PPP Poster nominations

[Gene Frenkle]

I'll remember that next time I'm about to give money to a homeless person.

 

This reminds me of why I stopped giving to PBS. They lead you to believe that you are contributing to save the programming you like. Maybe it is something non-political like Dr Who. But they take your money and use it to support politically-charged programing like Frontline instead. Your show doesn't stay on if it merely pays for itself, it has to be a cash-cow for things you may not support.

Giving directly to a homeless person would be the most efficient type of charity. Good luck writing it off though!

[Chef Jim]

Giving directly to a homeless person would be the most efficient type of charity. Good luck writing it off though!

 

I don't consider my money going to booze and drugs efficient.

[Gary M]

The first way of course, provided needs are met strictly through charity. Talk about fairies and unicorns...

 

Incidentally, any private charity that you may decide to contribute to has the EXACT same issues.

 

Two things :

 

You fail to trust people, so you take away my choice.

 

I like to have a choice. But you want to legislate it away.

 

[Magox]

Sort of reminds me of a thought I had the other day. I was thinking to myself, how is it that so many young "free thinking" liberated individuals have so much trust in what the government does? Sounds counter intuitive to me.

[Chef Jim]

Sort of reminds me of a thought I had the other day. I was thinking to myself, how is it that so many young "free thinking" liberated individuals have so much trust in what the government does? Sounds counter intuitive to me.

 

You know it really is weird when you think about it. They trust the government but not big business when they're often made up of the same greedy bastards. The only difference is the government has very little accountability.

[IDBillzFan]

I do, however, realize that not everyone is like me and that the world does not begin and end with me. I can't seem to rationalize simply looking out for #1, and that's where my godless morals kick in and we drift apart in our worldviews.

Someone says "I do my very best to look out for myself so no one else has to, and put myself in a position to help others" and you translate that directly to "the world begins and ends with me and I'm only looking out for number one."

 

It's amazing you've managed to remain even remotely functional for this long. You stand in judgement of others by misrepresenting their views as chest-thumping egomania while simultaneously standing up and thumping your chest in an egomaniacal way to let everyone know that you're better than others whose views your either misrepresent or can't understand.

[3rdnlng]

Blow me. I work hard, am very good at my job and have a solid career with a bright future. I've never taken unemployment, even when I was briefly unemployed in 2001. I do, however, realize that not everyone is like me and that the world does not begin and end with me. I can't seem to rationalize simply looking out for #1, and that's where my godless morals kick in and we drift apart in our worldviews.

 

Still looking for freebies? You are the definition of assmudgeonry. Twist my words all you want, but it won't change the fact that your superior view of yourself doesn't seem to be shared by anyone here, other than the few other people that strangely enough hold the same view of themselves.

[Gene Frenkle]

Someone says "I do my very best to look out for myself so no one else has to, and put myself in a position to help others" and you translate that directly to "the world begins and ends with me and I'm only looking out for number one."

I'm just lending my opinion like everyone else. It just happens to be a strong opinion that you don't like. Answer the question...if looking out for yourself and putting yourself in a position to help other is enough, why are we having this conversation?

 

It's amazing you've managed to remain even remotely functional for this long. You stand in judgement of others by misrepresenting their views as chest-thumping egomania while simultaneously standing up and thumping your chest in an egomaniacal way to let everyone know that you're better than others whose views your either misrepresent or can't understand.

You could apply that to just about any ideology you may find being defended or attacked on PPP. Your perception of my argument or tactics is only a reflection of your own worldview. You'll see plenty more myopic chest thumping throughout this thread which you failed to comment on because you happen to agree with it.

[Gene Frenkle]

Still looking for freebies?

I'm sure I've come to the right place...

[OCinBuffalo]

This is an interesting thread because it comes close to the heart of one of the main issues that are currently dividing us. In my view, this is largely due to either innocent misunderstanding, or willful misrepresentation, of the views/facts. Fundamentally, it comes down to caring vs. thinking. If I question your thinking, it doesn't mean I am questioning your caring. Conversely, my questioning of your thinking doesn't mean I care any less than you do.

One thing's for sure, we need a larger selection of lefties here. The current crop here continually supports that the liberal left are out of their mind in a "I need professional help" kind of way. Somewhere there must be some liberals that are capable of making a reasonable defense of their ideology and engaging in sound debate of their position.

