The War On Poverty: Lost

[NYcarbineer]

What will it take for folks to realize that, just like the title, big government is a loser?

If you think the war is lost then you must believe that the war must end.

Therefore you must believe that Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance, EIC, fuel and energy assistance, educational assistance, and all other programs that effectively represent the war on poverty should be ceased.

After that is done, how long before we win the war on poverty, using your plan of no programs for the poor?

==============
who the **** are you to tell that beautiful woman she "MUST" do, say or believe anything you pose ?

........ ........ you are so full of

Logic tells me.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is about the 20th thread started by PoliticalChic complaining about her hard earned money going to the poor,

when she doesn't have any hard earned money going to the poor.

It's hilarious.

Is that for real politichick? You don't work? Or pay taxes? How do you live? Off the kindness of others? How?

She's a stay at home mom by her own admission. Someone else pays the bills. She posts here and moves dishes in and out of the dishwasher,

although the latter is speculative and assumes she doesn't have a maid.

 

[NYcarbineer]

There is nothing in the Constitution that mandates a specific level of spending for the military, fucktard.

I'm not surprised you don't know that.

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

The People decide. The People have decided. When you get enough People to support your extremist views, then you can decide.

THAT is how the government works.

=================
in plain English..., "COMMUNISM" !!

A democratic constitutional republic is now an example of 'communism'?

lol. PC said it was an example of Nazism.

Make up your minds, demented ones..

 

[JoeB131]

[

I certainly think I am superior to those that constantly whine about imaginary corporations stealing their opportunities.

Get a grip.

I never talked about them stealing my oppurtunities.

I specifically said they illegally fired me after I ran up medical bills, and then paid me off with "Please don't sue us money".

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is about the 20th thread started by PoliticalChic complaining about her hard earned money going to the poor,

when she doesn't have any hard earned money going to the poor.

It's hilarious.

Is that for real politichick? You don't work? Or pay taxes? How do you live? Off the kindness of others? How?

My job?


Pleeeezzzzze.....


Thankfully, I'm independently wealthy, not obligated to actually work, as you peasants are.

You see, I'm heir to a family fortune.

For generations we've owned, via a closely held family corporation, the Nome (Alaska) to Rome (Italy) Railroad.

We are shielded from ObamaCare by the Hobby Lobby decision.

We use polar bears as conductors.....refugees from Global Warming.


And, President Obama actually made reference to our endeavor:

 

[PoliticalChic]

I never said there was. What I did say is the military is a delegated power and what you support isn't. I'm not surprised some retarded bleeding heart didn't know that.

If it wasn't it would have been challenged in court and ruled unconstitutional. Do you have any idea how our government works?

I also have an idea about what is and what isn't in the Constitution. You do not. You simply think one person owes another person something in life. Consider yourself lucky you don't rely on someone like me to help you. I'd look, laugh, walk right over you, and watch to do without for one reason and one reason only. You think it's owed.

The People decide. The People have decided. When you get enough People to support your extremist views, then you can decide.

THAT is how the government works.

=================
in plain English..., "COMMUNISM" !!

A democratic constitutional republic is now an example of 'communism'?

lol. PC said it was an example of Nazism.

Make up your minds, demented ones..

Communism and Nazism are variations on the same theme.

Nazi...national socialism....based on nationalism and/or race... Communism....international socialism.


And you espouse....which?

 

[Moonglow]

Funny how so called Christians always like to fight anti-poverty and never, ever use Jesus Christ as an example of bad when it comes to charity...equality and knowing that accumulating vast amounts of wealth is wicked and a sin...
Yet these people are the first to fly the banner of being christian when it suits them....

 

[PoliticalChic]

[

I certainly think I am superior to those that constantly whine about imaginary corporations stealing their opportunities.

Get a grip.

I never talked about them stealing my oppurtunities.

I specifically said they illegally fired me after I ran up medical bills, and then paid me off with "Please don't sue us money".

And after you accepted the "Please don't sue us money"....who took the horse's head out of your bed?

 

[JoeB131]

[

I certainly think I am superior to those that constantly whine about imaginary corporations stealing their opportunities.

Get a grip.

I never talked about them stealing my oppurtunities.

I specifically said they illegally fired me after I ran up medical bills, and then paid me off with "Please don't sue us money".

