Right-Wing Extremism: The Real Referendum of 2012

[JamesSchlarmann]

Again, when you accept public assistance, you bump right up against me getting to voice an opinion about it. Your position was that you choose not to work harder because you value your time...that's fine so long as you don't expect anyone else to pay for it, when you are capable of working harder/longer/more. Public assistance should be for the truly needy, not the the self important or lazy of society.

There. The part I put into bold text. That is EXTREMELY insulting to me. How dare you assume that I chose not to work harder. How do you know how hard I already work? You don't have a position to judge me from. My point here is that there are all sorts of reasons take help from the government, and for you to just assume that people take help because they don't want to work harder is INSULTING.

It devalues their lives. Don't you see that? How hard is hard enough for you? Four jobs? 100 jobs? 1,000 jobs? Are you really telling me the only way to live your life the proper way is to work has hard as it takes to not have to get any help from anyone?

Sorry. I reject that, and I think most caring, and compassionate people would. There are most definitely those who take advantage of the system. But the solution is not to cut EVERYONE off. The solution is to not allow people to game the system.

I'm floored by your cold, cold attitude towards people working as hard as they can and it still not being enough. It's not up to you, or anyone else, to decide that someone working two or more jobs isn't working hard enough.

 

[koshergrl]

If you need assistance your taxes are not likely funding much nationally. As to local and state programs? I say the same thing.

Wow. Smug arrogance much? So my taxes count less than yours now, is that it? What if the issue is more that the cost of health care is out of control and inappropriately high? Oh, that's right the free market says that's never possible.

Your taxes don't count at all if you receive more $$ than you put in. You're pretty much just a drain.

Cool. Better to let them all die in the streets than give them money, right? I'm kind of FLOORED by your tone here.

Oh look, it's the old standby..."If you don't continue to overfund a system that isn't working, people are going to DIE! THEY'LL DIE! DO YOU HEAR ME? THEY'LL DIE IN THE STREET AND ON YOUR DOORSTEP! YOU MIGHT DIE TO! EVERYBODY WILL DIE IF YOU DON'T THROW MORE MONEY IN!!"

Your duty is not to take from the system because it is there to take from. If you can work, it is your duty to do so.

That's your very narrow view. So let me get this straight: You pay taxes and don't take a single thing (which I think is kind of bullshit because we use government subsidies ALL THE TIME in our lives), so you get to tell people what they can and can't have.

I pay taxes, from working two full-time jobs, and you tell me I have no right to take the help?

Please quote her saying that. I'll wait.

As someone who contributes myself and is not taking, I have the right to say as much. Your value of your life is not to be questioned, only your insistence others should pay for that "value".

No, you don't have that right actually.

Yes, she does. We all have that right. Just as you have the right to continue to continue your stupid rants.

You have the right to live YOUR life YOUR way. You do not have the right to live mine.

Did she threaten to live your life for you? Please link & quote.


Nor do you have the right to tell someone when they can have help, and when they can't.

Of course you do, if they're asking you for help. You have the right to say "no". You also have the right to determine what sort of help you'll give them.

Well, you can say it, but then those of you decide to grace with your judgment have every right to tell you to **** off. I mean that. If you have the balls to tell someone, especially someone who pays into the system (And your quip about my tax dollars not doing much is pretty gross, really. You're basically telling ME I don't contribute enough. Kind of ironic, a Conservative telling a Liberal to PAY MORE TAXES), they're doing something wrong with their lives, they have every right to tell you to **** off.

Yes, you have the right to be as idiotic as you please. Meanwhile, if you're taking more than you're paying, you're a drain, not a contributing member of society. Sorry. You are the biggest loser.

I am not opposed to public education- only the monopoly of it for tax payer dollars.

Who exactly is monopolizing education, again?

Progressive extremist deviants, like Blue Phantom.

 

[clevergirl]

Again, when you accept public assistance, you bump right up against me getting to voice an opinion about it. Your position was that you choose not to work harder because you value your time...that's fine so long as you don't expect anyone else to pay for it, when you are capable of working harder/longer/more. Public assistance should be for the truly needy, not the the self important or lazy of society.

