What a bitch...

He loves Obama and wants the government to do everything for him.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yup, i admire Obama. No apologies. Simply put, the difference between my admiration for him and your hatred for him, at least as it relates to what's going on here, is that if you, IB Hankering, Whirlaway, Dali Lama, Joe Bloe and JD Barleycorn et al. were to all leave, I (and, i suspect, WTF, CJ7, Randy4Candy, BigLouie, and the rest of us) would all disappear. The reverse isn't true; if we were all to leave, you'd all still be here spouting your nonsense.

You're here because you want to spout your hatred of Obama. We're here because we want to spout our hatred for your stupidity.

I'll leave it to the readers to figure out which side has Obama Derangement Syndrome.

I have an anecdotal story about a friend and their retarded son and how they are preparing for his care after they are gone. I am sure he will have to rely on some assistance but at least will not be a ward of the State. Originally Posted by The2Dogs

Good on them.

It is a shame that more people do not take responsibility for themselves and theri family.

It's also a shame that people like you don't seem to care about the people who either don't have the capabilities of taking care of themselves at any given moment in time, or DON'T HAVE ANYONE WILLING OR ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM.

Not sure what aspect of the part in bold you're not getting.

Yup, i admire Obama. No apologies. Simply put, the difference between my admiration for him and your hatred for him, at least as it relates to what's going on here, is that if you, IB Hankering, Whirlaway, Dali Lama, Joe Bloe and JD Barleycorn et al. were to all leave, I (and, i suspect, WTF, CJ7, Randy4Candy, BigLouie, and the rest of us) would all disappear. The reverse isn't true; if we were all to leave, you'd all still be here spouting your nonsense.

You're here because you want to spout your hatred of Obama. We're here because we want to spout our hatred for your stupidity.

I'll leave it to the readers to figure out which side has Obama Derangement Syndrome.



Good on them.



It's also a shame that people like you don't seem to care about the people who either don't have the capabilities of taking care of themselves at any given moment in time, or DON'T HAVE ANYONE WILLING OR ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM.

Not sure what aspect of the part in bold you're not getting. Originally Posted by Doove

Douchee, Thanks for your opinion. We do care about the helpless. We will help them. We have helped them more than a crybaby bitch like you. It's the clueless that pisses us off. We know who they are and you can't figure it out so FUCK YOU.

I say good bye to "Douchee" every morning when i flush the toilet.

Yup, i admire Obama. No apologies. Simply put, the difference between my admiration for him and your hatred for him, at least as it relates to what's going on here, is that if you, IB Hankering, Whirlaway, Dali Lama, Joe Bloe and JD Barleycorn et al. were to all leave, I (and, i suspect, WTF, CJ7, Randy4Candy, BigLouie, and the rest of us) would all disappear. The reverse isn't true; if we were all to leave, you'd all still be here spouting your nonsense. Originally Posted by Doove

Actually, the reverse might be more true since your memory is obviously very faulty, or you are lying again. Doofus (17 April 2010 http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=243636&postcoun t=17), WTF, Randy4Candy, CharlesTudor, SA_Fartman, TTH, Mazomaniac, were all present and accounted for in Diamonds and Tuxedos on November 12, 2010. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=119187&page=7

Doofus, if you believed in something other than your savior Obama maybe you would have somebody to help you out other than the government.

Doofe wants the less fortunate cared for, he just wants others to do it. That's the way liberals are. He can't help it. This way, he can sit back, and watch the government do the things he should be doing, and thank God he's an American.

If Obama were not there we would still have Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Rangel, Boxer, Hillary and so many others that are just blowing through our money.

Doofe wants the less fortunate cared for, he just wants others to do it. That's the way liberals are. He can't help it. This way, he can sit back, and watch the government do the things he should be doing, and thank God he's an American.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Yup, only we liberals are immune to the effects of paying taxes.

Actually, the reverse might be more true since your memory is obviously very faulty, or you are lying again. Doofus (17 April 2010 http://www.eccie.net/showpost.php?p=243636&postcoun t=17), WTF, Randy4Candy, CharlesTudor, SA_Fartman, TTH, Mazomaniac, were all present and accounted for in Diamonds and Tuxedos on November 12, 2010. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=119187&page=7 Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You don't grasp points very well.

