If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    who would you hold your hand out to?

    softy or Ted Cruz?



    I would rather hear Softy read Green Eggs and Ham than Ted Cruz.




     

    Why?  Do you think the major problem with that book is the lack shameless self-righteousness and over-the-top hubris?

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...


    It's not only humorous, but also ironic with all the bashing of congress going on here.  The irony being the lamentations over a House devided by blind ideology, unable to have a reasoned conversation with any prospect of any compromise.  As though there are many involved with this conversation who even consider listening to the other side?  I can't possibly imagine how the House could be at loggerheads?

    This is not brain surgery!  We have a deeply ideological House & Senate, being 'lead from behind' by a deeply ideological president.  Shocker we can't even have a conversation.

    Yes!  The Republicans in the House are a complete embarrassment!  So many wanting nothing more than to throw political red meat to the fringe base of their individual districts.  The Dems are equally distasteful, but they're not my concern!  I can't control how the loons on the left conduct themselves.

    Sorry!  but the ultimate blame for the current situation lands squarely in the president's lap.  From day one in the White House, he laid down his marker telling Republicans to shut up & get in the back seat.  He's done next to nothing, other than window dressing, with respect to bringing both parties to the table for serious talks in dealing with the difficult issues facing this country.  His broader agenda, other than HCL, is relatively speaking non-existent.  These 5 years have been a shocking lack of leadership.  He has 1 year left to lead before the Nov. 2014 mid-term elections, & after that it's Lame Duck time.  I have absolutely no doubt he takes the low road.  Very sad.  If we accept the notion that GWB was one of the worst presidents in modern American politics, Obama is a close second at best.  It's all about his HCL legacy & we hear very little about a real economic agenda.  Yes!  Health Care was a brewing mess well before Obama, but his plan does little to right the ship.  If the rising tide of a good economy lifts all boats, this HCL has at best slammed the breaks on a very sick economy.  What exactly is his grand economic agenda?  Is it to continue putting all our eggs in the green energy basket?  What is his plan?  The Republicans are equally inept!  Zero credible agenda?  Where's the new 21'st Century Republican 12 point plan.  The new "contract with America?"  We are devoid of real leadership!  PATHETIC!

    Where the hell have all the REAL grownups gone in Washington D.C.?/??

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Things are going to worsen for you, me and everyone else.

    Of course it is. With babyboomers about to all get old and sick at once, any system we have would be facing serious issues.



    If you think the status quo would have left you well off, think again and look at the trends before Obama was even running for president. All projections warned of huge healthcare cost increases.

    Again, I am not an Obamacare supporter, but I see it as slightly better than the way it was and would have been had Republicans had their way.



    There were other ways to make changes, crossing state lines to encourage companies to compete was one of them.  I hope I am wrong but I believe we will be worse off because of obamacare.

    Obamacare allows obama to have the big government he wanted.  He will be appointing czars to control our health care.  People we can't vote out of office.  The IRS will have more control over us.  We all know how they operate.

    You have ignored my stats, in their place you state your opinion.  That's fine, you have a right to your opinion but I believe my stats have merit.  

    I believe obamacare gives far too much power to the federal government. I think we will be much worse off because of him and his big government policies.  I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

    Thanks for the civil discussion, it was fun!



    We'll never know if we will have been worse off or not. We very well could end up that way. My point is the American people voted for the guy twice knowing Obamacare was his major agenda item.

    It's a law now, not a bill. Yes, there is a long history of not funding laws that are not popular with the majority of the congress, but it's hard to find many examples where laws were not funded due to just a majority of the majority party in just one chamber. They knew Obama would veto their plan even if it passed, and that has always been the way it works. When that is the siuation, it's time to put your principles on the table and call a vote- not hold it off thinking no vote and a shutdown trumps losing a vote. 

    The vote was probably there from day one, but maybe 30 members of Congress chose a shameless path that was always doomed to fail, but was more of a flexing of muscle and self-promotion than anything seriousle having any chance. 

    I'd be saying the same thing if the Dems tried a tactic like that, and I have been highly critical of Democrats and Obama for years and years. 

    For those who say Obama has never compromised or tried to have their heads in the sand. There are plenty of example where Obama has agreed to Republican proposals only to see them back away and vote against their own plans, just to make sure Obama "gets nothing done". They have fillibustered their own bills, for God's sake! It's insanity, and everyone in Washington is to blame, including B.O.

    '67, I haven't "ignored your stats". I know the deficit is rising. I know the average Joe has less and less spending power. I see families with 2 full time workers still in poverty or near poverty. It's a sad situation, and something needs to be done quickly.

    I get the "wards of the state" argument and how many choose not to even try to work, because it's "not worth it" to them, but the fact is, there aren't enough jobs for everyone right now, and letting those who work or want to work starve or go without health care is a bigger crime than allowing some to become leeches. 

    I am my brothers keeper. I don't mind paying for those less fortunate than me. I don't mind being made to do it. I know there is waste and corruption even in legitimate charities. I do think it is everybodies duty as a human being to care for those who cannot care for themselves.

    Let's outlaw abortions and then take away food stamps, early childhood education, and all assistance. Then, let's wonder why these kids end up leading a life of crime and end up paying $50K a year per prisoner. That's the Republican social plan in a nutshell. Sounds so much better than the one we have now.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Things are going to worsen for you, me and everyone else.

    Of course it is. With babyboomers about to all get old and sick at once, any system we have would be facing serious issues.



    If you think the status quo would have left you well off, think again and look at the trends before Obama was even running for president. All projections warned of huge healthcare cost increases.

    Again, I am not an Obamacare supporter, but I see it as slightly better than the way it was and would have been had Republicans had their way.



    There were other ways to make changes, crossing state lines to encourage companies to compete was one of them.  I hope I am wrong but I believe we will be worse off because of obamacare.

    Obamacare allows obama to have the big government he wanted.  He will be appointing czars to control our health care.  People we can't vote out of office.  The IRS will have more control over us.  We all know how they operate.

