Hollywood, You’re absolutely nuts if you thought that’s what I wanted to do. It absolutely IS a matter of proportion, but it seems as if you’re the guy that doesn’t understand the concept. Your home is also just stuff and is insured anyway, yet you’ll shoot someone between the eyes if they try to take it. What happened to life being more valuable and proportional responses?
You believe you have a right to defend your life and property – so do I. Is your income not your property? Apparently you make a distinction between defending that which you bought with your income (your home) and your income. Apparently you believe that as long as I haven’t spent it yet, then I have no right to defend it; its fine for government to take it and spend it foolishly. That I find this unfair is too bad, I should just accept it. I did not sign up to pay for the invasion of Iraq, I opposed it. Yes, government has been spending my money ‘any fucking way it pleases’ and I’ve been fighting that my whole life. Who the hell is pretending government was just invented. It’s been going down the wrong path for a long time and I’ve been doing what I can to get it back on what I believe to be the right track; nothing new there. What is new is the pace at which it is trying to grow and control my life by spending more and more of my money on things I disagree with. You know what Hollywood, don’t bother responding. You’re arrogance is beginning to wear thin on me. You’ve got all the fucking answers. You’ll spout your opinions all day long but hell hath no fury equal to your reaction when someone has a different opinion. Then we’re all just stupid, living under a rock and unaware of the obvious. Your patronizing style got old a long time ago. If you’re fine with paying for your neighbor’s cars then have fun. I hope they at least allow you to pick the color. And bull shit. I never told you where to draw the line. I asked you where you draw it. What the fuck is the matter with you. Are you incapable of civilized discussion? On Aug 5, 12:14 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > frankg, > > You are absolutely nuts if you think I'm going to sit here all day and > discuss what is fair or not, what is stealing and what is not. If > that is NOT the point then don't ask me what I'd do if the govt. came > to steal my house. You do not seem to understand the concept of > proportion, or balance or even the common sense of choosing one fights > carefully. > It's like this, I believe I have a right to defend my life and > property. Ok? Regarding proportional response, am I going to kill a > person if he comes into my home and steals my microwave and TV? NO, > that's just stuff and is insured anyway, a human life is more > valuable. If that same person approaches me with a weapon during the > very same incident? Yep, going to blow his head off with my Mossberg. > I value MY life more than His. proportional response. > Where did you sign up to pay for the invasion of Iraq? Do you not > understand the govt. is pretty much going to spend your money any > fucking way it pleases and that it has pretty much always been that > way? What is it with you people wanting to pretend the Federal Govt. > and all it's faults was just invented 6 months ago? Are you all crazy? > > I'll draw MY line where I need to, you draws yours as you see fit. > Don't tell me where to draw MY line. > > On Aug 5, 10:27 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hell yeah, and you know... I'm going to be by your side supporting and > > cheering you on the entire way. > > > But isn't that the point; the idea of 'stealing' from you that which > > is yours so that it can be given to others without your approval is > > UNacceptable and you will defend it. Sometimes we just can't follow > > our Dad's advice about acceptance. > > > So why do you feel it's acceptable to defend your property (your home) > > from being unfairly taken yet I must accept my property (my income) > > being taken unfairly? Where are you drawing the line? You can make a > > case I have a moral obligation to pay taxes that will help the needy > > with food, housing and health care, and I can accept that. But where > > did I ever sign up to start bailing out companies that can't run > > competitively? Where did I ever sign up to start helping my neighbors > > buy new cars? In my opinion our Government has crossed WAY over the > > line and I am no longer willing to simply accept it as unfair. > > > On Aug 5, 10:30 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > frankg, > > > > Any city, state or federal govt. employee that shows up to take my > > > home from me without due cause is going to get shot right between the > > > eyes. > > > > Now, is THAT direct and simple enough for you to understand? > > > > On Aug 5, 12:31 am, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I have no idea but then, that's not what I said. > > > > > The point I made was; > > > > > Government reaches into my pocket to help buy itself a majority shares > > > > in GM. I don't benefit from this and I'm sure you'd say "life isn't > > > > fair" > > > > Government reaches into my pocket to help hand out up to $4500 to > > > > people who own 'clunkers'. I don't benefit from this and have to pay > > > > full price for a car. You say "life isn't fair" > > > > Government reaches into my pocket to help hand out TAP money to > > > > college students. My daughter doesn't qualify and have to pay her full > > > > tuition out of pocket. I'm sure you'd say "life isn't fair". (this > > > > was a new point, I was on a roll). > > > > > So I throw at you an admittedly inflated but definitely consistent > > > > with the theme scenario; > > > > > Government steps in and takes away your home to help fund low income > > > > housing. You don't qualify so must pay full price for a new home. I > > > > say "life isn't fair". > > > > > Do you agree that it's all just a matter of life being unfair or would > > > > you feel compelled to rise up and stop what government was doing? > > > > > On Aug 4, 11:37 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Frankg, > > > > > > Who's having cars taken away from them by the govt.? > > > > > > On Aug 4, 5:58 