Republicans: Do you believe that there are individuals who cannot help themselves?

[kwc57]

Liberals don't want to foot the bill for the poor, the destitute, the halt and lame.

Their FIRST choice is always to kill them off...via abortion, euthanasia, etc.

Their SECOND choice is to tax the shit out of the rich so they themselves will feel it less, if at all...

Oh cool....we are talking in partisan hyperbole

Can I play?

FIRST........Conservatives only care about the unborn. Once they are born they scream... LET THEM DIE

SECOND.......Conservatives care more about protecting the assets of the wealthy than they care about the struggles of less fortunate Americans

Can you play? You play the game everyday.

 

[kwc57]

Well no, you misunderstood the post. Look what it says: "Any MORE than charity is an invasion..." Charity is charity, provided via contributions. Government involvement via programs for the poor is not charity - it is, as you say, forcibly taken from people.

No, I'm quite aware that the conservative view is that hoping there are resources from charity is all the unfortunate should be allowed. If the resources via charity aren't there, tough shit, it's all your fault anyway. I get it.

Tough shit! And God Bless America! You betcha!

.

Tell me Mac.......and be totally honest here.....at the end of the day, who can you depend on to take care of you?

I don't depend on anyone, nor would I ever want to. The thought is damn near repulsive to me, as I know that I have all the skills and drive needed to accomplish what I expect of myself. Needing assistance would be a dark day indeed. Knowing this makes me feel fortunate, knowing that many simply don't have the same drive and the same skills. Many simply never had the chance, many had horrific luck befall them, many had tragic childhoods that scarred them for life, many simply don't have the mental capacity. Luck of the draw, kind of like the luck I had by being born here and not in, say, Afghanistan.

Why?

Why? Because at the end of the day, that is true for every person. Governments fail. What do the people who depend on them do then? Isn't it better to get the entitlement crowd up to speed on personal responsibility and limit our government assistance to only those who truely need it like the retarded and disabled with no family support?

 

[Mac1958]

Tell me Mac.......and be totally honest here.....at the end of the day, who can you depend on to take care of you?

I don't depend on anyone, nor would I ever want to. The thought is damn near repulsive to me, as I know that I have all the skills and drive needed to accomplish what I expect of myself. Needing assistance would be a dark day indeed. Knowing this makes me feel fortunate, knowing that many simply don't have the same drive and the same skills. Many simply never had the chance, many had horrific luck befall them, many had tragic childhoods that scarred them for life, many simply don't have the mental capacity. Luck of the draw, kind of like the luck I had by being born here and not in, say, Afghanistan.

Why?

Why? Because at the end of the day, that is true for every person. Governments fail. What do the people who depend on them do then? Isn't it better to get the entitlement crowd up to speed on personal responsibility and limit our government assistance to only those who truely need it like the retarded and disabled with no family support?

I wish I had a quick answer, but I'll try to keep this (mercifully) short.

Yes, governments fail. Yes, bureaucracies are bloated, slothful, wasteful and corrupt. But hell, that's nothing in comparison to the bigger issue. This country is facing a deep cultural problem, where generations of Americans have become inter-generationally dependent on those bureaucracies. Not just the individual, the family. And this wrong has been perpetrated by those who say they care about the unfortunate.

Sounds like I agree with you, right?

Here's the problem. Deep cultural problems cannot be turned around on a dime. Just as with the economic meltdown, our cultural meltdown was decades in the making and will take decades to turn around. The GOP has become very absolutist - stop this now, end that now, abolish this now. That's just a band-aid. It doesn't address the root cause, and that's the culture. I didn't agree with much that Bush did, but I strongly agree with his notion of "the soft bigotry of reduced expectations."

As with any complicated issue, the answer has to come in parts:

1. The Left needs to admit the failings of massive bureaucracies and spend as much time making them more efficient as they do in funding them. Show me you can significantly reduce the bloat and sloth and corruption, and I won't be so prickly about my tax money, because I know each dollar with go farther.

2. The Left also needs to admit that there are too many people who soak the system, and worse, they learned to do so by watching their parents. This inter-generational disaster has to be dealt with, and that may require some tough love. It also require the commitment of those who have positioned themselves as "advocates for the poor."