There. The part I put into bold text. That is EXTREMELY insulting to me. How dare you assume that I chose not to work harder. How do you know how hard I already work? You don't have a position to judge me from. My point here is that there are all sorts of reasons take help from the government, and for you to just assume that people take help because they don't want to work harder is INSULTING.

It devalues their lives. Don't you see that? How hard is hard enough for you? Four jobs? 100 jobs? 1,000 jobs? Are you really telling me the only way to live your life the proper way is to work has hard as it takes to not have to get any help from anyone?

Sorry. I reject that, and I think most caring, and compassionate people would. There are most definitely those who take advantage of the system. But the solution is not to cut EVERYONE off. The solution is to not allow people to game the system.

I'm floored by your cold, cold attitude towards people working as hard as they can and it still not being enough. It's not up to you, or anyone else, to decide that someone working two or more jobs isn't working hard enough.

Because you said as much. You stated you refused to work a third job. Actually, I work one job and don't take public assistance. And remember James, you choose to take it because you value your time more- how is it that your time should get my tax dollars? Do you not see the selfishness of your choice? If you were disabled or seriously seeking better pay, then I'd grant you the right of real or temporary need- but you are working at jobs that you know can't pay the bills- but they give you satisfaction, as if you are entitled to your satisfaction at the expense of tax payers. This is what is wrong with liberal thinking...I call it the "me me and more of all me" syndrome.

I suggest that if there were less people taking from the system all of us could afford more leisure time.

Again, it is my right, as a tax payer not taking assistance, to call you out on your comments. You continue to attempt to make my statements cold and uncaring- I have never said the truly needy should not be cared for- only those unwilling to work as hard as they can to not take from the system.

Your two jobs are not enough to support you? Then find one that will.

 

[koshergrl]

Why is he on public assistance? I thought he was a supremely successful...*coughjournalistcough*....!

 

[Too Tall]

It's definitely an opinion piece, as is everything else I write. Unlike those on the Right who do it too, I don't profess to have all the answers, only my views on where the Right Wing in this country is going terribly wrong.

Someone in this thread said that we Liberals are upset because our views aren't the common American's views. That kind of statement is much more hyperbolic and misguided than anything I've ever written ever will be. Like us or not, Conservatives, there are a Hell of a lot of us. And the fact is that on several key social issues your side is definitely losing.

The tide of public opinion on things like legalization of marijuana, marriage equaltiy, and reaffirming a woman's right to choose are flowing back towards the Left. This has happened throughout history, and now is no different. Progressives fight for real change (like abolition, the New Deal, Women's Suffrage, The Right to Choose), and Conservatives spend their time, energy, and now GOBS of money chipping away at those changes.

For every Wisconsin there's a California, or a New York, or an Oregon. Or even a Montana, shoving the influence of big money out of their state. You think your way of thinking is the only way people think because that's all you're surrounded by. But look at the opinion polls on these key social issues.

Social issues will drive economic concerns. I think Conservatives should be wary of declaring a win in the war on Liberalism with the Walker victory last night. And if you all don't think your party has been hijacked by extremists, you're just too far down the rabbit hole (or up the elephant's ass) to see it is all. It doesn't make it any less true.

I see that Walker basically won by the same margin as last time, plus a percentage point. That doesn't prove anything. It doesn't prove that Liberalism was handed a mighty defeat. It means that money works. So now we see how important it is to get CU overturned. Thanks for helping to fire up the Left Wing.

And we'll see in November how this all shakes out.

You live in San Diego and haven't commented on this:

SAN DIEGO, June 7, 2012 – Hear those alarm clocks ringing from the West Coast? It’s a big wake-up call for America’s public labor unions, and they better not hit the snooze button.

While the nation focused on Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s victory, the passage of two pension reform measures in the cities of San Jose and San Diego is likely to embolden other fiscal conservatives and taxpayer advocates across the country, triggering a revolution of reform.