I don't think most leftists are out of their minds. Rather, I think that they have been conditioned by their leaders to think that traditional American values are morally bankrupt and dangerous. Therefore, they respond emotionally, not rationally, and in doing so, open themselves up to all of the attacks, based on reason, and not emotion, that we see here. They think they are morally superior to others for no other reason than they define themselves as liberals. We look at that and say: it's not what you say or how you define yourself, but what you do and the results you get, that count.

 

They interpret that, wrongly, as us saying we don't care. We do care. We just don't see how their thinking solves the problem, and in most cases, we see their thinking as causing more problems than it solves.

Holy shite. I'm no bleeding heart liberal, though I certainly lean to the left.

 

The thing about Republicans is that they're selfish. You can't adopt that kind of mentality without being completely self-centered and having an utter lack of empathy toward the plight of less fortunate people. Every man for himself. That said, neither extreme is very appealing. One shouldn't strive to rely on others if they are able to take care of themselves. At the same time, these self-proclaimed Christians should be the last people to turn their backs on their fellow man.

 

In the end, it's the utter hypocrisy and backward-thinking of the Republican party that really tips the scales for me.

Exactly what I am talking about above. In a word: this is Projection. Gene has no idea what Republicans are thinking or their real views on how to help people. Instead, he projects his thoughts onto someone else without consciously asking them a thing. This is the easy way out. It's much easier to convince yourself you know what others are thinking, rather than going through the difficulty and uncertainty of actually asking them.

Really? The people making most of the money are giving more to charity than those struggling to make ends meet? That's amazing. Of course, what you're really talking about are tax write-offs. If guilt-driven charity is enough, why are we even having this conversation?

This illustrates another caring vs. thinking issue. Any of us that have given anything substantial to charity know: we do it because we are helping others, that we care about our fellow man, etc. Our thinking is: we hope that it will do some good....the only time we start thinking about the tax write off is...the last few days! The rest of the year, we give to charity because we care, the thinking that it helps the bottom line is a distant second.

 

Gene has this relationship reversed, and, is once again projecting. Of course there are exceptions. Corporate "charity" work is often times a marketing ploy and many times the extremely wealthy do charity work as a way to justify their existence. But still, that is the distant second = thinking. Whenever I have been involved in "forced Corporate giving", even though it feels like a put-up job, I still always end up focusing on the good that it will do first...because I care.

 

I never remember feeling any guilt about any of it. So, I guess we can chalk that one up to projection as well.

Blow me. I work hard, am very good at my job and have a solid career with a bright future. I've never taken unemployment, even when I was briefly unemployed in 2001. I do, however, realize that not everyone is like me and that the world does not begin and end with me. I can't seem to rationalize simply looking out for #1, and that's where my godless morals kick in and we drift apart in our worldviews.

As I said above, it appears that currently, most liberals consider themselves to be morally superior to everyone else. The problem is: nobody buys it. Not to mention that it's highly offensive to those of us who have dedicated our lives to making things better, even at great personal/financial/professional cost. The last thing we are thinking about is screwing other people to get ahead, or worse, ignoring other people and focusing on ourselves.

 

And, again, this is another example Gene's confusing caring with thinking. We care about taking care of ourselves, first, as a moral responsibility, and something that we should take pride in...because we care about ourselves in terms of having self-respect. Our thinking is therefore: everybody has the same moral responsibility, and anything that leads people away from that is a bad idea, and bad for them personally. Quote:

 

Self-control is the chief element in self-respect, and self-respect is the chief element in courage. - Thucydides

 

And, we can't understand how anybody wouldn't want the same = the courage to start a business, the courage to take a risk at work and get a promotion, etc. We want to start with: take care of yourself if you can, if not, then we will help you out. Not, "we feel guilty because we have money we didn't earn, or we got illicitly, so, you are entitled to take some of our money because you don't have any". That is simply bad thinking, and has no bearing on whether we care about others or not.

[DC Tom]

Two things :

 

You fail to trust people, so you take away my choice.

 

I like to have a choice. But you want to legislate it away.

 

 

Individual choice is selfish. You should be generous, and give your right to choose up to the government, so they can evenly distribute it.

