Remember when Obama...

[Revoltingest]

Even at the state level, I see absolutely nothing wrong with schools serving healthy foods.

I agree.
No sugary pop....no greasy chips....no chocolate cream sauce on the haggis.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Well, I am sure glad you know who I do or do not like and poor people aren't one of them.
Maybe in your part of the world things were different. I don't know how old you are or where you grew up but I was born in 1942. None of the grade schools I went to provided meals, the high school had a cafeteria but you had to pay for your meals. No children starved, then again things were different back then. We didn't rely on the government to look after us, the community churches were the bedrock of our communities. If there was a struggling family, there were always people there to assist with whatever they could. Maybe that's what we need now, people looking after people vice the government. Of course that couldn't happen now because of all the liberals thinking that only the government can provide. Of course you will say that it only works in small communities, and I say bullcrap, all it takes is people willing to help others vice "let the government" do it.

There are currently 43.1 million Americans living in poverty. How many of them do you provide for, personally?

 

[Grumpuss]

Did you actually read any of these articles as to why the DoJ was investigating Rossen? Did you also notice that Holder recused himself from that investigation?

I don't recall accusing Holden of anything. Just saying that Obama's DOJ surveilled and harassed James Rosen and his family. Are you denying that this happened?

 

[Grumpuss]

I think you might have made a mistake. Where does it say that "Obama's DOJ had reporters and their families threatened. For doing their jobs."

Can you quote where that is stated? I didn't see it anywhere in any of the articles your provided. Or, did you just make that part up?

It's in there. If you want to pretend the DOJ never did this, then it's a pretty sad world you live in. They followed him and his family. They demanded he reveal sources and methods or else they would have him jailed. What would you call that- "a friendly talk" or something?

 

[leibowde84]

It's in there. If you want to pretend the DOJ never did this, then it's a pretty sad world you live in. They followed him and his family. They demanded he reveal sources and methods or else they would have him jailed. What would you call that- "a friendly talk" or something?

Again, that was not in any of the sources you provided that I saw. Maybe I missed it. So, can you cite where these sources make this claim?

 

[tytlyf]

Of course that couldn't happen now because of all the liberals thinking that only the government can provide.

It's confirmed, you listen to El Rushbo. He said this today. Rush likes to tell his listeners what liberals are and what they think. Rush is always wrong when talking about most things. But his audience doesn't know the difference.

And look, you just repeated what he told you.

All these liberals thinking that only the government can 'provide.' Lmao. I'm sure you have an example since it's 'all' liberals.

 

[Grumpuss]

Again, that was not in any of the sources you provided that I saw. Maybe I missed it. So, can you cite where these sources make this claim?

Sounds like a denial of reality. Sad to see in action.

 

[esmith]

There are currently 43.1 million Americans living in poverty. How many of them do you provide for, personally?

None, you got a problem with that.

 

[esmith]

It's confirmed, you listen to El Rushbo. He said this today. Rush likes to tell his listeners what liberals are and what they think. Rush is always wrong when talking about most things. But his audience doesn't know the difference.

And look, you just repeated what he told you.

All these liberals thinking that only the government can 'provide.' Lmao. I'm sure you have an example since it's 'all' liberals.

You know you could get a life other than watching TV or other media. Ever hear of a library?

 

[Wirey]

Well, I am sure glad you know who I do or do not like and poor people aren't one of them.
Maybe in your part of the world things were different. I don't know how old you are or where you grew up but I was born in 1942. None of the grade schools I went to provided meals, the high school had a cafeteria but you had to pay for your meals. No children starved, then again things were different back then. We didn't rely on the government to look after us, the community churches were the bedrock of our communities. If there was a struggling family, there were always people there to assist with whatever they could. Maybe that's what we need now, people looking after people vice the government. Of course that couldn't happen now because of all the liberals thinking that only the government can provide. Of course you will say that it only works in small communities, and I say bullcrap, all it takes is people willing to help others vice "let the government" do it.

Yes, the good old days. Are you serious? You are of course aware that child malnutrition rates were much, much worse back then because of the lack of government interference, right? Modern programs like school lunches, and the governmental creation of departments that look after health and hygiene have greatly improved the quality of life for poor people. You say "We got together and fed each other", which is of course bullpucky. People are people and you looked after your own while the poor kids starved. How many meals did that church of yours give to poor black kids? Or Catholics? You know, poor people in your neighbourhood?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

None, you got a problem with that.

