Hi fellow taxpayers! My tax forms are done, the checks are written...and I thought I'd gift you with a little info on where your tax money is going! Here's some links to some of my "tax info golden oldies!":
http://justcommonsense-lostinamerica.blogspot.com/2011/04/illegals-on-welfare-and-naive-americans.html
http://justcommonsense-lostinamerica.blogspot.com/2011/02/taxing-not-only-my-patience.html
http://justcommonsense-lostinamerica.blogspot.com/2011/04/i-vote-yes-on-government-shutdown.html
http://justcommonsense-lostinamerica.blogspot.com/2011/04/end-irs-my-argument-for-valued-added.html
http://justcommonsense-lostinamerica.blogspot.com/2011/04/great-news-out-of-washington.html
Hope you all have a great day!
24 comments:
your still flaggin me, deny all u want. who else would have cause. you keep flaggin me here.
yes sir, gravy train has to stop, totally agree, however your fear mongering is not the way to do. so seem to enjoy spoutin off, by repeating the atypical right wing mantra that "it's the dems fault" and that is insane (think Reagan)
this isn't a partisan problem, sorry u don't get that
There you go, Anon! See how easy that was? Quit using the F-bomb every other word...and your comments get posted! Magic, huh?
Obviously Anon never listens to the left. If there is any group that plays upon fear it's the liberal left. How else do you explain all of the Democratic politicians charging the right with attempting to kill old people, starve grandma, not feed school children, prevent women from receiving healthcare, etc?
I, for one, absolutley appreciate everything you post. You do your name justice - "just common sense".
Thanks.
Nice blog. I appreciate the rational perspective you offer.
Thanks Tom and Anon for your kind comments. Visit me again, please.
Did someone say, "playing on fear"?
America's first black President is a secret Muslim.
Who pretends to be a Christian.
And is engaged in a massive coverup to hide the fact he was born in Africa.
[Did I mention his middle name's Hussein?]
I've even heard rumors he has a murky past,
That includes mentoring by communists.
And being palsy walsy with domestic terrorists.
His agenda is to overwhelm the system.
But he couldn't do this by himself.
So who's behind it all?
I mean besides the socialists, feminists, atheists and gays?
...all this makes me more than a little bit uneasy...
Where's Joe McCarthy when you need him?
[Did I mention his middle name's Hussein?]
Steve, you certainly hit the nail on the head; I'm embarrassed by all the "birther" talk. It deflects from the real concerns conservatives have about Obama. I wish both sides would quit playing the extremeist blame game. The Pols know they are playing to the lowest common denominator and I lose respect for anyone who does it.
Liberals have "real concerns" about Obama too... and it's too bad there's not more sober talking coming from both sides about what those concerns are. But appealing to fear and ignorance seems to be a tactic engaged in lopsidededly. No, there is no "gay agenda". No, women don't have children to collect more welfare benefits, or have abortions cavalierly.
Re: lopsided,disagree
abortions; disagree
gay agenda; live and let live
welfare mothers; too many federal bennies has made it too damn easy for women to make "mistakes" and the taxpayer ends up paying for them in welfare, wic, fully funded all day kindergarten, increased crime, food stamps, etc...if you can't feed em, don't breed em.
So you want to outlaw abortion why? To punish women? Because that's sure what it sounds like. Do you really think that women are careless about going through labor and raising a child for two decades because the government "makes it too damn easy"? Do you talk to women? The reason I ask is because, overwhelmingly, the only people spouting that nonsense are men... Now there's a group who WILL breed 'em and WON'T feed 'em.
Saying you want to "live and let live" means you oppose the prohibition against same sex marriage? Or are you just being cagey?
Well, at least we can agree that Obama's birthplace doesn't exclude him from office, that he's not a Muslim and that there's no sinister plot to subvert the Constitution.
I won't continue the debate; all of your arguments represent the same tired old liberal mantra of the "victim" class. Most of America is sick to death of hearing excuses for a failure of simple morality. And yes, I do believe both state and federal government makes it too damn easy for women to breed and have us pay for it. As to Obama, don't read into what I said; I believe he was born in Hawaii...I also believe that he's too damn cozy with miilitant muslims as well as Reverend Wright, Ayres, and other America haters.
JustCommonSense, you earn your name! Keep up the good work! jo (formerly anon 2)
Thanks jo, visit me often...come in and "set a spell".
Why do remove civil posts merely because you disagree with them?
Yesterday, for about four hours my posting was somehow screwed up; don't know if I changed something in error on my settings but it seems to be okay today. I apologize if yours was lost. I only delete a post if it contains vulgarity or hate speech.
That's odd. Because I responded to your post about how 'it's too damn easy for women to breed and have us pay for it'. That post was deleted and I wasn't able to re-post it...
Animals "breed", not people. And women don't go through 9 months of pregnancy and the pain of labor, not to mention spend 18 years rearing a child, merely for WIC or food stamps. The very idea's ludicrous. Nor do they have abortions cavalierly.
Your statements perpetuate negative stereotypes about women that don't comport with the truth.
I'll answer you one more time. You are a liberal; you can't help it. It's who you are. Liberals always find an excuse for any time of behavior. As millions of tit suckers have sucked from the public tit for three generations and bred babies who bred babies who bred babies...all with the knowledge that Uncle Sugar will give them a welfare check. You seem to have this fetish for women's labor...hmmm. Liberals, like you, at this moment are the equivalent of the spoiled brat screaming for his lollipop in the grocery aisle because you know in your heart that the taxpayers have had enough and we're gettin ready to stop the gravy train. I refuse to believe that you pay taxes...if you did you too would be disgusted by the waste, fraud and abuse. You can tell me you do on this board but I know damn well you don't. Sorry. Now, you can go into your liberal rant about how stupid we conservatives are, how heartless, blah..blah..blah.