    You have ignored my stats, in their place you state your opinion.  That's fine, you have a right to your opinion but I believe my stats have merit.  

    I believe obamacare gives far too much power to the federal government. I think we will be much worse off because of him and his big government policies.  I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

    Thanks for the civil discussion, it was fun!



    We'll never know if we will have been worse off or not. We very well could end up that way. My point is the American people voted for the guy twice knowing Obamacare was his major agenda item.

     

    The majority of american voters don't know what's going on.  There are thousands of new regulations in the obamacare bill, more added daily.  I had to close my business because of my health but I was being hit by some.

    They don't know that they will be taxed to death and czars will control their future.  Obamacare is a big government power grab backed by progressives.  If you read obama'a autobiography "dreams from my father" you would have a better understanding of why obama wants bigger government.

    Obama has the press on his side so he gets a free pass.  Unless you take an interest and do some research you won't be reading about what obama is up to in the daily news.

    Obama has a very powerful chicago style political machine and I believe the backing of george soros.

    He has more people on food stamps and more on the government dole so of course people voted him back in.  Why would they give up a good thing.

    We get the government we deserve.  We have become a lazy nation that would rather take handouts than find work.  Not all of course but a whole lot more than in my parents generation.

    It's a law now, not a bill. Yes, there is a long history of not funding laws that are not popular with the majority of the congress, but it's hard to find many examples where laws were not funded due to just a majority of the majority party in just one chamber. They knew Obama would veto their plan even if it passed, and that has always been the way it works. When that is the siuation, it's time to put your principles on the table and call a vote- not hold it off thinking no vote and a shutdown trumps losing a vote. 

    The vote was probably there from day one, but maybe 30 members of Congress chose a shameless path that was always doomed to fail, but was more of a flexing of muscle and self-promotion than anything seriousle having any chance. 

     


    I agree that it didn't have a chance and I'm not sure why they did it.  Maybe desperate times call for desperate measures ;0)

    I'd be saying the same thing if the Dems tried a tactic like that, and I have been highly critical of Democrats and Obama for years and years. 

    For those who say Obama has never compromised or tried to have their heads in the sand. There are plenty of example where Obama has agreed to Republican proposals only to see them back away and vote against their own plans, just to make sure Obama "gets nothing done". They have fillibustered their own bills, for God's sake! It's insanity, and everyone in Washington is to blame, including B.O.

     


    I can't agree with you on this one.  Obama wants to move his progressive agenda forward so he won't compromise in important areas.  He wouldn't listen to republicans when this bill was being drafted.  Obamacare is a massive increase in federal authority, obama didn't want the republicans to mess with his agenda.

    '67, I haven't "ignored your stats". I know the deficit is rising. I know the average Joe has less and less spending power. I see families with 2 full time workers still in poverty or near poverty. It's a sad situation, and something needs to be done quickly.


    Obama wants to push his social agenda forward.  He wants more people ro rely on big government, he wants to spread the wealth. Again, read "dreams from my father" if you want to know why he is increasing governmental control over us. It has been a very, very slow recovery under obama.  

    I get the "wards of the state" argument and how many choose not to even try to work, because it's "not worth it" to them, but the fact is, there aren't enough jobs for everyone right now, and letting those who work or want to work starve or go without health care is a bigger crime than allowing some to become leeches. 

     


    More and more are choosing to become wards of the state.  We are loosing our work ethic mentality in this country. 

    I was very poor as a child.  On night my mother put an onion in a pot of water and that was dinner.  My mother was overjoyed that my dad won a turkey at work because we couldn't afford one for thanksgiving.  My dad on occasion worked three jobs to keep a roof over our heads.

    We never, ever took one brown penny from the government. Why? Because while my father drew breath he would work to provide for his family.  It was shameful to take from others when you could work.

    Now some of these "poor" people have big screen tv's, computors, cell phones and all sorts of perks. They think nothing of taking our hard earned dollars.

    I am my brothers keeper. I don't mind paying for those less fortunate than me. I don't mind being made to do it. I know there is waste and corruption even in legitimate charities. I do think it is everybodies duty as a human being to care for those who cannot care for themselves.

     

    We are called to help those who have less.  Do you really think that handing over money to the government is the best way to do it?  I don't.

    I don't like to be "made to do it".  I contribute to charities that I know and trust. I want my dollars to go to those in need.  I don't want my hard earned dollars going to fraud and waste.  We are suppose to be our "brothers keeper" but we are also called to be "good stewards" of our talents.  Being forced to give to a wastful government is not, in my opinion, being a good steward.

     

    Let's outlaw abortions and then take away food stamps, early childhood education, and all assistance. Then, let's wonder why these kids end up leading a life of crime and end up paying $50K a year per prisoner. That's the Republican social plan in a nutshell. Sounds so much better than the one we have now.

     


    Abortions are a whole other topic but killing the innocent is not the answer.  We are throwing money at these problems left and right.  Obama's old stomping ground, chicago, like a war zone.  Money gets thrown at the situation and nothing improves.

    Has any one noticed that when the family went into decline so did our society.  Families are the very building blocks of our nation like bricks in a wall.  Strongly made bricks will keep the wall strong and secure, not so for broken bricks.

    Our families are broken. You can throw all sorts of money at the problem but it's not helping.  We have lost the very thing that made this country great, a strong work ethic and faith in God.  

    Now some want big government to replace what is lost.  That's just not possible.




     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    So how bout them Red Sox?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to 37stories' comment:

    So how bout them Red Sox?



    LOL!

    I don't know how they did it but things are looking pretty good!

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to slasher9's comment:

    Hanna Simone can def get the biz. 



     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    Abortions are a whole other topic but killing the innocent is not the answer.  We are throwing money at these problems left and right.  Obama's old stomping ground, chicago, like a war zone.  Money gets thrown at the situation and nothing improves.

    Has any one noticed that when the family went into decline so did our society.  Families are the very building blocks of our nation like bricks in a wall.  Strongly made bricks will keep the wall strong and secure, not so for broken bricks.

