gut wrenching envy of the woman who could afford the expensive perfume.* .Man, they really take a pen knife to the Bible when it comes to someone else's wealth.

I saw a show on H2, I believe it was, about Jesus. Many people have a misconception that he was poor. But Mary's husband Joseph was a carpenter, and so was Jesus before he started his ministry. Carpentry was and is still a respected trade, and carpenters do well and unless they just sucked at their trade, always did.

*I have always loved that passage about the woman using the most expensive vial of perfume to anoint Jesus' feet. That is why I buy expensive perfume. That has really my only truly big splurge. When I was in my 20s I bought perfume which cost more for an ounce than I made in a week's time. I still buy the absolute most expensive that I can. If Jesus returns in my time, I will use it to anoint his feet. And those with the gut wrenching envy can be onlookers for they will have nothing to offer but their demands. But the deeper meaning is that the vial must be broken before its aroma can be released. Many people, when broken, abandon their beliefs. Those who do not are the true believers and their essence is the expensive perfume.

(You know what else? Men notice perfume that expensive.)

I suspect Jesus will have other business to conduct with you rather than letting you anoint his feet with perfume. Yes, I suspect you'll have some explaining to do.

[MENTION=31092]Kooshdakhaa[/MENTION]


That would not be for you to decide.

1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. Mk. 4.24

3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Of course I always forget number 6 in that run of verses until I deal with pigs like you:

6 ¶ Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

All from Matthew 7.


What was that last thing you said? "LOL?" Yea, that was it. "LOL"