3. The Right needs to admit that, if run efficiently, the government can play a positive (if only foundational) part in the lives of Americans. They have to admit that there are millions of Americans, for whatever reason, just aren't going to make it off the starting line. My argument is, in a country this wealthy, that foundation could be a little higher without us giving up our "freedoms and liberty."

4. The Right has to get off this libertarian crap that the government should not provide any services outside of the very basics and the military. That dog just ain't gonna hunt, and it slows down the communication process needed to get us out of the shitter. The longer the Right pursues this simplistic, platitude-soaked, binary thought pattern, the longer it's going to take for us to find equilibrium. There's nothing wrong with giving in a bit now and then. It's not a sign of weakness, it's a sign of maturity and self esteem.

Bottom line is, both sides have get their heads out of their ass and work together on this. The problem is too big for one "side" to fix.

There. More pontificating than you can probably stand. I even bored MYSELF. Aren't you sorry you asked?

.

 

[koshergrl]

Actually, they can be turned much more quickly than you think.

Have a little faith. The primary disease of our culture is that we don't have any faith in our people. Period. You think they're incapable of pulling themselves out of the gutter. I promise you, they're not...so long as we have INDUSTRY for them to work in...

 

[koshergrl]

When you expect people to breed like animals, to act like animals, and to fail...they will. Particularly if you give them money to do so.

When you expect better things of them...they rise to the task.

This is why good parents set high standards...

 

[Harry Dresden]

Republicans: Do you believe that there are individuals who cannot help themselves?


They are called liberals.......................

and you call yourself Logic and Reason?.....your no better than TruthMatters......

 

[theHawk]

So far no liberal has said they'd rather see welfare money strictly go to mentally disabled people first.


All this supposed compassion for 'people who can't fend for themselves' and yet you'd rather send tax money to able-bodied lazy people than to mentally disabled people.

 

[rightwinger]

So far no liberal has said they'd rather see welfare money strictly go to mentally disabled people first.


All this supposed compassion for 'people who can't fend for themselves' and yet you'd rather send tax money to able-bodied lazy people than to mentally disabled people.

How do you send them money first? They are either covered or not

Disabled people are also entitled to assistance in other areas

 

[kwc57]

I don't depend on anyone, nor would I ever want to. The thought is damn near repulsive to me, as I know that I have all the skills and drive needed to accomplish what I expect of myself. Needing assistance would be a dark day indeed. Knowing this makes me feel fortunate, knowing that many simply don't have the same drive and the same skills. Many simply never had the chance, many had horrific luck befall them, many had tragic childhoods that scarred them for life, many simply don't have the mental capacity. Luck of the draw, kind of like the luck I had by being born here and not in, say, Afghanistan.

Why?

Why? Because at the end of the day, that is true for every person. Governments fail. What do the people who depend on them do then? Isn't it better to get the entitlement crowd up to speed on personal responsibility and limit our government assistance to only those who truely need it like the retarded and disabled with no family support?

I wish I had a quick answer, but I'll try to keep this (mercifully) short.

Yes, governments fail. Yes, bureaucracies are bloated, slothful, wasteful and corrupt. But hell, that's nothing in comparison to the bigger issue. This country is facing a deep cultural problem, where generations of Americans have become inter-generationally dependent on those bureaucracies. Not just the individual, the family. And this wrong has been perpetrated by those who say they care about the unfortunate.

Sounds like I agree with you, right?

Here's the problem. Deep cultural problems cannot be turned around on a dime. Just as with the economic meltdown, our cultural meltdown was decades in the making and will take decades to turn around. The GOP has become very absolutist - stop this now, end that now, abolish this now. That's just a band-aid. It doesn't address the root cause, and that's the culture. I didn't agree with much that Bush did, but I strongly agree with his notion of "the soft bigotry of reduced expectations."

As with any complicated issue, the answer has to come in parts:

1. The Left needs to admit the failings of massive bureaucracies and spend as much time making them more efficient as they do in funding them. Show me you can significantly reduce the bloat and sloth and corruption, and I won't be so prickly about my tax money, because I know each dollar with go farther.