    Our families are broken. You can throw all sorts of money at the problem but it's not helping.  We have lost the very thing that made this country great, a strong work ethic and faith in God.  

    Now some want big government to replace what is lost.  That's just not possible.

    [/QUOTE]

    "Families" include hungry children, awful schools, and parents working 3 jobs. What's the Republican answer? Cut food stamps, education, and give hefty tax breaks to the rich. Got it.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    Abortions are a whole other topic but killing the innocent is not the answer.  We are throwing money at these problems left and right.  Obama's old stomping ground, chicago, like a war zone.  Money gets thrown at the situation and nothing improves.

    Has any one noticed that when the family went into decline so did our society.  Families are the very building blocks of our nation like bricks in a wall.  Strongly made bricks will keep the wall strong and secure, not so for broken bricks.

    Our families are broken. You can throw all sorts of money at the problem but it's not helping.  We have lost the very thing that made this country great, a strong work ethic and faith in God.  

    Now some want big government to replace what is lost.  That's just not possible.

    "Families" include hungry children, awful schools, and parents working 3 jobs. What's the Republican answer? Cut food stamps, education, and give hefty tax breaks to the rich. Got it.



    Here is an article from the wall street journal.

    No more sacred idea exists in American public policy than unemployment benefits. Unemployment insurance is thought of as an act of compassion and a necessary stimulative intervention to avoid a vicious cycle in which joblessness begets more joblessness. Not surprisingly, the Great Recession caused states to dramatically increase unemployment insurance up to 99 weeks—from the more traditional 26.

    A striking new study from the National Bureau of Economic Research concludes this is a mistake. Longer-term unemployment insurance, rather than supporting a recovery, likely makes unemployment persist.

    "Most of the persistent increase in unemployment during the Great Recession can be accounted for by the unprecedented extensions of unemployment benefit eligibility," conclude the authors of "Unemployment Benefits and Unemployment in the Great Recession." What's the problem?

    The four economist-authors adopted an ingenious approach: Given how widespread long-term unemployment insurance programs have become in the U.S., they were able to compare results in counties that adjoin but that sit in separate states.

    Because these common geographical regions share weather, housing markets, industry and culture, the economists were able to isolate the effects of differences in the duration of unemployment insurance, with normal adjustments for variations in such things as foreclosure policies.

    Places with more unemployment generosity remained worse off than those with less. Unemployment, the economists write, "rises dramatically in the border counties belonging to the states that expanded unemployment benefit duration" compared to the counties next door. The benefit extensions can explain "most of the persistently high unemployment after the Great Recession."

    The authors note the oft-heard criticism that extended unemployment benefits subsidize unemployment and discourage the supply of labor. But this phenomenon, they say, is small. The real problem is job creation. There isn't enough of it, and so unemployment gets stuck at a high level. What brings unemployment down is not mainly the effort made by people to find jobs; instead, it's the incentive employers have to create jobs. Long-term unemployment benefits deter that job creation.

    The reason is that extended unemployment benefits create upward pressure on wages. The higher wage level reduces the employer's potential profits on any new job created, so naturally they don't create them. With fewer jobs available, the number of unemployed who land a job also stays low. High unemployment persists.

    This isn't a happy finding. Liberals, however, have to come to grips with its supply-side implications. Want to create jobs? Let employers prosper. (end of article)

     

    After clinton turminated AFDC more people were employed.  AFDC destroyed familes by making marriage less attractive.  Who needs fathers and husbands when the government will take care of you. The unemployment numbers dropped.

    I was a hungry and cold child who's father at times worked 3 jobs and we never took one thin dime from anyone.

    My grandparents were immigrants, my dad went to war when he was 18, my mother had an 8th grade education.  They taught me the value of hard work and that there were no free lunches.  I grew up on the other side of the tracks.  I new this because a classmate told me.

    I worked hard and I studied hard. I put myself through a state college, at times I didn't have enough money for food, forget about having a car or money for clothes. 

    We taught our kids the same lessons.  They went to state schools and both have great jobs, know the value of a dollar and have a very strong work ethic.  

    My husband grew up in new bedford, his family didn't have much.  He had a paper route when he was a kid. He road his bike in the rain and sleet wearing a thin jacket.  Dogs attacked him and kids beat him up.  He had to buy some of his own clothes.

    He went to a state college and put himself through grad school with an assistantship.  He was paid to teach computer programming while getting his masters in electrical engineering.  Lots of hard work with no handouts.

    It's hard but it can be done.  I guess it's much easier to sit at home watching tv and getting handouts than working hard to improve yourself.

     

     
  10. Facebook
  11.  
 
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...


    http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/that-victorias-secret-baby-is-just-the-tip-of-a-disturbing-trend

    Please read this story from start to finish. Abortion is destroying our families and society.  Nothing good can come from and evil act.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    Wow, '67. Not much to say to that. The government is to blame for everything. We will all be drones in a decade. I can see why you guy want to just blow it all up and start over.

    I'm speechless.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    Moon~

    Read the article below and let me know what you think, thanks!

     

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/that-victorias-secret-baby-is-just-the-tip-of-a-disturbing-trend

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    Moon~

    Read the article below and let me know what you think, thanks!

     

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/that-victorias-secret-baby-is-just-the-tip-of-a-disturbing-trend



    Abortion is a horrible thing. 

    Nobody is "for abortion". We all wish it never had to happen.

    I could cite dreadful stories where our society has not providing support for babies, children, teens and desperate mothers who go full term. 

    It wouldn't change your thinking, just as this article has not changed mine. It's not like I am living in a bubble. It's a cruel world, but I don't blame the government for it. It would be a lot worse with out one, and ours is one of the best on the planet.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    MOON~

    The Left loves to think of itself as compassionate, and — indeed — many of my more liberal friends are among the most caring people that I know.