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hollywood, > > > > > > > I too learned that lesson at an early age, but there are limits to > > > > > > my > > > > > > acceptance. I'm willing to bet that if the government decided they > > > > > > were going to step in and take away your home you would not simply > > > > > > stand by and think "damn, this is rather unfair.... but OK". > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 6:30 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > frankg.. > > > > > > > My late father once told me that life is not always fair. i was > > > > > > > simply > > > > > > > crushed by that notion. Of course i was only six years old at the > > > > > > > time. At age 60 I've learned a level of acceptance. I'd like to > > > > > > > suggest you do the same. > > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 5:26 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hollywood, > > > > > > > > > So the buyer who trades in a 'clunker' wins; the auto dealers > > > > > > > > get more > > > > > > > > business and win; car manufacturers and their employees win; > > > > > > > > the auto > > > > > > > > suppliers and their employee win; everybody wins….. except me. > > > > > > > > > I don't have a clunker that qualifies, so as usual, I qualify > > > > > > > > to pay > > > > > > > > for a government program, but I don't qualify to receive from > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > I'm also thinking there's something fundamentally wrong when the > > > > > > > > government assumes majority control of a company via my tax > > > > > > > > dollars, > > > > > > > > and then drives that company's sales up by giving more of my tax > > > > > > > > dollars to others so they can purchase products from the > > > > > > > > company the > > > > > > > > government just 'bought'. > > > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 4:01 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > dick, > > > > > > > > > > What happens when car dealers can sell more cars than they > > > > > > > > > would have > > > > > > > > > w/o the "clunker" program? They keep their doors open and move > > > > > > > > > inventory. > > > > > > > > > What happens when car dealers move more inventory? Maybe car > > > > > > > > > manufacturers can stay open and/or nit have to lay off people. > > > > > > > > > What happens when car manufacturers stay open and/or keep up > > > > > > > > > production? The thousands of companies that supply these car > > > > > > > > > manufacturers mabybe stay open and/or don't have to lay off > > > > > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > people. > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 1:55 pm, dick thompson <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > What can be parted out? They put sodium silicate in the > > > > > > > > > > block which > > > > > > > > > > destroys the mechanicals totally. You might get some body > > > > > > > > > > parts but no > > > > > > > > > > engine parts. The answer is the US taxpayer takes it in > > > > > > > > > > the ass on both > > > > > > > > > > sides of the deal at once. Aren't you glad the vote last > > > > > > > > > > fall went the > > > > > > > > > > way it did. The country is in the best of hands, so they > > > > > > > > > > say. > > > > > > > > > > > Mark wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Will the government owned(?) gas guzzlers that are traded > > > > > > > > > > > in actually > > > > > > > > > > > be crushed or will they be sold out of country at a > > > > > > > > > > > profit ?? > > > > > > > > > > > > If they are crushed who gets the salvage money, if they > > > > > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > partsed out who gets the dough, if they are sold who > > > > > > > > > > > gets that > > > > > > > > > > > money... or does the US taxpayer simply take it in the > > > > > > > > > > > ass on both > > > > > > > > > > > sides of the deal once again. > > > > > > > > > > > > Any of the three represents substantial cash. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Sage2 > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Doc, > > > > > > > > > > > > You and VT should take the advice of Senator > > > > > > > > > > > Schumer ( D-NY ) > > > > > > > > > > > who said of the cash for clunkers program " don't fix > > > > > > > > > > > what ain't broke > > > > > > > > > > > " . Health Care ain't broken , it just needs a little > > > > > > > > > > > adjustment, but > > > > > > > > > > > guys like Obama and his ilk want to crush it ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************** > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 4, 1:00 pm, DOC828NDF <[email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm.... I would love to agree with you, but the > > > > > > > > > > > Republicans may be > > > > > > > > > > > > onto something when they say "what's the rush"... I > > > > > > > > > > > mean, for > > > > > > > > > > > > example... What if we were to rush into a war > > > > > > > > > > > without thinking it > > > > > > > > > > > > through? No diplomacy, and no planning... What if > > > > > > > > > > > something goes > > > > > > > > > > > wrong > > > > > > > > > > > > and its not as easy as we initially thought? Do we > > > > > > > > > > > really have aan > > > > > > > > > > > > exit strategy? We need to take some time to think > > > > > > > > > > > this thing > > > > > > > > > > > through. > > > > > > > > > > > > After all, its not like anyone's dying for > > > > > > > > > > > healthcare > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 3, 3:58 pm, VT Sean Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Health Care Reform is NEEDED NOW! > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Republican party is becoming the party of > > > > > > > > > > > hatred and the > > > > > > > > > > > > > destruction of the American dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sean Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > August 3, 2009 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1) Minimal basic coverage for the unemployed and > > > > > > > > > > > uninsured. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2) > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