There and here, 95% of the Obama threads start out as anti-Obama comments. Nobody is on here pushing 8000 posts by filling up their day starting Pro-Obama threads.

Hell, even some people who would prefer someone better than Obama think most of the anti-Obama posters are full of crap. That should tell ya something. But being you, i'm sure it's all lost on you.

Jeez guys relax...you arguing over bs....realize this whatever you believe you are to blinded to see the other sides pov. We have all been lied too, the left pays to much, the right dont want to help enough, when the truth is no matter Who is in the office our society will be the same...Poor middle class and rich. The right hate obamacare because they are hell bent on not agreeing with him and making him a demon, the left are pridful and dont want to see it flaws. But remember romney already passed a similar law. The right says we dont want to pay for it. But we. Already pay for medicare

No, I see their point of view, you need to be able to see it in order to know their weaknesses. I does not mean that you have to believe that their point of view is what is best. Notice I do not say right as it is their point of view and that is right to them even if it is not the best thing to believe.

Two different purposes,.
One is to get them to not only see your point of view but to hope they will understand it without the cloud of their own bias.
Second, but not that important is the debate itself. In this arena there are no judges that are unbiased to make the determination of who won or lost the debate.

The reality is that because of conditioning of the people to rely on the government and the taxpayer supplied safety net, more and more people are choosing the safety net rather than using the resources that are out there via friends, family, churches and so on. Some is because of circumstances beyond theri control but much is the result of poor chices in life and the failure to prepare for the times of need.
We have become a society of instant gratification and not only will spend every cent we make but places ourselves in enourmous debt to gratify ourselves in the short term causing us to not be prepared long term. I am speaking mainly of personal responsibility but thae lack of personal responsibility permeates through the government.
The counter to that argument is that there are instances of the cost of things beyond their control that put them in debt and I say they are not so many as to be the greatest of the problem.
Of coursethe system is set against us being able to succeed. We are constantly bombarded with advertisng that tells us to buy now prices willnever be ower and how much you can save by spending money and how much cooler you will be if you buy this porduct. Ths conditions the mind of most people to gratify themselves as quickly as possible htus not being able to wait till they have saved the money to buy the new car and instead pay interest on the loan resulting in an expenditure that span 7 years of their lives and cost then a considerable amount more. Same as with a house and the idea of the dream house and the 30 year mortage and how you should buy as much house as you can qualify for nver thinking you will spend three times what the house cost. All of this money that could be set aside and work to increase your wealth and ehlp in those bad times and when you reach retirement age.
In the larger sense, most people fail to understand that when you spend more than you have and borrow to make up the difference that you are creating your own inflationary spiral automatically raising the price of the goods and services without raising the value of them. In the sense of the government spending more than you have and borrowing it even at a ow interest rate is just a piece of paper that allows the government to print more money diluting the value of the money. This in turn makes what you need cost more and thus creates real inflation.\In the end people become reliant on the government to bail them out of not only their poor choices but the situation caused by the government.

So is the solution to stop the government from creating a worse situation for the individual and thus the whole nation or to have people understand that they are a cause of the problem. Are we in fact making it better by making it easier to allow the government to make our choices for us? Who will provide for the government when the government is providing for all of us.

When under the pretext of fraternity, the legal code imposes mutual sacrifices on the citizens [taxes], human nature is not thereby abrogated. Everyone will then direct his efforts toward contributing little to, and taking much from, the common fund of sacrifices. Now, is it the most unfortunate who gains from this struggle? Certainly not, but rather the most influential and calculating. - Frédéric Bastiat

We've proven that to be true.

You don't grasp points very well.

There and here, 95% of the Obama threads start out as anti-Obama comments. Nobody is on here pushing 8000 posts by filling up their day starting Pro-Obama threads.

Hell, even some people who would prefer someone better than Obama think most of the anti-Obama posters are full of crap. That should tell ya something. But being you, i'm sure it's all lost on you. Originally Posted by Doove

Here's two points you do not grasp very well: 1) Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice -- not adultery. 2) Odumbo voted for an Illinois bill that would allow abortionists to commit infanticide in instances when the fetus survived an attempted abortion. That's why you come to this forum. You recognize your intellectual inadequacy, and you come here to receive instruction. Therefore, expect to get your knuckles rapped every time you post bogus bullshit.