    So why does the Left cling so tightly to timetables and systems that not only risk rendering legal compliance with Obamacare mandates impossible but also place many families at real risk? Today, during our daily ACLJ radio show, Jay Sekulow Live, we asked listeners to call and tell us about their experiences with the exchanges.  Of course we heard stories of repeated failures and frustrations, but also truly distressing stories of families dropped from their catastrophic care plans because of Obamacare (insurers were no longer offering plans that weren’t compliant with ACA minimal standards) only to find out they not only can’t yet replace their lost insurance, the new coverage (if they could get it) offers less real coverage for far more money. You can listen to a selection of those calls here.

    It doesn’t seem to occur to the “do you hate Obamacare more than you love your country?” MSNBC crowd that oppenents of Obamacare might actually care about real people — how they get their health care, whether they can afford the health insurance they’re required to buy, and whether the government is competent enough to create a program that can even work.

    Eventually, the current news cycle will end, and (I agree with Ramesh) discussion about whether the Republicans missed an “opportunity” to highlight Obamacare’s failings will fade to irrelevance. We’ll be left with the reality of a program that will directly affect the daily lives of many, many more millions of Americans than those who follow the political news cycle. And for many of them, Obamacare means financial hardship, health-related uncertainty, potentially punitive taxation, and fewer employment opportunities.

    So, my answer to the MSNBC question is another question: “Why do you love Obamacare more than you love Americans?” 

    This article is crossposted on National Review.

    Tags  »  obamacarehealthcareHealthcare law You see we arn't the only ones who have been hurt by obamacare.  No one said we shouldn't have a federal government.  We need one but a small one.  The founding fathers knew what life was like under a government with too much power.  We now live under a government with too much power.  
     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    Moon~

    Intersting article, it has lots of numbers in it and I know how much you like numbers :0)

     

     

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/08/23/no-obamacare-is-not-a-good-deal-for-young-people-in-the-long-run-not-even-close/

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    On a lighter note Wink

      1. Roman emperor Vespasian placed a tax on urine in the 1st century A.D. Urine at that time was collected and used as a source of ammonia for tanning hides and laundering garments.j

    England TaxA window tax in England eventually led to health problems

    1. In 1691, England taxed the number of windows on a house. Consequently, houses began to be built with very few windows or people would close up existing windows. When people began to suffer health problems from lack of windows/air, the tax was finally repealed in 1851.a
    2. Russian Emperor Peter the Great placed a tax on beards in 1705. He hoped that the tax would encourage men to have a clean-shaven look that was popular in Western Europe
     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    Moon~

    I was a little suprised at your reaction to the abortion article. Do you really believe that innocent children must die because some will be born into poverty.  I was born into poverty, I was abused as a child, have been in and out of pain with medical conditions since I was thirteen and I'm very ill now.  By the way, my mother didn't want me. I suffered and still do.

    Are you saying I shouldn't have been born?  I shouldn't have had my two wonderful sons and my amazing granddaughter?  I shouldn't be here to help my friends, family and the poor?

    I once heard a pro-life speaker who was the product of a rape.  She said "My mother was raped and I'll never know my father.  Do you believe I don't have a right to be here?"

    I worked in a pro-life clinic.  We would have girls come to us seeking abortions as a form of birth control.  I'll never forget one young lady. She was in college to become a sports therapist, she wanted to work for a  professional football team.

    We talked about her baby, and I encourage her to have her child then give him up for adoption.  She didn't want to sacrifice several months of her life for her child.  She said she knew what she was doing was wrong but she was going to do it anyway.  

    I sometimes think of her and others I met there and wonder how they are doing.  Once a woman realizes what she has done, taken the life of her child, she has a hard time forgiving herself.  There is a high rate of depression and other physical symproms. I once sat with a woman who had an abortion and regreted it.  I will never forget the sound of her cry. She was crying from the deepest part of her being, it was a terrible sound.

    Once a mother kills her child or in some cases children she has to harden her heart to accept what she has done. She is forever changed because it is not natural to murder your own child.  With this hardened heart she often times raises her other children.  This affects the other children because their mother can't show them the tenderness she would have if her heart was not hardened.  

    I have a friend in this situation.  Her mother aborted her first child but had children after that.  Her mother has never fully healed from what she did and it affected her parenting.

    Kids born into this abortion minded society are survivors, they made it while some others didn't

    This all comes back to what I was saying before.  Our families are broken so instead of going to the root of the matter to fix it we kill babies instead. So much easier you may say but it isn't, it is taking it's toll on society.

    I raised to fine sons with a proper work ethic, they both have good jobs, make good money and are good stewards of their talents.  We believe in God and practice our faith.  We fall, get up and try again.  It's in the getting up that matters.

    My sons made mistakes, crossed the line but because they knew there was a line to cross they understood the difference between right and wrong.  When the did wrong they knew it had felt bad about it.

    We don't have that in our society as a whole.  Young people are living together at alarming rates. With birth control young people don't have to get married and can sleep around, that whole friends with benefits thing.  I once counseled a woman who had 14 s ex ual encounters.

    Before the pill about 60% of black families had a father and a mother now I think the number is below 10%.  My numbers may be off a bit the dramatic change isn't.

    We don't respect life at the moment of conception as that article clearly stated.  It made me sick to read it although I knew alot of that was going on.

    I raised my sons to respect women as persons not sexual objects to be used for self gratification.  My older son is married with a beautiful child.  They waited for marriage. He told me he wanted to do everything the right way because she was worth it.  He was able to say on his wedding night "I waited for you".  Pretty special.

    The family is broken so society is broken.  Giving the federal government more power isn't going to fix the problem.

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    Sorry, their are a few typos but for some reason I can't hit the reply or edit button on this thread.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from stan17. Show stan17's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to moonslav59's comment:

    who would you hold your hand out to?

    softy or Ted Cruz?



    Moon I respect your baseball knowledge but take your political crap somewhere else this is a baseball forum. I would expect better judgement from you than this kind of garbage.

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from RSF4Life234. Show RSF4Life234's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    MOON~

    The Left loves to think of itself as compassionate, and — indeed — many of my more liberal friends are among the most caring people that I know.

