READER COMMENTS ON
"You Can't Make This Stuff Up."
(14 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 8/3/2004 @ 11:10 pm PT...
Hilarious. Do you have a picture?
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 4:31 am PT...
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 5:11 am PT...
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 8:25 am PT...
Love Alan Keyes. His speeches sound like Lincoln could have given them.
You guys confuse "compassionate conservatism" with a human being. Men are fallible, fallen from grace, sinners needing salvation from Jesus Christ. "No one is good, no not one."
Conservatism is a belief and it is already compassionate by default. Give a man a fish (liberalism) and he is feed for that day. Teach a man to fish (conservatism) and he is fed for life. He may go on to create a fishing company, hire employees, and they all pay taxes. If the fisherman then beats his wife to death with a fishing pole, that has nothing to do with conservatism. Johnhp, you should know better than that.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 8:38 am PT...
Why reject Christianity with that give a man a fish horsecrap? Didn't Jesus tell us that when we fed the hungry we were feeding him? That when we were slaking the thirst of the thirsty we were slaking his thirst?
Quoting Christianity and rejecting one of its most important principles in one post. Shame.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 9:00 am PT...
I don't think you can "generalize" conservatives and liberals the way you just did. I think there are many shades of grey. For example, in your analogy, I happen to agree with the "teach him to fish" philosopy.
However, should I see a homeless person on the street and have a sandwich in my hand, I'll hand it over to him in a heartbeat. No questions asked.
The "other blog" sure is having a hard time letting go of me, huh? I bet it's exactly what happened with Brad. Brad left, and his name was brought up in every other post! LET IT GO ALREADY!
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 10:06 am PT...
i can understand why they are having withdrawal; its your charm and warmth.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 10:53 am PT...
But, ugh - You can't begin to understand how disgusted I was . I was just sitting there reading stuff (and feeling bad for you) and to say I was 'outraged' is truly an understatement.
But then again, all the stuff that I was observing, you had been pointing out right from the start. They evade the issue when you have a point. They change their words & opinions like a chameleon changes colors. They make small comments (like fat jokes?!), they're rude, crude and they can't taste their own medicine.
"Oh, it's my site, so I can do what I want. Wah, wah, wah.".
What is he, a teenager??! I'd love to give him a piece of my mind, but then I just remind myself he isn't worth it.
Ugh. Sorry. I had to get that out of my system.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 11:11 am PT...
Yes - of course we are to help those in need, feed those who are hungry, help the sick, visit them in jail, etc. That is fine for those who cannot help themselves. I know for a fact that some decide to not work for a time because they know they can get help from the government. I also disagree with the role of government in feeding the masses. Perhaps faith-based organzations, who are already doing it too, are better suited.
Speaking of helping -
Send a soldier or soldiers in Iraq a care package. Here is a list of acceptable things to send:
Bags StarBucks Coffee
Cracker jacks popcorn
Bags Crunch N Munch popcorn
Tubes Chap Stick lip balm
Hand Sanitizer bottles
Packages of Wet Ones
LOTS OF GUM
Bags of Candy Suckers
Bags of Candy Ė M&Mís
Bottles of Foot Powder
Canisters of Kool-Aid
Bags of Trail Mix
Case of Copenhagen Chewing Tobacco
Bags of lemon drops
Packs of cheese N crackers
COMMENT #10 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 11:55 am PT...
"I know for a fact that some decide to not work for a time because they know they can get help from the government"
Then you also know for a fact (based on your rigorous knowledge of the Welfare system) that 75% of those receiving aid from the Government are children.
Perhaps you'd like them to "decide to work", but until your "faith based" organizations can guarantee that those children won't go hungry and without a roof over their head, I think it's the right thing to do to make sure they are taken care of.
Don't know if Jesus would agree or not, but you can be sure to ask him at your next strategy meeting.
COMMENT #11 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 12:47 pm PT...
"I know for a fact that some decide to not work for a time because they know they can get help from the government."
I agree with you. Unfortunately, there will always be some shmucks who take advantage of the system . Hopefully with proper guidelines, a government can weed those people out, but a system is rarely ever perfect. That being said, I don't think it's fair to deprive those who deserve the "food" just because there are some who will take advantage.
If we were to live like this, then you should have to pay for fraudulent charges on your credit card, even though someone else was irresponsible and stole YOUR card...
COMMENT #12 [Permalink]
said on 8/4/2004 @ 2:10 pm PT...
I'm not much for wide-based social spending programs, however...
The one area I don't apply that belief to is children. No child should have to suffer because of their parent(s) bad luck/laziness/infirmity/insert reason here. And though it may cost more short-term, it saves money long-term.
COMMENT #13 [Permalink]
said on 8/5/2004 @ 8:09 am PT...
I agree with you guys. So many take advantage of the system.
COMMENT #14 [Permalink]
said on 8/5/2004 @ 9:50 am PT...
Yeah, its a really good idea to blame the un and under-employed on a system that needs un and under employment to keep its wages low. God forbid we look at the biggest feeders at the trough. Companies like Haliburton.