And after you accepted the "Please don't sue us money"....who took the horse's head out of your bed?

Naw, you see, the thing was, I don't sue. But they knew they were in the wrong.

Oddly, I benefited because i landed a job two weeks later. Meanwhile, all these schlubs were still there when the recession hit in October and about half of them got fired, including the manager who screwed me over.

What goes around, comes around.

 

[JoeB131]

Funny how so called Christians always like to fight anti-poverty and never, ever use Jesus Christ as an example of bad when it comes to charity...equality and knowing that accumulating vast amounts of wealth is wicked and a sin...
Yet these people are the first to fly the banner of being christian when it suits them....

Don't you know, Jesus was totally for Tax Cuts for Rich people. It's in the bible. Just ask PC.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Funny how so called Christians always like to fight anti-poverty and never, ever use Jesus Christ as an example of bad when it comes to charity...equality and knowing that accumulating vast amounts of wealth is wicked and a sin...
Yet these people are the first to fly the banner of being christian when it suits them....

Time for drop-draw's educational moment.

Christian charity was the way to go, and in effect until Stalin's pal FDR took it over.


1. Well, how was "welfare" formerly handled? Noted in the minutes of the Fairfield, Connecticut town council meeting: "April 16, 1673, Seriant Squire and Sam moorhouse [agreed] to Take care of Roger knaps family in this time of their great weaknes...." "Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development," by Ralph Pumphrey and W. Muriel Pumphrey, p.22.


2. November, 1753, from the Chelmsford, Massachusetts town meeting: "payment to Mr. W. Parker for takng one Joanna Cory, a poor child of John Cory, deceased, and to take caree of her while [until] 18 years old."
See The Social Service Review XI (September 1937), p. 452.


3. The Scots' Charitable Society, organized in 1684, "open[ed] the bowells of our compassion" to widows like Mrs. Stewart, who had "lost the use of her left arm" and whose husband was "Wash'd Overboard in a Storm."
Pumphrey, Op.Cit., p. 29.

4. And here is the major difference between current efforts and the earlier: charity was not handed out indiscriminately- "no prophane or diselut person, or openly scandelous shall have any pairt or portione herein."

The able-bodied were expected to find work,and if they chose not to, well....it was considered perfectly appropriate to press them to change their mind.
Olasky, "The Tragedy of American Compassion," chapter one.


A cornerstone of the Liberal philosophy is that one never make judgments about the behavior of other.
Notice how that view eliminates the compassion and charity prevalent in an earlier America, one in which 'need' was the driver, not 'want.'



Hard to believe how many have been convinced to support the proven stupidity of today's "welfare system."

 

[Moonglow]

Funny how so called Christians always like to fight anti-poverty and never, ever use Jesus Christ as an example of bad when it comes to charity...equality and knowing that accumulating vast amounts of wealth is wicked and a sin...
Yet these people are the first to fly the banner of being christian when it suits them....

Time for drop-draw's educational moment.

Christian charity was the way to go, and in effect until Stalin's pal FDR took it over.


1. Well, how was "welfare" formerly handled? Noted in the minutes of the Fairfield, Connecticut town council meeting: "April 16, 1673, Seriant Squire and Sam moorhouse [agreed] to Take care of Roger knaps family in this time of their great weaknes...." "Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development," by Ralph Pumphrey and W. Muriel Pumphrey, p.22.


2. November, 1753, from the Chelmsford, Massachusetts town meeting: "payment to Mr. W. Parker for takng one Joanna Cory, a poor child of John Cory, deceased, and to take caree of her while [until] 18 years old."
See The Social Service Review XI (September 1937), p. 452.


3. The Scots' Charitable Society, organized in 1684, "open[ed] the bowells of our compassion" to widows like Mrs. Stewart, who had "lost the use of her left arm" and whose husband was "Wash'd Overboard in a Storm."
Pumphrey, Op.Cit., p. 29.

4. And here is the major difference between current efforts and the earlier: charity was not handed out indiscriminately- "no prophane or diselut person, or openly scandelous shall have any pairt or portione herein."

The able-bodied were expected to find work,and if they chose not to, well....it was considered perfectly appropriate to press them to change their mind.
Olasky, "The Tragedy of American Compassion," chapter one.