2. The Left also needs to admit that there are too many people who soak the system, and worse, they learned to do so by watching their parents. This inter-generational disaster has to be dealt with, and that may require some tough love. It also require the commitment of those who have positioned themselves as "advocates for the poor."

3. The Right needs to admit that, if run efficiently, the government can play a positive (if only foundational) part in the lives of Americans. They have to admit that there are millions of Americans, for whatever reason, just aren't going to make it off the starting line. My argument is, in a country this wealthy, that foundation could be a little higher without us giving up our "freedoms and liberty."

4. The Right has to get off this libertarian crap that the government should not provide any services outside of the very basics and the military. That dog just ain't gonna hunt, and it slows down the communication process needed to get us out of the shitter. The longer the Right pursues this simplistic, platitude-soaked, binary thought pattern, the longer it's going to take for us to find equilibrium. There's nothing wrong with giving in a bit now and then. It's not a sign of weakness, it's a sign of maturity and self esteem.

Bottom line is, both sides have get their heads out of their ass and work together on this. The problem is too big for one "side" to fix.

There. More pontificating than you can probably stand. I even bored MYSELF. Aren't you sorry you asked?

.

Nope, not sorry. I disagree with your take on libertarianism. Had our politicians over the centuries had the resolve to actually follow the constitution and keep our government limited, we wouldn't find ourselves where we are today. A return to following the constitution is needed to save our nation.

As to your view it will take decades to change things, I disagree. There are times where that is called for and times where it isn't. If over the past 10 years you've put on 50 lbs of fat, your doctor is going to tell you there is no quick fix. You put it on over tome and it will take time to take it off. Sound advice when your condition isn't life threatening. But if you have cancer, you can't take time to fight it. You have to treat it aggressively before it kills you. We simply don't have time to fix our economy. Drastic cuts are called for so the government can live within their means. Do I mean tomorrow? No, but the sooner the better.

 

[Mac1958]

Why? Because at the end of the day, that is true for every person. Governments fail. What do the people who depend on them do then? Isn't it better to get the entitlement crowd up to speed on personal responsibility and limit our government assistance to only those who truely need it like the retarded and disabled with no family support?

I wish I had a quick answer, but I'll try to keep this (mercifully) short.

Yes, governments fail. Yes, bureaucracies are bloated, slothful, wasteful and corrupt. But hell, that's nothing in comparison to the bigger issue. This country is facing a deep cultural problem, where generations of Americans have become inter-generationally dependent on those bureaucracies. Not just the individual, the family. And this wrong has been perpetrated by those who say they care about the unfortunate.

Sounds like I agree with you, right?

Here's the problem. Deep cultural problems cannot be turned around on a dime. Just as with the economic meltdown, our cultural meltdown was decades in the making and will take decades to turn around. The GOP has become very absolutist - stop this now, end that now, abolish this now. That's just a band-aid. It doesn't address the root cause, and that's the culture. I didn't agree with much that Bush did, but I strongly agree with his notion of "the soft bigotry of reduced expectations."

As with any complicated issue, the answer has to come in parts:

1. The Left needs to admit the failings of massive bureaucracies and spend as much time making them more efficient as they do in funding them. Show me you can significantly reduce the bloat and sloth and corruption, and I won't be so prickly about my tax money, because I know each dollar with go farther.

2. The Left also needs to admit that there are too many people who soak the system, and worse, they learned to do so by watching their parents. This inter-generational disaster has to be dealt with, and that may require some tough love. It also require the commitment of those who have positioned themselves as "advocates for the poor."

3. The Right needs to admit that, if run efficiently, the government can play a positive (if only foundational) part in the lives of Americans. They have to admit that there are millions of Americans, for whatever reason, just aren't going to make it off the starting line. My argument is, in a country this wealthy, that foundation could be a little higher without us giving up our "freedoms and liberty."

4. The Right has to get off this libertarian crap that the government should not provide any services outside of the very basics and the military. That dog just ain't gonna hunt, and it slows down the communication process needed to get us out of the shitter. The longer the Right pursues this simplistic, platitude-soaked, binary thought pattern, the longer it's going to take for us to find equilibrium. There's nothing wrong with giving in a bit now and then. It's not a sign of weakness, it's a sign of maturity and self esteem.

