The Nanny State Can't Last

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by Vicky32

 

You deserve to be guillotined in an eventual revolution, but you won't be.

You think the " opt " out idea would deem a beheading? Not much for your paycheck are ya? Ron Pauls suggestion to have the " opt " out program is so that members of this society no longer par take in the Unconstitutional Social welfare programs.

Over and over again, social welfare is nothing more than a burden on the tax payer!

My reference was to the French Revolution, something I thought all American rightwingers were 'au fait' with!
I was and am appalled by your "I'm all right, f*** everyone else, they can starve!" Keeping your fellow citizens alive is against the "Karnstytooshun", is it?
The nobles were guillotined by the people who had been literally starving - all I said to him was, that if there was any justice, the people living in boxes under bridges, the single mothers having to choose between prostitution and seeing their babies starve to death before their eyes, the people on minimum wage struggling to feed and house their children on a pittance while he in his gated community, polishes his guns, would rise up against him and St Ron Paul...
But they won't, any more than they will here. What y'all like to call TPTB (the Dagny Taggarts and the John Galts that is!) have been very successful with their divide and rule strategies.. turning the comfortable people such as y'all against the poor, and convincing you that if you attack a poor person, you too will wind up running a Megacorp like Dagny does!
Hence your attack on me. IMO you're brainwashed and you don't even know it!

reply to post by Vicky32

something I thought all American rightwingers were 'au fait' with!

Well theres your first problem, "assuming " you know what party or affiliation a person is rather naive, considering the generalizations behind it.

I was and am appalled by your "I'm all right, f*** everyone else, they can starve!" Keeping your fellow citizens alive is against the "Karnstytooshun", is it?

Its not that those who oppose your view are suggesting " screw " everyone else. Its the Constitutionality of the Social Programs. First they are Unconstitutional , and second, the social welfare programs have been solvent for many decades. Did you know, it is widely known, that the payments that allegedly go to the " social Security fund " isnt really a fund. The money is already spent. Which would further suggest the insolvency of the programs.

The nobles were guillotined by the people who had been literally starving - all I said to him was, that if there was any justice, the people living in boxes under bridges, the single mothers having to choose between prostitution and seeing their babies starve to death before their eyes, the people on minimum wage struggling to feed and house their children on a pittance while he in his gated community, polishes his guns, would rise up against him and St Ron Paul...

By giving " hand outs " to those peoples, you do realize, even Thomas Jefferson once wrote, stating:

Giving unto the fellow man, does nothing to promote self production, nor self worth. Allow are man to build unto which his own. There, prosperity will be gained.

[ not word for word, summarized the above ]

Even the founding fathers knew what social programs/entitlements would do.

Hence your attack on me. IMO you're brainwashed and you don't even know it!

I didn't attack you personally. Just made an observation? And now that we know your opinion, could it be possible that it is YOU whom is brainwashed. Its nothing new, that the liberals would love for people like your self to believe everything they do is for the humanitarian efforts. The only problem is, the liberals have never been champions of small government, nor have they ever pretended to do so.

The founding fathers knew what would happen if government got to big in size.

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government

[ Thomas Jefferson ]

I have pointed out specific articles of the Constitution, and specific references from the founders themselves. Have you anything to provide other than baseless opinions? Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but on a site such as this one, facts or at the very least, viable evidence to support your argument would permit credibility to your arguments. Which in this case, you have none!