Voters overwhelmingly approved initiatives that overhauled retirement benefits for city employees in an effort to get overwhelming pension obligations under control. In San Diego, a super majority two-thirds of all voters approved Proposition B; that number was 70 percent in favor of the similarly named Measure B in San Jose.

It looks like strike two against Obama to me and I am waiting for the next pitch.

 

[JamesSchlarmann]

Because you said as much. You stated you refused to work a third job. Actually, I work one job and don't take public assistance. And remember James, you choose to take it because you value your time more- how is it that your time should get my tax dollars?

Well, in this case, unless you live in CA, your tax dollars aren't funding anything for me. It's a state program, and again, I even pay into that, on top of my taxes. So once again, your arrogance to assume you play any part in my children's health care is evident. Why should you have to pay for other government assistance programs?

Because I have to pay for oil subsidies, corporate tax loopholes, the portion of his fair share of taxes that Mitt Romney doesn't pay, wars, etc. We're all in this together. So like I said, when the day comes that we can individually pick where our taxes go, then it won't matter. Until then, don't presume to tell me I should work harder.

Well, you can, but I'll dismiss you out of hand.

Do you not see the selfishness of your choice? If you were disabled or seriously seeking better pay, then I'd grant you the right of real or temporary need- but you are working a at jobs that you know can't pay the bills- but it gives you satisfaction as if you are entitled.

I'm not entitled. My kids are. They're the ones receiving the benefits. Tell you what, Queen of Arrogance, I'll go grab my six year old and my 15 month old and you can explain to them that Daddy needs to work more than the 15 hours a day he already works. You don't know ****-all about my jobs, do you? I make a decent wage, admittedly, between my two occupations.

And it's still not enough. Why? Because there are things that cost too much, plain and simple. I know you're going to hate that, but it's true. I should not have to work 24 hours a day. And how the **** dare you accuse me of not constantly working to improve my situation. Again, this is just plain arrogance. Nothing more.

Until you've come into my house, lived my life, paid my bills, shut the **** up or keep your opinions to yourself over who should work more or less, okay? Because I don't think ANYONE should have to work more than ONE job to survive, regardless of political bent.

This is what is wrong with liberal thinking...I call it the "me me and more of all me" syndrome.

And you know what's wrong about conservative thinking? Letting people starve and die because they shouldn't be asking for help. That's gross. Amoral, Godless, etc. It's the irony of you insulting me for thinking that maybe we should be an evolved sociey and stop telling people to work forty jobs to make ends meet.

I suggest that if there were less people taking from the system all of us could afford more leisure time.

And I suggest that if corporations and the 1% paid their fair share you wouldn't have to cast judgment on people for needing help from the government.

Again, it is my right, as a tax payer not taking assistance, to call you out on your comments. You continue to attempt to make my statements cold and uncaring- I have never said the truly needy should not be cared for- only those unwilling to work as hard as they can to not take from the system.

And again, I am a tax payer too. You don't have the "right" to force me to work more than one job. You don't have that right. No one does. That's not how our system works. You can say to me whatever you want, but I have the right to think that you're a cold, heartless ***** for it, yeah?

I work enough for you, me and others. Let me say this one time: Do not ever, ever tell me I don't work hard enough, okay? Because I could be rude and ask what you do for a living and take a peak into your life so I can find all the flaws I think I see, but I'm not. So just leave it that I work plenty hard, okay?

Your two jobs are not enough to support you? Then find one that will.

Nah, no thanks. I'll live my own life, you live yours okay? And when you're the one needing help, you'll see what a crazy loon you're being right now. Let them eat cake, right Clevergirl?

 

[JamesSchlarmann]

It's definitely an opinion piece, as is everything else I write. Unlike those on the Right who do it too, I don't profess to have all the answers, only my views on where the Right Wing in this country is going terribly wrong.