 

 

Sort of reminds me of a thought I had the other day. I was thinking to myself, how is it that so many young "free thinking" liberated individuals have so much trust in what the government does? Sounds counter intuitive to me.

 

Independent thinking is selfish. You should be generous, and give up your right to independent opinions to the government, so they can evenly distribute opinions.

[Gene Frenkle]

This is an interesting thread because it comes close to the heart of one of the main issues that are currently dividing us. In my view, this is largely due to either innocent misunderstanding, or willful misrepresentation, of the views/facts. Fundamentally, it comes down to caring vs. thinking. If I question your thinking, it doesn't mean I am questioning your caring. Conversely, my questioning of your thinking doesn't mean I care any less than you do.

 

...

You're posts are too long, bud. I might read and respond when I have more time to kill, but surely your point(s) could be boiled down a bit and still remain effective. I'm not trying to be a dick, I just think that most people probably breeze over long-winded posts like I do.

[OCinBuffalo]

You're posts are too long, bud. I might read and respond when I have more time to kill, but surely your point(s) could be boiled down a bit and still remain effective. I'm not trying to be a dick, I just think that most people probably breeze over long-winded posts like I do.

I doubt you could respond effectively to any of it. Short enough for you?

[3rdnlng]

This is an interesting thread because it comes close to the heart of one of the main issues that are currently dividing us. In my view, this is largely due to either innocent misunderstanding, or willful misrepresentation, of the views/facts. Fundamentally, it comes down to caring vs. thinking. If I question your thinking, it doesn't mean I am questioning your caring. Conversely, my questioning of your thinking doesn't mean I care any less than you do.

 

I don't think most leftists are out of their minds. Rather, I think that they have been conditioned by their leaders to think that traditional American values are morally bankrupt and dangerous. Therefore, they respond emotionally, not rationally, and in doing so, open themselves up to all of the attacks, based on reason, and not emotion, that we see here. They think they are morally superior to others for no other reason than they define themselves as liberals. We look at that and say: it's not what you say or how you define yourself, but what you do and the results you get, that count.

 

They interpret that, wrongly, as us saying we don't care. We do care. We just don't see how their thinking solves the problem, and in most cases, we see their thinking as causing more problems than it solves.

 

Exactly what I am talking about above. In a word: this is Projection. Gene has no idea what Republicans are thinking or their real views on how to help people. Instead, he projects his thoughts onto someone else without consciously asking them a thing. This is the easy way out. It's much easier to convince yourself you know what others are thinking, rather than going through the difficulty and uncertainty of actually asking them.

 

This illustrates another caring vs. thinking issue. Any of us that have given anything substantial to charity know: we do it because we are helping others, that we care about our fellow man, etc. Our thinking is: we hope that it will do some good....the only time we start thinking about the tax write off is...the last few days! The rest of the year, we give to charity because we care, the thinking that it helps the bottom line is a distant second.

 

Gene has this relationship reversed, and, is once again projecting. Of course there are exceptions. Corporate "charity" work is often times a marketing ploy and many times the extremely wealthy do charity work as a way to justify their existence. But still, that is the distant second = thinking. Whenever I have been involved in "forced Corporate giving", even though it feels like a put-up job, I still always end up focusing on the good that it will do first...because I care.

 

I never remember feeling any guilt about any of it. So, I guess we can chalk that one up to projection as well.

 

As I said above, it appears that currently, most liberals consider themselves to be morally superior to everyone else. The problem is: nobody buys it. Not to mention that it's highly offensive to those of us who have dedicated our lives to making things better, even at great personal/financial/professional cost. The last thing we are thinking about is screwing other people to get ahead, or worse, ignoring other people and focusing on ourselves.

 

And, again, this is another example Gene's confusing caring with thinking. We care about taking care of ourselves, first, as a moral responsibility, and something that we should take pride in...because we care about ourselves in terms of having self-respect. Our thinking is therefore: everybody has the same moral responsibility, and anything that leads people away from that is a bad idea, and bad for them personally. Quote:

 

Self-control is the chief element in self-respect, and self-respect is the chief element in courage. - Thucydides

 

And, we can't understand how anybody wouldn't want the same = the courage to start a business, the courage to take a risk at work and get a promotion, etc. We want to start with: take care of yourself if you can, if not, then we will help you out. Not, "we feel guilty because we have money we didn't earn, or we got illicitly, so, you are entitled to take some of our money because you don't have any". That is simply bad thinking, and has no bearing on whether we care about others or not.