Bottom line is, both sides have get their heads out of their ass and work together on this. The problem is too big for one "side" to fix.

There. More pontificating than you can probably stand. I even bored MYSELF. Aren't you sorry you asked?

.

Nope, not sorry. I disagree with your take on libertarianism. Had our politicians over the centuries had the resolve to actually follow the constitution and keep our government limited, we wouldn't find ourselves where we are today. A return to following the constitution is needed to save our nation.

As to your view it will take decades to change things, I disagree. There are times where that is called for and times where it isn't. If over the past 10 years you've put on 50 lbs of fat, your doctor is going to tell you there is no quick fix. You put it on over tome and it will take time to take it off. Sound advice when your condition isn't life threatening. But if you have cancer, you can't take time to fight it. You have to treat it aggressively before it kills you. We simply don't have time to fix our economy. Drastic cuts are called for so the government can live within their means. Do I mean tomorrow? No, but the sooner the better.

Understood.

Both the libertarian issue and the time frame issue are related. It has been damn near 100 years since this country operated on anything approaching strict constitutionalism. It could be argued that it's been even longer than that. Therefore, those who are demanding a return to strict constitutionalism are trying to take the national mindset back to the days of our grandparents, and that simply isn't where the country is now.

If this is the foundation from which the right is going to proceed as we endeavor to fix things, holy crap, it will be a very long time before any kind of identifiable resolution is reached, if ever. Looking at the demographics of this country, I don't see us getting there from here. I'd love to see the plan these folks have in accomplishing this.

If I'm right (and who the hell knows), those after strict constitutionalism are only going to get their way, or anything close to it, by changing the minds and hearts of one helluva lot of Americans. I'd respectfully submit the way they're going about it ain't gonna cut it.

My guess is that there are far more Americans who would rather see mature, civil, adult, reasonable cooperation between the parties than "one side wins all."

.

 

[Mr. H.]

That's great Mr. H.

However.... How much funding does your family get from the state? That is also supplemented from the Fed? Don't even tell me that your family takes care of him on your own, or I will call you a liar.... and you know that deep down in your heart that I'm right. SSI? Medicaid? If you're even an AVERAGE family.... you couldn't make ends meet without either one of those programs.

You can call me a liar anytime you like. That's sort of a badge of honor around here LOL.

Let's see- he's legally disabled so he does get SSI. Medicare helps pay for the big stuff like the tumor he had removed recently. I don't think the state of Illinois pitches in anything.

My point is, there's no substitute for a caring family no matter how much money state or federal agencies throw at you. When he was dancing around outside his apartment- in his underwear- threatening neighbors- it was family that diffused the situation. If we didn't intervene he probably w/have been tazed unconscious and hauled off. That's what the state does. I dunno- that make sense?

And in state custody he would be locked up in some state institution heavily medicated, probably put it restraints at the cost of approximately $250.00 per day. Caring families do need help with disabled family members, or they can just send them off and let the state take care of them. You are in fact, saving the government a lot of $, errrr........ I mean saving the taxpayers a lot of money. Kudos to you and your family for doing the right thing.

In the early years (early '80s) of his illness, this is exactly what happened. We didn't know what was happening to him and didn't know where to turn. He was initially admitted to a state of Tennessee mental hospital for evaluation and treatment. I visited him on occasion and let me tell you if you've ever seen the movie "Cukoo's Nest" that's where he was.

We found a private hospital and for a while our parent was shelling out about $15k/month for "treatment" until we realized even that was a fruitless endeavor. It's been a long torturous road for my brother and our family but thank goodness he's finally stabilized and doing quite well. Anyhow- thanks for your comments.

 

[Listening]

A couple of exampes: the mentally retarded and disabled veterans.

In other words, is there anyone living in this country that NEEDS and DESERVES government assistance? If not, how do you deal with these individuals?

Sure....

Chris....

Rightwinger.....

Franco.....

 

[Listening]

So far no liberal has said they'd rather see welfare money strictly go to mentally disabled people first.


All this supposed compassion for 'people who can't fend for themselves' and yet you'd rather send tax money to able-bodied lazy people than to mentally disabled people.

How do you send them money first? They are either covered or not

Disabled people are also entitled to assistance in other areas

Key word.