Someone in this thread said that we Liberals are upset because our views aren't the common American's views. That kind of statement is much more hyperbolic and misguided than anything I've ever written ever will be. Like us or not, Conservatives, there are a Hell of a lot of us. And the fact is that on several key social issues your side is definitely losing.

The tide of public opinion on things like legalization of marijuana, marriage equaltiy, and reaffirming a woman's right to choose are flowing back towards the Left. This has happened throughout history, and now is no different. Progressives fight for real change (like abolition, the New Deal, Women's Suffrage, The Right to Choose), and Conservatives spend their time, energy, and now GOBS of money chipping away at those changes.

For every Wisconsin there's a California, or a New York, or an Oregon. Or even a Montana, shoving the influence of big money out of their state. You think your way of thinking is the only way people think because that's all you're surrounded by. But look at the opinion polls on these key social issues.

Social issues will drive economic concerns. I think Conservatives should be wary of declaring a win in the war on Liberalism with the Walker victory last night. And if you all don't think your party has been hijacked by extremists, you're just too far down the rabbit hole (or up the elephant's ass) to see it is all. It doesn't make it any less true.

I see that Walker basically won by the same margin as last time, plus a percentage point. That doesn't prove anything. It doesn't prove that Liberalism was handed a mighty defeat. It means that money works. So now we see how important it is to get CU overturned. Thanks for helping to fire up the Left Wing.

And we'll see in November how this all shakes out.

You live in San Diego and haven't commented on this:

SAN DIEGO, June 7, 2012 – Hear those alarm clocks ringing from the West Coast? It’s a big wake-up call for America’s public labor unions, and they better not hit the snooze button.

While the nation focused on Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s victory, the passage of two pension reform measures in the cities of San Jose and San Diego is likely to embolden other fiscal conservatives and taxpayer advocates across the country, triggering a revolution of reform.

Voters overwhelmingly approved initiatives that overhauled retirement benefits for city employees in an effort to get overwhelming pension obligations under control. In San Diego, a super majority two-thirds of all voters approved Proposition B; that number was 70 percent in favor of the similarly named Measure B in San Jose.

It looks like strike two against Obama to me and I am waiting for the next pitch.

San Diego is a super-conservative county. I'm not surprised in the least. San Jose, I'm a little surprised about, but I don't know the particulars of the pension program. But you're not really understanding the point of why unions/labor and the Progressives in this country were so appalled at what Walker did.

Clearly there was a real fiscal need to adjust the financial stress the pensions and benefits were putting on WI. But the unions capitulated. They gave them all the financial demands they wanted. But that wasn't enough, he had to cut off their right to unionize. That's where I take umbrage with him, and anyone who tries to cut off the balls of the unions.

Oh yeah, and the fact that it's an obvious ploy to de-fund the Democratic party as much as possible. But no, I have no problem with cities doing what they have to do to balance their books, as long as they aren't also taking away someone's civil liberties to do so.

 

[koshergrl]

Because you said as much. You stated you refused to work a third job. Actually, I work one job and don't take public assistance. And remember James, you choose to take it because you value your time more- how is it that your time should get my tax dollars?

Well, in this case, unless you live in CA, your tax dollars aren't funding anything for me. It's a state program, and again, I even pay into that, on top of my taxes. So once again, your arrogance to assume you play any part in my children's health care is evident. Why should you have to pay for other government assistance programs?

Because I have to pay for oil subsidies, corporate tax loopholes, the portion of his fair share of taxes that Mitt Romney doesn't pay, wars, etc. We're all in this together. So like I said, when the day comes that we can individually pick where our taxes go, then it won't matter. Until then, don't presume to tell me I should work harder.

Well, you can, but I'll dismiss you out of hand.

Do you not see the selfishness of your choice? If you were disabled or seriously seeking better pay, then I'd grant you the right of real or temporary need- but you are working a at jobs that you know can't pay the bills- but it gives you satisfaction as if you are entitled.

I'm not entitled. My kids are. They're the ones receiving the benefits. Tell you what, Queen of Arrogance, I'll go grab my six year old and my 15 month old and you can explain to them that Daddy needs to work more than the 15 hours a day he already works. You don't know ****-all about my jobs, do you? I make a decent wage, admittedly, between my two occupations.