 

 

Please do not put so much clear thinking into your posts. Your eloquence and reasoning makes it too difficult to refute.

[DC Tom]

You're posts are too long, bud. I might read and respond when I have more time to kill, but surely your point(s) could be boiled down a bit and still remain effective. I'm not trying to be a dick, I just think that most people probably breeze over long-winded posts like I do.

 

Oh, sure...something with substance is "too long to read". But post "you're an idiot", and everyone gets all "You never post anything of substance, all you do call people idiots".

 

There's no winning with people here.

[IDBillzFan]

You could apply that to just about any ideology you may find being defended or attacked on PPP. Your perception of my argument or tactics is only a reflection of your own worldview. You'll see plenty more myopic chest thumping throughout this thread which you failed to comment on because you happen to agree with it.

The issue is not whether I agree with what you call "myopic chest thumping," but rather that I understand what some of these people are saying and you, simply, choose not to. You refuse to understand it because you need to roll it up and shove it in a neat little liberal box that fits your ideology so you can pretend you're addressing it when all you're really doing is taking the lazy way out by criticizing it. The simple fact that you believe conservatives who contribute to charity only do so because of guilt and tax-breaks is more than enough evidence of this truth. You see what you're told to see, and criticize it based on how you see it because to take the time to understand and respect it might mean you'd have to think for yourself...and we can't have that, can we?

 

I look forward to the day when people can stop trying to twist logic and just address it with their own logic. This is especially the liberal way now, though they surely aren't alone. Why bother to try and understand something when it's so much easier to twist it into a shape that is easy for you to criticize.

 

As I said before, this is the one thing I truly love about libs having all the power right now: they are completely FUBAR'ing any chance of getting into full power again for years upon years. It is quickly becoming an embarrassing failure that is, in fact, the one "historic" thing it is doing.

[3rdnlng]

The issue is not whether I agree with what you call "myopic chest thumping," but rather that I understand what some of these people are saying and you, simply, choose not to. You refuse to understand it because you need to roll it up and shove it in a neat little liberal box that fits your ideology so you can pretend you're addressing it when all you're really doing is taking the lazy way out by criticizing it. The simple fact that you believe conservatives who contribute to charity only do so because of guilt and tax-breaks is more than enough evidence of this truth. You see what you're told to see, and criticize it based on how you see it because to take the time to understand and respect it might mean you'd have to think for yourself...and we can't have that, can we?

 

I look forward to the day when people can stop trying to twist logic and just address it with their own logic. This is especially the liberal way now, though they surely aren't alone. Why bother to try and understand something when it's so much easier to twist it into a shape that is easy for you to criticize.

 

As I said before, this is the one thing I truly love about libs having all the power right now: they are completely FUBAR'ing any chance of getting into full power again for years upon years. It is quickly becoming an embarrassing failure that is, in fact, the one "historic" thing it is doing.

 

 

But, but your posts are too long for me to read.

[Gene Frenkle]

Hmmm....maybe it's something to do with OC's writing style. I can usually get through most of LABills posts without suddenly feeling the need to be doing something else.

[Gene Frenkle]

Oh, sure...something with substance is "too long to read". But post "you're an idiot", and everyone gets all "You never post anything of substance, all you do call people idiots".

 

There's no winning with people here.

Do you usually read all of his posts in their entirety? It's could be ADD or something.

[OCinBuffalo]

As I said before, this is the one thing I truly love about libs having all the power right now: they are completely FUBAR'ing any chance of getting into full power again for years upon years. It is quickly becoming an embarrassing failure that is, in fact, the one "historic" thing it is doing.

The fun part is: they think that doing even more FUBAR'ing is going to turn things around, instead of merely making it worse for themselves. The hysterical part is: while they are doubling down they will also self-congratulating themselves for being "courageous"....which feels good....which means there is almost certainly going to be even more doubling down.

 

It's an idiot's vicious cycle really. They are doing more damage to themselves than billions in soft money ads could ever do. I figure another year or so of this nonsense, and no one will trust the left...for at least another 30 years anyway, since it's been about that long since Jimmy Carter.