Just hypocrisy. You're saying it's better for people to help each other than live on government handouts, which is a noble sentiment, but then it turns out that you aren't actually making any effort whatsoever to help anyone personally, so you're just blowing hot air. It's easy to say "We should all be helping each other rather than relying on the government" when you aren't making any effort yourself.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Sounds like a denial of reality. Sad to see in action.

Can you provide a source which says Obama threatened them and their family?

 

[metis]

I don't recall accusing Holden of anything. Just saying that Obama's DOJ surveilled and harassed James Rosen and his family. Are you denying that this happened?

There's a difference between "investigation" and "harassment", and the DoJ does not bow to the president's commands in our long-standing tradition when it comes to such investigations. This is probably why Holder recused himself from the investigation.

Therefore, again, did you actually read the articles you posted that explain why Rossen was being investigated?

 

[metis]

There are currently 43.1 million Americans living in poverty. How many of them do you provide for, personally?

None, you got a problem with that.

You're saying it's better for people to help each other than live on government handouts, which is a noble sentiment, but then it turns out that you aren't actually making any effort whatsoever to help anyone personally, so you're just blowing hot air. It's easy to say "We should all be helping each other rather than relying on the government" when you aren't making any effort yourself.

As we've seen so many times before, many of these self-proclaimed "conservatives" just talk the talk but are unwilling to walk the walk.

We've seen similar reactions with this same element with the issue of health care, whereas so many of these pseudo-conservatives that have health-care themselves, including some being provided us such through federal programs such as Medicare or help from the VA, really don't give a rat's rump for those who may not be so fortunate.

It's the old "Let them eat cake!" approach

 

[esmith]

As far as personally helping the poor by going to each one individually no. I do not have the resources to make a determination of who they are and their actual needs. We, rely on charities like the local food banks and the local Salvation Army, to name just a couple, that we support through our actions. But I guess some of you do not consider that "personally" helping a poor person; That's fine I understand your hostility and ignorance.

 

[metis]

But I guess some of you do not consider that "personally" helping a poor person; That's fine I understand your hostility and ignorance.

Let me recommend that you actually go back and reread what you posted in post #168, which I quoted along with IF's posts in my post #174.

 

[esmith]

Let me recommend that you actually go back and reread what you posted in post #168, which I quoted along with IF's posts in my post #174.

I took offense to what I considered a hostile question and answered in a hostile manner. Sometimes frustrations can cause one to respond with other than facts.

 

[Grumpuss]

There's a difference between "investigation" and "harassment", and the DoJ does not bow to the president's commands in our long-standing tradition when it comes to such investigations. This is probably why Holder recused himself from the investigation.

Therefore, again, did you actually read the articles you posted that explain why Rossen was being investigated?

Yes, the government was hunting for the leak. Rather than look for it there with his own people, Obama's DOJ decided it was okay to offer to throw Rosen in jail, follow him and violate his civil rights.

 

[Stevicus]

As we've seen so many times before, many of these self-proclaimed "conservatives" just talk the talk but are unwilling to walk the walk.

We've seen similar reactions with this same element with the issue of health care, whereas so many of these pseudo-conservatives that have health-care themselves, including some being provided us such through federal programs such as Medicare or help from the VA, really don't give a rat's rump for those who may not be so fortunate.

It's the old "Let them eat cake!" approach

I would never expect conservatives to be all that compassionate or sympathetic to the plight of the poor, but the thing is, if their economic philosophy was worth its salt, then most of these problems wouldn't even exist at all. The whole "trickle down" theory never really worked, but they've also put our national security at risk by favoring outsourcing and globalism.

I don't expect them to have a heart. In fact, I think it's better for politicians that their heads rule over their hearts. But they also have to have brains, too. Yet their thinking is clouded by myopic greed, obsessed more with instant gratification than building a long-term future for America.

 

[Revoltingest]

I would never expect conservatives to be all that compassionate or sympathetic to the plight of the poor, but the thing is, if their economic philosophy was worth its salt, then most of these problems wouldn't even exist at all. The whole "trickle down" theory never really worked, but they've also put our national security at risk by favoring outsourcing and globalism.

I don't expect them to have a heart. In fact, I think it's better for politicians that their heads rule over their hearts. But they also have to have brains, too. Yet their thinking is clouded by myopic greed, obsessed more with instant gratification than building a long-term future for America.

The conservatives I know care as much about the poor as me liberal friends.
But their remedy to poverty differs. The former would make opportunity for
self sufficiency. Liberals would give largesse (with strings attached).
Both methods see some success & failure. The folly among liberals is
that some believe only they care, because only their solution is righteous.