Why characterize my posts as "screaming" and "rants"? The only one here appealing to emotion is you.
I can assure you, I pay many thousands in taxes. The vast majority of which goes to supporting the military and medicaid for the elderly. Only a pittance of that goes to poor--- a group composed primarily of women and children.
But let's assume your premise is correct [that single-Mothers got that way by being promiscuous and forget about the possibility that they may be divorced or widowed]: "Why deny a child food or needed medical care because of the poor choices his Mother made?" Not to mention his father, who's strangely absent from your equation.
You've talked about sexual morality. But I fail to see how your position's a moral one in the broader sense of the word.
Take the trough away and the pigs stop hovering around the trough. Re-"only a pittance for single mothers, welfare, etc..either read the references on costs or do your own..not a pittance...
Regarding medicaid: Millions of anchor babies drawing medicaid, millions more working for cash, not reporting income and gaming every social benefit they can get...but you already know all this..oh boo hoo...what about the babies (yeah, the crack babies and the 12 year olds having kids, etc.. Sigh.....
Why do you insist on equating women with breeding and barnyard animals? And in relation to military expenditures what we spend on aid to single-Mothers IS a pittance.
Being born out of wedlock isn't a recent phenomenon. Hence it's emergence or continuance isn't contingent on government assistance. Women aren't having kids because the government feeds or doctors them. [Any more than they're having abortions because they have nothing better to do on a slow afternoon.] And withholding that support doesn't ameliorate the situation. In fact it contributes to societal costs by significantly increasing incarceration rates further on down the line.
Again, forgetting about morality for a second, how is withholding food or medicine from a child whose Mother is 12, or addicted to crack, a pragmatic decision?
Here he is folks; he's wanting us to adopt him as the "house liberal". He sits, lower lip protruding in pout, protesting against us "meanies". He, like all non-tax paying slugs, sees no connection between the $70 plus trillion dollar Great Society giveaways (New York Times, 1985) as incentive for people to take no reponsibility for taking drugs, having children they can't afford, watching their health since they don't have to pay for healthcare, etc. He cannot see that when "bad behavior" is rewarded it reaps more bad behavior. He doesn't see that it is a "fait accompli" that when society gives these "poor victims" a free ride the "victim" takes it as tacid acknowledgement that it must be morally okay to take drugs, loaf, have babies, etc. He sees no connection between the feds buidling public housing and five years later they become a ghetto because "what you don't earn, you don't value." He sees no connection to how our previous amnesty only encouraged further invasion, especially when they have their "legal" anchor babies and use them to sign up for huge social benefits. Whatever the "victim" does the liberal will have an excuse for them. As working families forego dining out the welfare "victims" are out using their food stamp cards in fast food restaurants. The list goes on and on and on...and poor little liberal is in massive panic mode because he knows the spending orgy is over and the gravy train has come to a screeching halt. All he has left is to bemoan the heartlessness of those who simply have no more to give. And finally, rather than starting his own blog to promote his interests he hangs around here. When he sends me his tax return and proves that he willingly pays taxes to these tit suckers he has no credibility. Most liberals don't. (Read "Who's the Bigger Hypocrite..." and "Liberals are bullies and liars". Sad.
[Hey, if you didn't want people commenting, why did you facilitate it? Solely for the accolades?]
Now do you think--- instead of relying on rhetoric, straw man arguments, and ad hominem attacks ---you could focus on the issue at hand and maybe quit with the deflecting? Or is that how you've grown accustomed to thinking you've won arguments? [I'm ALL for securing our borders and enforcing our immigration laws by the way. The world isn't as neatly divided into sheep and goats as you'd like to pretend it is.]
"How is withholding food or medical care from a child, especially one who starts out life disadvantaged, pragmatic?" It costs far less to feed him now than incarcerate him later.
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity". Women don't have kids to game the system. They have kids because they have unprotected sex. Whether they should or not is immaterial to them. Teach contraception in our schools. Provide early abortion services to pregnant teens. See to it that those children who do come into the world with parents who are ill-equipped get nutrition, medical treatment and a sound education so the situation doesn't repeat itself.
Grandstanding and moralizing, as you are prone to do, doesn't get us anywhere. Except, perhaps, to make you feel better.
See what I mean, folks? I have to address this to the collective "you" because we don't speak the same language nor does the math ever work for a liberal; one and one never equal "two". See my previous post to him. I tried to explain the logic of "cause and effect". His philosophy is "oh, just take care of the "victim"'s problem, we'll worry about cause and effect at another time...this has been going on now since The Great Society programs began. It bred tens of millons of co-dependent "victims" who are free to party hearty and let someone else pay. The "adult" conservative says "stop the reward, you stop bad behavior". The liberal says "oh, but it just feels so good!...let the orgy continue!". Once gain liberal anon...no more lollipops and no more gravy.
If your goal is to reduce the number of abortions, or unwanted infants getting government handouts, then you'd promote contraception education among teens. But getting young people to stop engaging in unprotected sex by threatening not to feed or treat their potential offspring is just blatantly, laughably wrongheaded. Moreover, making their children bear the brunt of their parent's lousy decisions is a sure-fire way to get them to follow in their dysfunctional footsteps.
It should be abundantly clear who's making a cogent argument here and who's taken the discourse to a personal level while relying on a bunch of faulty premises. And arriving at invariably false conclusions.
Post a Comment