    So why does the Left cling so tightly to timetables and systems that not only risk rendering legal compliance with Obamacare mandates impossible but also place many families at real risk? Today, during our daily ACLJ radio show, Jay Sekulow Live, we asked listeners to call and tell us about their experiences with the exchanges.  Of course we heard stories of repeated failures and frustrations, but also truly distressing stories of families dropped from their catastrophic care plans because of Obamacare (insurers were no longer offering plans that weren’t compliant with ACA minimal standards) only to find out they not only can’t yet replace their lost insurance, the new coverage (if they could get it) offers less real coverage for far more money. You can listen to a selection of those calls here.

    It doesn’t seem to occur to the “do you hate Obamacare more than you love your country?” MSNBC crowd that oppenents of Obamacare might actually care about real people — how they get their health care, whether they can afford the health insurance they’re required to buy, and whether the government is competent enough to create a program that can even work.

    Eventually, the current news cycle will end, and (I agree with Ramesh) discussion about whether the Republicans missed an “opportunity” to highlight Obamacare’s failings will fade to irrelevance. We’ll be left with the reality of a program that will directly affect the daily lives of many, many more millions of Americans than those who follow the political news cycle. And for many of them, Obamacare means financial hardship, health-related uncertainty, potentially punitive taxation, and fewer employment opportunities.

    So, my answer to the MSNBC question is another question: “Why do you love Obamacare more than you love Americans?” 

    This article is crossposted on National Review.

    Tags  »  obamacarehealthcareHealthcare law You see we arn't the only ones who have been hurt by obamacare.  No one said we shouldn't have a federal government.  We need one but a small one.  The founding fathers knew what life was like under a government with too much power.  We now live under a government with too much power.  




    I do not enjoy talking politics here, there is a political forum that is part of this site and meant to be used for the explicit purpose. You do however need a serious history lesson. The revolution had nothing to do with rebelling against a government because it was to “large”, it had to do with the fact that there was nor representation for the colonies in parliament, hence the fraise, no taxation without representation. Also the founding fathers were not a homogenous group that all had the same beliefs in government, in fact they were quite divided much as we are today, back then the first two real political parties were the federalists and the anti federalists who often argued over the power and responsibilities of a federal government. You should also know that before the constitution was signed we experimented for about fifteen years with a form of government that was based around a small federal government with more power residing in the states, it was called The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union. It is universally thought of as a total disaster, and was replaced with our current constitutional democracy.

    1.     1.  Don’t speak for the dead, you didn’t know the founding fathers and they didn’t all have the same beliefs.

     

    2.      2.  They tried small government and it was an abject failure, why would it be more successful today?

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxdirtdog. Show redsoxdirtdog's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to RSF4Life234's comment:

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    MOON~

    The Left loves to think of itself as compassionate, and — indeed — many of my more liberal friends are among the most caring people that I know.

    So why does the Left cling so tightly to timetables and systems that not only risk rendering legal compliance with Obamacare mandates impossible but also place many families at real risk? Today, during our daily ACLJ radio show, Jay Sekulow Live, we asked listeners to call and tell us about their experiences with the exchanges.  Of course we heard stories of repeated failures and frustrations, but also truly distressing stories of families dropped from their catastrophic care plans because of Obamacare (insurers were no longer offering plans that weren’t compliant with ACA minimal standards) only to find out they not only can’t yet replace their lost insurance, the new coverage (if they could get it) offers less real coverage for far more money. You can listen to a selection of those calls here.

    It doesn’t seem to occur to the “do you hate Obamacare more than you love your country?” MSNBC crowd that oppenents of Obamacare might actually care about real people — how they get their health care, whether they can afford the health insurance they’re required to buy, and whether the government is competent enough to create a program that can even work.

    Eventually, the current news cycle will end, and (I agree with Ramesh) discussion about whether the Republicans missed an “opportunity” to highlight Obamacare’s failings will fade to irrelevance. We’ll be left with the reality of a program that will directly affect the daily lives of many, many more millions of Americans than those who follow the political news cycle. And for many of them, Obamacare means financial hardship, health-related uncertainty, potentially punitive taxation, and fewer employment opportunities.

    So, my answer to the MSNBC question is another question: “Why do you love Obamacare more than you love Americans?” 

    This article is crossposted on National Review.

    Tags  »  obamacarehealthcareHealthcare law You see we arn't the only ones who have been hurt by obamacare.  No one said we shouldn't have a federal government.  We need one but a small one.  The founding fathers knew what life was like under a government with too much power.  We now live under a government with too much power.  




    I do not enjoy talking politics here, there is a political forum that is part of this site and meant to be used for the explicit purpose. You do however need a serious history lesson. The revolution had nothing to do with rebelling against a government because it was to “large”, it had to do with the fact that there was nor representation for the colonies in parliament, hence the fraise, no taxation without representation. Also the founding fathers were not a homogenous group that all had the same beliefs in government, in fact they were quite divided much as we are today, back then the first two real political parties were the federalists and the anti federalists who often argued over the power and responsibilities of a federal government. You should also know that before the constitution was signed we experimented for about fifteen years with a form of government that was based around a small federal government with more power residing in the states, it was called The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union. It is universally thought of as a total disaster, and was replaced with our current constitutional democracy.

    1.     1.  Don’t speak for the dead, you didn’t know the founding fathers and they didn’t all have the same beliefs.

     

    2.      2.  They tried small government and it was an abject failure, why would it be more successful today?




    Kind of a specious arguement.

    1)  Because 67 is an idiot does not mean that she is 100% wrong on all things.  Just 100% wrong on most.

    2)  Because a relatively non-existent Federal government existed under the Articles of Confederation did not function well, does not ipso facto mean that a relatively limited federal government would not work better than the behemath that our federal government has OBVIOUSLY BECOME.

    3) We are now 17 Trillion (TRILLION) dollars in debt.  Obama has almost doubled the "immoral" (what HE called it, not me) debt that the unbelievably inept George W. Bush ran up while swaggering into two foolish wars, & struggling through the mortgage default crisis caused by Congress & the rest of the Federal government.