And it's still not enough. Why? Because there are things that cost too much, plain and simple. I know you're going to hate that, but it's true. I should not have to work 24 hours a day. And how the **** dare you accuse me of not constantly working to improve my situation. Again, this is just plain arrogance. Nothing more.

Until you've come into my house, lived my life, paid my bills, shut the **** up or keep your opinions to yourself over who should work more or less, okay? Because I don't think ANYONE should have to work more than ONE job to survive, regardless of political bent.



And you know what's wrong about conservative thinking? Letting people starve and die because they shouldn't be asking for help. That's gross. Amoral, Godless, etc. It's the irony of you insulting me for thinking that maybe we should be an evolved sociey and stop telling people to work forty jobs to make ends meet.



And I suggest that if corporations and the 1% paid their fair share you wouldn't have to cast judgment on people for needing help from the government.

Again, it is my right, as a tax payer not taking assistance, to call you out on your comments. You continue to attempt to make my statements cold and uncaring- I have never said the truly needy should not be cared for- only those unwilling to work as hard as they can to not take from the system.

And again, I am a tax payer too. You don't have the "right" to force me to work more than one job. You don't have that right. No one does. That's not how our system works. You can say to me whatever you want, but I have the right to think that you're a cold, heartless ***** for it, yeah?

I work enough for you, me and others. Let me say this one time: Do not ever, ever tell me I don't work hard enough, okay? Because I could be rude and ask what you do for a living and take a peak into your life so I can find all the flaws I think I see, but I'm not. So just leave it that I work plenty hard, okay?

Your two jobs are not enough to support you? Then find one that will.

Nah, no thanks. I'll live my own life, you live yours okay? And when you're the one needing help, you'll see what a crazy loon you're being right now. Let them eat cake, right Clevergirl?

Dude. You're not working now. This isn't work.



Get a job.

And foodstamps is a FEDERAL program. FEDERAL. And most other programs also have federal elements to them.

 

[The T]

Why is he on public assistance? I thought he was a supremely successful...*coughjournalistcough*....!

Because he's a LAZY asshole and isn't allowed into the hallowed halls...so he's relegated here and being monitored?

Redemption?

 

[Too Tall]

Who's deflecting. I never said it wasn't about Obama. It's about the choice between Obama and his "Kenyan, Radical, Socialist/Communist/Islamic Fundamentalist/Whateverthefuckelsestupiidgoddamne houedconspiracytheorythatanyonewithabraincellknowsisbullshit" Ways, or Right Wing Extremists who are holding Congress hostage and purposefully tanking the economy.

The Senate is the other half of the Congress and even a partisan pissant like you should know that it is controlled by a Democrat majority. They House has sent dozens of bills to the Senate that are promptly shelved by Majority Leader Harry Reid and are not voted on.

The way it is supposed to work is a bill from the house is voted on in the Senate, and if it does not pass, it goes to a conference committee of House and Senate members to resolve the differences, then voted on again by both bodies. If it passes, the President either signs, ignores or vetoes the bill.

Do you now understand who is holding whom hostage?

 

[clevergirl]

Because you said as much. You stated you refused to work a third job. Actually, I work one job and don't take public assistance. And remember James, you choose to take it because you value your time more- how is it that your time should get my tax dollars?

Well, in this case, unless you live in CA, your tax dollars aren't funding anything for me. It's a state program, and again, I even pay into that, on top of my taxes. So once again, your arrogance to assume you play any part in my children's health care is evident. Why should you have to pay for other government assistance programs?

Because I have to pay for oil subsidies, corporate tax loopholes, the portion of his fair share of taxes that Mitt Romney doesn't pay, wars, etc. We're all in this together. So like I said, when the day comes that we can individually pick where our taxes go, then it won't matter. Until then, don't presume to tell me I should work harder.

Well, you can, but I'll dismiss you out of hand.