Yup, i admire Obama. No apologies. Simply put, the difference between my admiration for him and your hatred for him, at least as it relates to what's going on here, is that if you, IB Hankering, Whirlaway, Dali Lama, Joe Bloe and JD Barleycorn et al. were to all leave, I (and, i suspect, WTF, CJ7, Randy4Candy, BigLouie, and the rest of us) would all disappear. The reverse isn't true; if we were all to leave, you'd all still be here spouting your nonsense.

You're here because you want to spout your hatred of Obama. We're here because we want to spout our hatred for your stupidity.

I'll leave it to the readers to figure out which side has Obama Derangement Syndrome.



Good on them.



It's also a shame that people like you don't seem to care about the people who either don't have the capabilities of taking care of themselves at any given moment in time, or DON'T HAVE ANYONE WILLING OR ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THEM.

Not sure what aspect of the part in bold you're not getting. Originally Posted by Doove

Fucking aye.

Yup, only we liberals are immune to the effects of paying taxes.



You don't grasp points very well.

There and here, 95% of the Obama threads start out as anti-Obama comments. Nobody is on here pushing 8000 posts by filling up their day starting Pro-Obama threads.

Hell, even some people who would prefer someone better than Obama think most of the anti-Obama posters are full of crap. That should tell ya something. But being you, i'm sure it's all lost on you. Originally Posted by Doove

Fucking Bee.

Here's two points you do not grasp very well: 1) Clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice -- not adultery. 2) Odumbo voted for an Illinois bill that would allow abortionists to commit infanticide in instances when the fetus survived an attempted abortion. That's why you come to this forum. You recognize your intellectual inadequacy, and you come here to receive instruction. Therefore, expect to get your knuckles rapped every time you post bogus bullshit. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

First, what the fuck do either of your statements have to do with catching a ball or you being a lying, hating psychotic sociopath?

Second, your number 2 is completely wrong. Not a little, completely. Day and night, black and white. You said he voted for. He voted against a bill that specified that an infant surviving a planned abortion is "born alive" and "shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law."

Illinois already had a law on its books from 1975 that said if a doctor suspected an abortion was scheduled for a viable fetus — meaning able to survive outside of the mother's body — then the child must receive medical care if it survives the abortion. The new laws didn't distinguish between viable and nonviable, meaning that an infant of any age that survived an abortion should receive care. So you need to look up the definition for infanticide too.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...rality-clause/

Instruction? From the bloody knuckled, intellectually inadequate, subject changing douche bag?

You must be high.

WTF, Randy4Candy, CharlesTudor, SA_Fartman, TTH, Mazomaniac, were all present and accounted for in Diamonds and Tuxedos on November 12, 2010. http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=119187&page=7 Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I was at least dragging some puntang outta that forum!

First, what the fuck do either of your statements have to do with catching a ball or you being a lying, hating psychotic sociopath? This matter was previously discussed -- and your ignorant ass wasn't involved -- and Doofus was proved to be a lying sack of shit. BTW, you are a lying sack of shit also.

Second, your number 2 is completely wrong. Not a little, completely. Day and night, black and white. You said he voted for. He voted against a bill that specified that an infant surviving a planned abortion is "born alive" and "shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law."" You are quite correct: Odumbo OPPOSED a bill that would have PROTECTED the life of any aborted fetus that showed signs of life.

In essence (as inferred above), Odumbo's vote on the Illinois bill ALLOWED abortionists to commit INFANTICIDE in instances when the fetus survived an attempted abortion. Everything else you posted is irrelevant to that fact.

Illinois already had a law on its books from 1975 that said if a doctor suspected an abortion was scheduled for a viable fetus — meaning able to survive outside of the mother's body — then the child must receive medical care if it survives the abortion. The new laws didn't distinguish between viable and nonviable, meaning that an infant of any age that survived an abortion should receive care. So you need to look up the definition for infanticide too.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...rality-clause/

Instruction? From the bloody knuckled, intellectually inadequate, subject changing douche bag?Your retard ass needs to go back to school also.

You must be high. Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

.