    4)  There is a little thing known as a happy medium.  I would be ok with this if I thought the federal government were in any way capable of controling itself.  It's not, & therefor it is incumbent upon the people to control an out of control federal government.

    5) Extreme Right wingers like 67, Lil' bill, & Stiffy give the Republican party a bad name.  This in no way diminishes the need to limit the federal government.  It is the power of the feds, & an inept administration that now stands firmly in the way of economic growth, the U.S.'s # problem.  Without serious economic growth, the U.S. will reach 25 TRILLION in Debt by 2020 at the latest, thus necessitating an ever larger % of the budget to go to the servicing of said debt.  THUS cutting back on all those social services liberals love to talk about.  Cutting back on education spending, which happens to be in my pervue.  Cutting back on help to the needy.  Cutting back on almost everything we say we hold dear.

    *YES!  The federal government is most certainly out of control! 

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    Moon~

    I was a little suprised at your reaction to the abortion article. Do you really believe that innocent children must die because some will be born into poverty.  I was born into poverty, I was abused as a child, have been in and out of pain with medical conditions since I was thirteen and I'm very ill now.  By the way, my mother didn't want me. I suffered and still do.Are you saying I shouldn't have been born?  I shouldn't have had my two wonderful sons and my amazing granddaughter?  I shouldn't be here to help my friends, family and the poor?

    I don't think of it as "killing innocent children", but I sympathazie with those who do. What gets me more to my heart is that many of the right wing who sympathize with the unborn lose all sympathy once the baby is born. 

    No sympathy for the single mom, the hungyr child, the uneducated child, and the repeating cycle of poverty and despair.

    I once heard a pro-life speaker who was the product of a rape.  She said "My mother was raped and I'll never know my father.  Do you believe I don't have a right to be ere?"

    I worked in a pro-life clinic.  We would have

    girls come to us seeking abortions as a for of birth control.  I'll never forget one young lady. She was in college to become a sports therapist, she wanted to work for a  professional football team.

    I think a bunch of men cannot know what it is like to be pregnant with an unwanted baby, and then be forced to bring it to term, and raise it in poverty, and watch them grow up to repeat the cycle all over again.

    Yes, there are some that milk the system, and even some who have chilcren just to get the benefits, but that does not mean we should make the child suffer to "send a message" by cutting off food stamps. heating subsidies, housing subsidies, etc...

    We talked about her baby, and I encourage her to have her child then give him up for adoption.  She didn't want to sacrifice several months of her life for her child.  She said she knew what she was doing was wrong but she was going to do it anyway.  

    I have a sister that snuck away and had an abortion at 17. My Catholic parents found out and it nearly destroyed our family in the aftermath. Nobdy I know likes abortion or thinks it is "right", but many recognize the issue is not so clear as those who just think of it as murder. Certainly if you view it as murder, the debate ends right there. I get that.

    I sometimes think of her and others I met there and wonder how they are doing.  Once a woman realizes what she has done, taken the life of her child, she has a hard time forgiving herself.  There is a high rate of depression and other physical symproms. I once sat with a woman who had an abortion and regreted it.  I will never forget the sound of her cry. She was crying from the deepest part of her being, it was a terrible sound.

    My sister told me she still feels badly about the choice she made. She laso says she made the right choice. She ended up going to Yale on her own (my parents cut her off) and now has 4 kids (2 adopted) and owns her own family planning business in Brazil (offering birth control to impoverished familes).

    Once a mother kills her child or in some cases children she has to harden her heart to accept what she has done. She is forever changed because it is not natural to murder your own child.  With this hardened heart she often times raises her other children.  This affects the other children because their mother can't show them the tenderness she would have if her heart was not hardened.  

    For some reason this thread is messed up. I'm having a hard time reading your posts, as the words are jumbled and the window cuts off some of your text. Of course there are countless stories of unwated children being born and going on to live happy and productive lives.

    I have a friend in this situation.  Her mother aborted her first child but had children after that.  Her mother has never fully healed from what she did and it affected her parenting.

    Kids born into this abortion minded society are survivors, they made it while some others didn't

    This all comes back to what I was saying before.  Our families are broken so instead of going to the root of the matter to fix it we kill babies instead. So much easier you may say but it isn't, it is taking it's toll on society.

    Legalized abortions took the place of illegal ones. I don't blame the government for the state of society, the recklessness of many couples, the lack of forethought and planning, and the plain ignorance of too many.

    I raised to fine sons with a proper work ethic, they both have good jobs, make good money and are good stewards of their talents.  We believe in God and practice our faith.  We fall, get up and try again.  It's in the getting up that matters.

    It's not always about a proper work ethic. So many impoverished people in this word and in this country wrok their behinds off and still can't feed their babies and get them proper medical care when needed. Others go bankrupt after a major medical happening. Private insurance would never solve these issues on their own. Where there is no money to be made, there is no caring by business, and not enough charitable individulas to cover the need. Talking about the "tyranny of the majority", one could say the government has protected the wealthy, the healthy, and the lucky people from having to do what is the obvious right thing to do: following the teachings of Jesus just reinforces what is what every good society should and must do: care for the less fortunate, the sick, the elderly, and those who don't have sense enough to know how to help themselves. OK, call me all the names in the book for thinking this way, but I'd rather pay a few mailingerers and system milkmen than let a large amount of needy people who really would rather not put their hand out for a dollar to buy a loaf of bread, than turn a cold shoulder and tel them to improve their work ethic and blame them for their preidicament.

    Talk about family values? The rightwingers who scream the most about protecting traditional family values are the same ones sending undocumented family member back home and dividing familes at the core. Their the ones who watch a father work 3 jobs, a mother work two jobs, then wonder why their children are out on the streets in gangs and what not. Cut off the aid for pre-schooling poor kids, cut off the free breakfast and lunch programs, cut it all off so my taxes will go down enough, so I can take that trip to Europe.