Do you not see the selfishness of your choice? If you were disabled or seriously seeking better pay, then I'd grant you the right of real or temporary need- but you are working a at jobs that you know can't pay the bills- but it gives you satisfaction as if you are entitled.

I'm not entitled. My kids are. They're the ones receiving the benefits. Tell you what, Queen of Arrogance, I'll go grab my six year old and my 15 month old and you can explain to them that Daddy needs to work more than the 15 hours a day he already works. You don't know ****-all about my jobs, do you? I make a decent wage, admittedly, between my two occupations.

And it's still not enough. Why? Because there are things that cost too much, plain and simple. I know you're going to hate that, but it's true. I should not have to work 24 hours a day. And how the **** dare you accuse me of not constantly working to improve my situation. Again, this is just plain arrogance. Nothing more.

Until you've come into my house, lived my life, paid my bills, shut the **** up or keep your opinions to yourself over who should work more or less, okay? Because I don't think ANYONE should have to work more than ONE job to survive, regardless of political bent.



And you know what's wrong about conservative thinking? Letting people starve and die because they shouldn't be asking for help. That's gross. Amoral, Godless, etc. It's the irony of you insulting me for thinking that maybe we should be an evolved sociey and stop telling people to work forty jobs to make ends meet.



And I suggest that if corporations and the 1% paid their fair share you wouldn't have to cast judgment on people for needing help from the government.

Again, it is my right, as a tax payer not taking assistance, to call you out on your comments. You continue to attempt to make my statements cold and uncaring- I have never said the truly needy should not be cared for- only those unwilling to work as hard as they can to not take from the system.

And again, I am a tax payer too. You don't have the "right" to force me to work more than one job. You don't have that right. No one does. That's not how our system works. You can say to me whatever you want, but I have the right to think that you're a cold, heartless ***** for it, yeah?

I work enough for you, me and others. Let me say this one time: Do not ever, ever tell me I don't work hard enough, okay? Because I could be rude and ask what you do for a living and take a peak into your life so I can find all the flaws I think I see, but I'm not. So just leave it that I work plenty hard, okay?

Your two jobs are not enough to support you? Then find one that will.

Nah, no thanks. I'll live my own life, you live yours okay? And when you're the one needing help, you'll see what a crazy loon you're being right now. Let them eat cake, right Clevergirl?

James, having a background in finance, I know that your taxes are not high enough to amount to your adding to the system- not if you qualify for assistance. I understand you may think they are, but I can assure you they are not.

But all this aside- you are wriggling from the reason I entered this particular debate.

You stated quite clearly that refuse to work harder and choose instead to take from the system, because you feel entitled to do so. That kind of thinking is what is wrong with our nation.

You have put yourself purposefully in a position of needing help- you are not helpless.

 

[JamesSchlarmann]

Why is he on public assistance? I thought he was a supremely successful...*coughjournalistcough*....!

You're an idiot. I participate in a program that CA offers that subsidizes health care for children until they're 18 years of age. You have to meet income guidelines, very strict ones at that. And unless you really make zero or close to zero you have to pay something. I pay the maximum that they can charge, and it's still cheaper than private insurance.

I never said I was anything, successful or otherwise. That's you once again projecting for the sake of trolling, and it's really ******* transparent. Unless you're willing to let me peer into your life, as I willingly do with mine, shut the **** up.

And that is, seriously, the last time I'm going to address you ever. Like ever, ever. I just didn't want you to have incomplete picture of the situation; I like to educate the ignorant and bitchy. In your case, you exhibit symptoms of both.

 

[tjvh]

Whoa, it seems that this thread really pissed off California Girl, aka USMB Wingnut Queen. Her picture should be in the dictionary beside the word "extremist"...

And your's should be next to partisan hack.

You say "partisan hack," I say "guy who writes shit that ignorant Conservatives don't agree with." Potato, meet dipshit.