A cornerstone of the Liberal philosophy is that one never make judgments about the behavior of other.
Notice how that view eliminates the compassion and charity prevalent in an earlier America, one in which 'need' was the driver, not 'want.'



Hard to believe how many have been convinced to support the proven stupidity of today's "welfare system."

If they are so generous then why do you people sit here and ***** about it so much?

 

[JoeB131]

Uh, PC, the reason why FDR took it over was because after the Capitalists fucked it up as badly as they did in 1929, private charities couldn't get the job done.

NOw, if you want to argue that we need welfare reform, I'm totally there with you. It should be a safety net, not a hammock. I would be all for work requirements and even something like FDR's CCC or WPA to put those folks to work to get a check.

but here's the problem. A lot of the poor ARE working. Big companies like WalMart and McDonalds that pay minimum wage and instruct their employees how to apply for food stamps and medicaid.

 

[Moonglow]

Funny how so called Christians always like to fight anti-poverty and never, ever use Jesus Christ as an example of bad when it comes to charity...equality and knowing that accumulating vast amounts of wealth is wicked and a sin...
Yet these people are the first to fly the banner of being christian when it suits them....

Time for drop-draw's educational moment.

Christian charity was the way to go, and in effect until Stalin's pal FDR took it over.


1. Well, how was "welfare" formerly handled? Noted in the minutes of the Fairfield, Connecticut town council meeting: "April 16, 1673, Seriant Squire and Sam moorhouse [agreed] to Take care of Roger knaps family in this time of their great weaknes...." "Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development," by Ralph Pumphrey and W. Muriel Pumphrey, p.22.


2. November, 1753, from the Chelmsford, Massachusetts town meeting: "payment to Mr. W. Parker for takng one Joanna Cory, a poor child of John Cory, deceased, and to take caree of her while [until] 18 years old."
See The Social Service Review XI (September 1937), p. 452.


3. The Scots' Charitable Society, organized in 1684, "open[ed] the bowells of our compassion" to widows like Mrs. Stewart, who had "lost the use of her left arm" and whose husband was "Wash'd Overboard in a Storm."
Pumphrey, Op.Cit., p. 29.

4. And here is the major difference between current efforts and the earlier: charity was not handed out indiscriminately- "no prophane or diselut person, or openly scandelous shall have any pairt or portione herein."

The able-bodied were expected to find work,and if they chose not to, well....it was considered perfectly appropriate to press them to change their mind.
Olasky, "The Tragedy of American Compassion," chapter one.


A cornerstone of the Liberal philosophy is that one never make judgments about the behavior of other.
Notice how that view eliminates the compassion and charity prevalent in an earlier America, one in which 'need' was the driver, not 'want.'



Hard to believe how many have been convinced to support the proven stupidity of today's "welfare system."

The welfare system you hate because Jesus would approve...

 

[iamwhatiseem]

After that is done, how long before we win the war on poverty, using your plan of no programs for the poor?

Where did she say she wanted "no programs for the poor"?
What I read is the WAY THE WAR ON POVERTY was fought, i.e. - colossal, ineffective corrupt programs - is a failure. The liberal answer for everything is always - ALWAYS - the same. Create a new government bureaucracy, appropriate massive funds and simply hand it out.
That would actually be awesome if it would work. If all you had to do was build a building, fill it with managers and clerical staff, give them the ability to write checks - and problems went away!! <POOF!>
But at no time in the history of the world has societal problems been solved with the government in charge of handing out money/goods. Never. And never will be.
The answer to poverty is, and will always be - OPPORTUNITY. Not free shit.
People who WANT to get out of poverty can ONLY do so with opportunity to secure income. I.E. - a JOB.

 

[Moonglow]

After that is done, how long before we win the war on poverty, using your plan of no programs for the poor?

Where did she say she wanted "no programs for the poor"?
What I read is the WAY THE WAR ON POVERTY was fought, i.e. - colossal, ineffective corrupt programs - is a failure. The liberal answer for everything is always - ALWAYS - the same. Create a new government bureaucracy, appropriate massive funds and simply hand it out.
That would actually be awesome if it would work. If all you had to do was build a building, fill it with managers and clerical staff, give them the ability to write checks - and problems went away!! <POOF!>
But at no time in the history of the world has societal problems been solved with the government in charge of handing out money/goods. Never. And never will be.
The answer to poverty is, and will always be - OPPORTUNITY. Not free shit.
People who WANT to get out of poverty can ONLY do so with opportunity to secure income. I.E. - a JOB.