    Yeah, I think we all have a duty as a citizen of this great country under God to be forced by our government to care for those who do not get cared for otherwise. I'm the nemey for having these thoughts and trying to force the results on you and others. When I was against the Vietnam War, I was told to love America "or leave it". Now, I feel like when the tides have turned a bit, none of you guys are considering "leaving", as well you shouldn't, but your plans to blow it all up and start over is exactly the tactics you abhorred in the 60's.

    My sons made mistakes, crossed the line but because they knew there was a line to cross they understood the difference between right and wrong.  When the did wrong they knew it had felt bad about it.

    We don't have that in our society as a whole.  Young people are living together at alarming rates. With birth control young people don't have to get married and can sleep around, that whole friends with benefits thing.  I once counseled a woman who had 14 s ex ual encounters.

    Before the pill about 60% of black families had a father and a mother now I think the number is below 10%.  My numbers may be off a bit the dramatic change isn't.

    We don't respect life at the moment of conception as that article clearly stated.  It made me sick to read it although I knew alot of that was going on.

    I raised my sons to respect women as persons not sexual objects to be used for self gratification.  My older son is married with a beautiful child.  They waited for marriage. He told me he wanted to do everything the right way because she was worth it.  He was able to say on his wedding night "I waited for you".  Pretty special.

    The family is broken so society is broken.  Giving the federal government more power isn't going to fix the problem.

     

    I agree, the family is broken, but I don't blame our goverment for it. To me, it all started when both parents began to need to work to make ends meet.  Children were not sufficiently nurtured at an early age or through childhood. Daycare and grandma took the place of proper child rearing. It has gotten worse. Now, familes with both parents working have less adjusted income and spending power year after year. At the same time, the rich have gotten filthy rich, the big companies are no longer beholden to any country or governemnt, and there is no end in sight. Republican or Democratic leadership makes no difference in the larger scale of what is happening, but the general philosophy of lifting the restrictions on big busness and giving tax breaks to the rich, that by and large, the Republicans support more than the Dems, is not the way to go. it never has been. The "trickle down" always becomes trickled on. Worker production per hour wroked has greatly increased over the years, but who is making the money? Not the common worker. His wealth is sinking. Buch, Clinton, Obama, Reagan- it's all the same. Big business runs the show. Republicans would have defaulted and the governemnt would still be shut down right now, had it not been for Wall Street, bankers, and the rich putting a scare into all Congressmen to end it "or else".

    I respect your vies, '67. I know it's a tired and overused line, but truthfully, my very best friend in teh whole world is as right wing as they come. We respect each other and often have lively debates. We don't ever question our motives and assume the other does not care for our country or mankind as a whole, but what has happened in Congress lately has sickened even my best bud. This whole "obama is a Muslim, or not a citizen", and more is sick. It takes away from the issues and polarizes both sides (as if they needed any more poarization). Most Dems and Repubs really want what is best, but have different ideas on how to get there.

    I get the argument that there is a growing number of Americans getting accustomed to handouts. For some, it's not worth trying to find a job, even if there was some to get. It's become easier to not work than work. I realize these people must be persuaded to at least legitimately try and find a job and keep one, but making those who are really trying to make it "the right way" suffer, because many are abusing the system is not the right answer either. Under Clinton and  Republican Congress, Welfare was greatly overhauled. Compromise was reached. Things got done. However, once Clinton was demonized by his affair or abuse of power, whichever way you choose to look at it, nothing got done. It's that way now. Nothing is getting done, and one main reason is that there is a small set of Congressmen that refuse to let Obama get anything done, even if it is a plan they originally called for. That's a fact. It is going on as we speak. Republicans are voting against plans the originated. they are fillibustering their own bills just to keep anything from getting done. A do nothing government is better than a do something governement. that is their motto. They were sent to govern, but believe there shoudl be little or no "governing". They are prepared to bring our economy to its knees to get their way. It's a total joke to say Obama hasn't compromised. If he had his way, we'd have gun control, immigration reform, rolled back Bush tax cuts, and on and on. He's basically got nothing done he wanted, except healthcare, and that turned out to be more like Hillary's plan than his own.

    The rhetoric has gotten out of hand, and the tea party'ers are more concerned with their image and winning their next primary in severely gerrymandered districts than finding common ground for the sake of getting something done.

    Our future hangs at the whims of a handful of nutcases. And, Obama is not one of the nuts, as much as I disagree with more than what I agree with him. No president should allow this form of extortion to become the way of the land. There was no way Ted Cruz was going to get what he wanted. When you are in the minority, you have to know it.




     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    I didn't say large, I said strong.  The british government was indeed strong, they refused to give the colonies representation.

    I am well aware of the tea tax, no taxation without representation is well known to me.  I did live and work in boston, I studied it in school.

    The supreme court has called obamacare a tax.  Up to 16,500 IRS agents are going to be hired to enforce obamacare.  We all know what the IRS does to those they don't like.  That to me is a strong government with too much power.

    Czars will be hired to figure out all the complicated rules and regulations in obamacare.  These czars will have power over us, we can neither elect them into or out of office.  That sounds like a government with too much power to me.  I am aware that past presidents have had czars, these czars will have all sorts of information on us.  Do you trust them with that, I don't.  

     

    By Paul Bedard

    The Washington Examiner

    July 18, 2013

    As many Americans express dismay at the level of information the Obama administration is secretly gathering on them, the president's Obamacare czar is begging the public to trust her agency and the IRS to protect the personal health information they plan to collect and store for years.

    "I want to assure you and all Americans, that when they fill out their [health insurance] marketplace applications, they can trust the information they're providing is protected," assured Marilyn Tavenner, head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in a congressional hearing this week. (end of article)

    The government is collecting and storing more and more information on us.  I think that is a government that is much too strong and powerful.  You have heard of the NSA.  They are building a massive facility in Utah.  Have you seen the picture of it?  Why in the world would the NSA need a place like that. 

    The IRS, SEC and EPA all went after conservatives because they can.  The reason is because they want to maintain a big and stong government.  They want to keep their jobs.