Hey JamesS after reading through your posts, about you being a Journalist and all what came to mind was THIS:Stewie on Brian's novel - YouTube

 

[JamesSchlarmann]

James, having a background in finance, I know that your taxes are not high enough to amount to your adding to the system- not if you qualify for assistance. I understand you may think they are, but I can assure you they are not.

No, you really can't know that at all. Do you live in California? Do you know all the ins and outs of the Healthy Families program? No you don't. You don't know ****-all about my life, and you're not going to. I'm kind of starting to regret interacting with YOU now, because you really do think you have the ability to judge, analyze and pick apart my life. You don't. At all.

But all this aside- you are wriggling from the reason I entered this particular debate.

You stated quite clearly that refuse to work harder and choose instead to take from the system, because you feel entitled to do so. That kind of thinking is what is wrong with our nation.

I said I refuse to work harder than I already do. Which is plenty hard, and again, for the last time because I'm sick of defending myself to an arrogant person: You do not have the right to set MY threshhold of what's working hard enough. 15 hours a day, six days a week is enough. Quit ******* telling me it's not enough., It is. For me. For anyone.

You're not an elected official, you're not even someone I know well enough to know what color car I drive. Therefore you do not have any right, under any circumstance to tell me I don't work hard enough.

You have put yourself purposefully in a position of needing help- you are not helpless.

Don't take this the wrong way: But **** you. My kids see me for about 2 or 3 hours a day, tops. I kill myself daily working the jobs I do. Again, it's beyond arrogant and rude to tell me I don't work hard enough. If you don';t see that, you're not clever, you're just judgmental, pious and sanctimonious. None of which are traits that make me want to converse with you any further.

People who think like you are the reason the Middle Class is dying. You really think a person should do nothing but work with their life if that's the only way to make sure they never take an extra dime from the government.

I'm sorry that I have a soul, and a human compassion that you don't. It's fine. I'll carry the load for you. I'll care for you, okay? You go on being a heartless, judgmental and pious person. I'll continue to fight for people, including you, to have the help you need, no matter how many jobs you're currently calling your own.

You've said some really gross things. And have forwarded some really gross philosophies, and I pray to Yoda that your way of thinking NEVER becomes the societal norm. But dead, starving babies in the street isn't my thing either.

 

[JamesSchlarmann]

And your's should be next to partisan hack.

You say "partisan hack," I say "guy who writes shit that ignorant Conservatives don't agree with." Potato, meet dipshit.

Hey JamesS after reading through your posts, about you being a Journalist and all what came to mind was THIS:Stewie on Brian's novel - YouTube

Hey person I don't know or care about who's insulting my work, all that came to mind when I read your post is that you have nothing to add except personal attacks, so **** your face.

Wait. This might help:

 

[Too Tall]

It's definitely an opinion piece, as is everything else I write. Unlike those on the Right who do it too, I don't profess to have all the answers, only my views on where the Right Wing in this country is going terribly wrong.

Someone in this thread said that we Liberals are upset because our views aren't the common American's views. That kind of statement is much more hyperbolic and misguided than anything I've ever written ever will be. Like us or not, Conservatives, there are a Hell of a lot of us. And the fact is that on several key social issues your side is definitely losing.

The tide of public opinion on things like legalization of marijuana, marriage equaltiy, and reaffirming a woman's right to choose are flowing back towards the Left. This has happened throughout history, and now is no different. Progressives fight for real change (like abolition, the New Deal, Women's Suffrage, The Right to Choose), and Conservatives spend their time, energy, and now GOBS of money chipping away at those changes.

For every Wisconsin there's a California, or a New York, or an Oregon. Or even a Montana, shoving the influence of big money out of their state. You think your way of thinking is the only way people think because that's all you're surrounded by. But look at the opinion polls on these key social issues.

Social issues will drive economic concerns. I think Conservatives should be wary of declaring a win in the war on Liberalism with the Walker victory last night. And if you all don't think your party has been hijacked by extremists, you're just too far down the rabbit hole (or up the elephant's ass) to see it is all. It doesn't make it any less true.

