IRS.FBI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov
XPost: alt.politics.economics, alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons
XPost: alt.revisionism, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy
XPost: alt.politics.immigration, alt.true-crime, alt.politics.guns
XPost: misc.survivalism, soc.culture.usa, alt.survival
From: I-WAS-JUST-GANG-PROBED-BY-THE-ObamaRegime-SPY-NETWORK@IRS.
BI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov
On 2/22/2015 2:44 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
> In article ,
> BeamMeUpScotty
> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
>
>> On 2/22/2015 1:15 AM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
>>> In article <2Y4Gw.83017$Oy4.39216@fx17.iad>,
>>> BeamMeUpScotty
>>> >> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/21/2015 2:12 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
>>>>> In article ,
>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>> >>>> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/20/2015 7:57 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
>>>>>>> In article ,
>>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>> >>>>>> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2/20/2015 2:16 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article ,
>>>>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> A.
>>>>>>>>> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/19/2015 2:10 PM, Keeley Crawford wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article <3xoFw.2191782$1s.1636401@fx05.iad>,
>>>>>>>>>>> BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> CI
>>>>>>>>>>> A.
>>>>>>>>>>> EPA.ObamaCare.gov> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/18/2015 6:36 PM, davidp@agent.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Economists are baffled about Obama's recovery
>>>>>>>>>>>>> By Robert J. Samuelson - Jan. 19, 2015
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The great wage mystery deepens. In economic recoveries, there
>>>>>>>>>>>>> usually
>>>>>>>>>>>>> comes a time when strong job gains lead to strong wage gains.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Businesses must pay more to recruit and retain the workers they
>>>>>>>>>>>>> need.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not this time - or at least not yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Because there is NO recovery...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> NO "green shoots"
>>>>>>>>>>>> No "summer of recovery"
>>>>>>>>>>>> No "Jobless recovery"
>>>>>>>>>>>> No "stocks led recovery"
>>>>>>>>>>>> No "ObamaCare stimulated Recovery"
>>>>>>>>>>>> No "Shovel Ready Jobs Recovery"
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Or any of the other half dozen recoveries we were told were
>>>>>>>>>>>> happening....
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There is NO recovery....
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> there must be a recovery, the 1%er's keep getting richer
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> when did they ever stop getting richer? The rich didn't have a
>>>>>>>>>> recession. Just as the government didn't have a recession. The
>>>>>>>>>> government just stole money from the rest of us. The poor didn't
>>>>>>>>>> suffer
>>>>>>>>>> a recession. In fact the Government increased it's deficits and
>>>>>>>>>> it's
>>>>>>>>>> spending and that proves there was NO recession for the government.
>>>>>>>>>> The
>>>>>>>>>> rich got richer so there was NO recession for the wealthy.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> so they must have been stealing the money from the gov't, right?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Only if the government was first stealing the money from the middle
>>>>>>>> class.
>>>>>>>> And that looks like what was happening, *borrowing the printed* money
>>>>>>>> was theft and so the entire collapse and TARP and all the bailouts was
>>>>>>>> paid for by the middle class which is why they have neither moved
>>>>>>>> forward or recovered since the collapse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "the gov't just stole from the rest of us", so you made my point, thank
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Didn't seem like what you meant but if it was then great...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Government stole from the middle class and redistributed it to the poor
>>>>>> and the wealthy and the government has nearly crushed the middle class.
>>>>>> But that just what Socialism does.
>>>>>
>>>>> so you don't like the wealthy either, good, that's a start
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> you jump to conclusions.... and wrong ones at that.
>>>>
>>>> What I said made it obvious that I don't like Government taking sides
>>>> for one group over another because that's NOT treating "persons" equal
>>>> under the law.
>>>
>>> so you are an egalitarian? that sounds like socialism to me
>>
>> I believe I said equal under the law... that's being a constitutionalist.
>> A Socialist or egalitarian seeks to "force" people to become equal
>> rather than suggesting we are created as equals with no titles of
>> nobility and from that point we make of ourselves what we can and we're
>> NOT equal in all areas like political, economic, social, and civil
>> rights for all people at all times and places. But that *Government*
>> must treat all persons equally everywhere all the time.
>>
>> That is different from egalitarians and Socialism that try to make
>> people all equal in every way all the time and everywhere.
>>
>> We aren't always equal everywhere and the constitution was written to
>> recognize that, and then an attempt was tried to refine that first
>> attempt to get rid of titles of nobility and expand it to make
>> "GOVERNMENT" treat all people equally.
>>
>> Unfortunately that has been corrupted by egalitarians and Socialists to
>> try to *force* all people to be equal all the time and everywhere and
>> that is a total failure and was always going to fail. The original idea
>> and the uncorrupted fix had it right. We are all created equal "with no
>> titles of nobility" and the government should then treat us equally
>> under the law. The problem is egalitarians and Socialists corrupting
>> that idea to their own ridiculous idea that all people are equal all the
>> time everywhere. Which is NOT what the constitution or Amendment 14
>> says.
>>
>> SO no I'm NOT egalitarian or Socialist, I actually support the
>> constitution and NOT the corruption of it.
>
> I believe all people are equal, I don't believe all people are the same
>
And yet given $10 and an equal environment, one person will end up with
more of the cash at some point.
Ever play Monopoly, even when everything starts "equal" in the end given
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
