- Joined
- Sep 3, 2010
- Messages
- 120,954
- Reaction score
- 28,531
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
what is intellectually dishonest is your constant confusion of the purpose of this board. We are not limited by what the law is, but we have the right to say why it ought to be changed. You like the current system where welfare socialists buy votes by promising the "poor" that others have the duty of paying for all the social programs the poor want. I think that is a system doomed to ultimately fail as it creates more and more dependent sloths whose parasitic cravings grow faster than the bank accounts of those forced to fund the expansion of the dependency classes
Honest question: at what point do you say to yourself "I have floated this idea hundreds of times in different ways in many different threads for some time now and it is not going anywhere. In a poll I got my butt kicked by a vote of 50 to 4 and even one of the 4 admitted to voting in error. Every time I do it just catch flack for it and I am convincing nobody. Its time to give it a rest."
At what point do you decide that over the top hyperbole using phrases like
"welfare socialists"
"dependent sloths"
"parasitic cravings"
"dependency classes"
are really there to provide red meat for the already converted to your cause and really do nothing to further debate or stimulate any sort of honest discussion?