I see that Walker basically won by the same margin as last time, plus a percentage point. That doesn't prove anything. It doesn't prove that Liberalism was handed a mighty defeat. It means that money works. So now we see how important it is to get CU overturned. Thanks for helping to fire up the Left Wing.

And we'll see in November how this all shakes out.

You live in San Diego and haven't commented on this:

SAN DIEGO, June 7, 2012 – Hear those alarm clocks ringing from the West Coast? It’s a big wake-up call for America’s public labor unions, and they better not hit the snooze button.

While the nation focused on Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s victory, the passage of two pension reform measures in the cities of San Jose and San Diego is likely to embolden other fiscal conservatives and taxpayer advocates across the country, triggering a revolution of reform.

Voters overwhelmingly approved initiatives that overhauled retirement benefits for city employees in an effort to get overwhelming pension obligations under control. In San Diego, a super majority two-thirds of all voters approved Proposition B; that number was 70 percent in favor of the similarly named Measure B in San Jose.

It looks like strike two against Obama to me and I am waiting for the next pitch.

San Diego is a super-conservative county. I'm not surprised in the least. San Jose, I'm a little surprised about, but I don't know the particulars of the pension program. But you're not really understanding the point of why unions/labor and the Progressives in this country were so appalled at what Walker did.

Clearly there was a real fiscal need to adjust the financial stress the pensions and benefits were putting on WI. But the unions capitulated. They gave them all the financial demands they wanted. But that wasn't enough, he had to cut off their right to unionize. That's where I take umbrage with him, and anyone who tries to cut off the balls of the unions.

Oh yeah, and the fact that it's an obvious ploy to de-fund the Democratic party as much as possible. But no, I have no problem with cities doing what they have to do to balance their books, as long as they aren't also taking away someone's civil liberties to do so.

To start with, the right to unionize is alive and well in Wisconsin. Are you misinformed or lying?

I find it amusing that you consider limiting unions activities a civil liberty. I went to work many years ago at an R&D lab in San Ramon, Ca and after working for 30 days a union rep handed me a form to sign to join the union and authorize the dues come out of my paycheck. I asked him what if I said no. He said that today would be my last day to work there. I signed it, but considered it a loss of my civil liberty and my money.

I do not have a problem with private sector unions as the company has a vested interest in the collective bargaining negotiations. Not so with the public sector unions and I would not be disappointed if they were abolished.

 

[koshergrl]

You say "partisan hack," I say "guy who writes shit that ignorant Conservatives don't agree with." Potato, meet dipshit.

Hey JamesS after reading through your posts, about you being a Journalist and all what came to mind was THIS:Stewie on Brian's novel - YouTube

Hey person I don't know or care about who's insulting my work, all that came to mind when I read your post is that you have nothing to add except personal attacks, so **** your face.

Wait. This might help:

Lol...

What I have learned about many "freelancers" in my life...

They have a very low tolerance for criticism...which makes it difficult for them to succeed since their writing, to be passable, needs to have the SHIT edited out of it.

So they become *coughfreelancejournalistbloggermessageboardtrollscough*.

 

[tjvh]

You say "partisan hack," I say "guy who writes shit that ignorant Conservatives don't agree with." Potato, meet dipshit.

Hey JamesS after reading through your posts, about you being a Journalist and all what came to mind was THIS:Stewie on Brian's novel - YouTube

Hey person I don't know or care about who's insulting my work, all that came to mind when I read your post is that you have nothing to add except personal attacks, so **** your face.

Wait. This might help:

Ahhh, the praise I must endure from those who consider themselves part of the "Intellectual Elite". Thank You ever so much!!!!

 

[Flopper]

“Extremes to the right and to the left of any political dispute are always wrong.”
― Dwight D. Eisenhower

This is so because by definition extremist deviate from the norm and the voters are the norm.

 

[Stephanie]

Why is he on public assistance? I thought he was a supremely successful...*coughjournalistcough*....!

And he has the NERVE to call other American citizens (tea party members) supporting his ass, extremist..