Even those lazy bastards that are paraplegic, they'll find you a damn job...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Funny how so called Christians always like to fight anti-poverty and never, ever use Jesus Christ as an example of bad when it comes to charity...equality and knowing that accumulating vast amounts of wealth is wicked and a sin...
Yet these people are the first to fly the banner of being christian when it suits them....

Time for drop-draw's educational moment.

Christian charity was the way to go, and in effect until Stalin's pal FDR took it over.


1. Well, how was "welfare" formerly handled? Noted in the minutes of the Fairfield, Connecticut town council meeting: "April 16, 1673, Seriant Squire and Sam moorhouse [agreed] to Take care of Roger knaps family in this time of their great weaknes...." "Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development," by Ralph Pumphrey and W. Muriel Pumphrey, p.22.


2. November, 1753, from the Chelmsford, Massachusetts town meeting: "payment to Mr. W. Parker for takng one Joanna Cory, a poor child of John Cory, deceased, and to take caree of her while [until] 18 years old."
See The Social Service Review XI (September 1937), p. 452.


3. The Scots' Charitable Society, organized in 1684, "open[ed] the bowells of our compassion" to widows like Mrs. Stewart, who had "lost the use of her left arm" and whose husband was "Wash'd Overboard in a Storm."
Pumphrey, Op.Cit., p. 29.

4. And here is the major difference between current efforts and the earlier: charity was not handed out indiscriminately- "no prophane or diselut person, or openly scandelous shall have any pairt or portione herein."

The able-bodied were expected to find work,and if they chose not to, well....it was considered perfectly appropriate to press them to change their mind.
Olasky, "The Tragedy of American Compassion," chapter one.


A cornerstone of the Liberal philosophy is that one never make judgments about the behavior of other.
Notice how that view eliminates the compassion and charity prevalent in an earlier America, one in which 'need' was the driver, not 'want.'



Hard to believe how many have been convinced to support the proven stupidity of today's "welfare system."

If they are so generous then why do you people sit here and ***** about it so much?

. Cultures build systems of charity based on the god they worship, whether distant deists, or a personal theistic God of justice and mercy.....or simply government.

The 'justice' part produced an understanding of compassion that was hard-headed and, at the same time, warm-hearted. As 'justice' meant punishment for wrong-doing, it was perfectly correct for the slothful to suffer.
Olasky, Op. Cit.

 

[Bfgrn]

The soft bigotry of reduced expectations applies to more than skin color.

Your usual vacuous bluster...

 

[billyerock1991]

Funny how so called Christians always like to fight anti-poverty and never, ever use Jesus Christ as an example of bad when it comes to charity...equality and knowing that accumulating vast amounts of wealth is wicked and a sin...
Yet these people are the first to fly the banner of being christian when it suits them....

Don't you know, Jesus was totally for Tax Cuts for Rich people. It's in the bible. Just ask PC.

no jesus said don't tax the poor they were taking it from the poor you idiot but you know everything about every thing ... must hurt your head with all of this knowledge you carry... do you go through a lot of aspirin ???

 

[PoliticalChic]

After that is done, how long before we win the war on poverty, using your plan of no programs for the poor?

Where did she say she wanted "no programs for the poor"?
What I read is the WAY THE WAR ON POVERTY was fought, i.e. - colossal, ineffective corrupt programs - is a failure. The liberal answer for everything is always - ALWAYS - the same. Create a new government bureaucracy, appropriate massive funds and simply hand it out.
That would actually be awesome if it would work. If all you had to do was build a building, fill it with managers and clerical staff, give them the ability to write checks - and problems went away!! <POOF!>
But at no time in the history of the world has societal problems been solved with the government in charge of handing out money/goods. Never. And never will be.
The answer to poverty is, and will always be - OPPORTUNITY. Not free shit.
People who WANT to get out of poverty can ONLY do so with opportunity to secure income. I.E. - a JOB.

Even those lazy bastards that are paraplegic, they'll find you a damn job...

Each day you manage to produce a post so stupid that it must have been produced via the pic in your avi....

And the fact that you believe it to be clever makes it even more stupid.