    I am aware that the smaller federal government didn't work. Small government now would be a large government back then. They didn't have all the government agencies back then.  The build up began with president wilson who was a progressive.  Progressives like wilson, FDR, johnson, obama and hillary clinton are all working towards a stronger and bigger government.  More power for them less for us.  We are a republic, at least for now.

    Today government policies discourage work (see some of my earlier posts) not so back then.

    I am also aware that there we differing opinions among the founding fathers. But they came to a consensus and agreed on the constitution. A constitution that obama does not respect or adhere to.

    One example is that he postpone the implimentation of regulations for big businesses.  He does not have the right to do that.  His job is to implement the law not flout it.  

    Well, Doctor, what have we got—a Republic or a Monarchy?”

      “A Republic, if you can keep it.” ATTRIBUTION:

    The response is attributed to BENJAMIN FRANKLIN—at the close of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, when queried as he left Independence Hall on the final day of deliberation—in the notes of Dr. James McHenry, one of Maryland’s delegates to the Convention. (end )

     

    Even with differening opinions the founding fathers worked hard to give us a republic.  Progressives are not interested in maintaining the republic.  How do you think obama would look with a crown?

     

     

     
  • You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: If you were starving and needed a dollar to buy a loaf of bread...

    http://www.abortionfacts.com/facts/13

    Please read the article above.  The child in the womb is indeed a child.  In the first trimester the child has a heart beat and primitive circulatory system.  Fingers with finger nails as well as toes.  Blood cells are being formed is his little liver. Its little he or she parts are starting to form.

    This little child is a person, a small one but still a growing moving person.

    I realize that this is a sensitive issue for you and your family.  If you agree that the child in the womb is a person then you have to face the fact that your sister ended you nephew's life.  Not an easy thing to do.

    How can a person regret something that was the right thing to do.  Your sister can't say she did the wrong thing.  If she did she would have to admit she ended the life of her child, a very hard and painful thing to do.  My heart goes out to her, some women don't come to terms with what they did for a very long time, some are in their 80's

    Republicans are not as evil as you say.  This appears to be an emotional issue for you so I think you are overstating things.

    I would never call you names, I believe in civil discourse.  I have good friends who are hard core dems. Our most intense conversation was when the pats met the giants for the first time in the super bowl ;0)

    As I said earlier I also believe we should help the poor.  But we shouldn't help them to be more and more dependent on government.  We should be good stewards of our money, giving it to the goverment is not the answer.

    If you want to continue this chat I will be happy to continue this civil discourse. I don't know that there is a whole lot more to say.  We both believe we should help the poor.  Even though the government takes close to 50% of my husband's hard earned dollars we still give to those in need.

    I will say this.  He and 3 others own their own business.  They have employees.  You see those who work hard and succeed do make money but they also employ others.  If the government takes more of his money what's the point of working hard.  He could cut back on the work, have fewer employees and take it easy.

    California is a big dem state with high taxes.  Companies are going to states with a more business friendly tax code.  Less work for people, fewer tax dollars for california, more people on the government dole.  

    In the 60's and 70's women decided to roar.  They burned their bra's and wanted to compete in the work place.  These women were not poor, they just wanted to get out of the kitchen and away from their kids.  My friend's daughter is like this.  She told her mother she didn't want to stay home with her child.  Boy, that kid must feel loved.

    My son has ADD so I sent him to private school.  We just moved to a nice house in a nice neighborhood so we couldn't afford the tuition. The first year I drove the scool bus and after that I worked as a teacher's aide.  I am a nurse but I took the job so I could pay their tuition and still be an at home mom.  See, it can be done without taking anyones money.

    There were many children in the AM and PM day care who lived in large and beautiful houses.  How do I know?  I would drive some of them in the school bus.  It was a little hard on my pride but I work for what I get.  These people were not poor, not in the least.

    Broken families can be wealthy also. Woman can take the pill, have a couple of kids, go out to work and have latch key kids.  I see it all the time.  When my kids were younger I had friends who were not poor and had latch key kids.

    I'm sure you read about those kids who went into the ex-patriots house and destroyed it.  They were not poor by any means. The pats guy wanted to start a fund to help these kids.  What in the world in throwing money at these kids going to do.  The parents decided to sue him so the guy is going to press charges.

    Our families are broken for several reasons.  Fewer homes with moms and dads.  Some moms have to work but a whole lot just want to.  All latch key kids are at risk, rich or poor.  Moms can pop a pill, go to work and let their kids fend for themselves.

    Young men live with women, have kids and don't marry the women.  Broken families.  Women sleep around, don't want to marry, just pop a pill.  Our families are broken.

    When I was young there were 2 STD'S now there are over 30.  The pill has allowed for free sex.  Nothing in life is free, the cost is STD'S, unwanted pregnancies, abortions, increase in divorce, and fewer homes with a mom and dad.

    Throwing money at these problems isn't the answer.  More taxes isn't the answer, abortion isn't the answer. A big and powerful government isn't the answer.

    We were better off when family came first.  We took prayer out of schools then added metal detectors.  We have to instill morals and values back into our kids and our society.  Single motherhood throws a woman into poverty.  What about teaching young ladies to respect themselves and their bodies.  What about teachin you men that women are not instruments for their sexual gratification.

    We are a sex satuated society.  Music, tv shows, commercials and clothing all promote sexuality.  Have you seen some of the avatars in this baseball forum.

    So if society promotes sex and parents don't teach their kids to not use eachother (friends with benifits) how are these kids supposed to learn what is right and wrong.  Remember that there is a high percentage of single moms in poverty.  

    Let's work on decreasing the number of single moms.  Let's work on teaching young men to respect women.  No, that takes too much effort.  Let's take the easy way out.  Let's pay our taxes and let the government grow and grow so they can throw money at the problems.  The government has been throwing money at problems for years and years and things are just getting worse.

    Families are broken for many reasons. Many are in poverty because the family is broken.  Throwing money at the problem won't fix it.

    I'll continue with this if you would like but I don't know that there is much more to say. Sorry for any typos, I'm too tired to look for them.

     
  • Sections
    Shortcuts

    Share