On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:47:02 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> wrote:

>
>dsi1 wrote:
>
>> Michel Boucher wrote:
>> > Dave Smith > wrote in news:488CE79F.7AEB4A07
>> > @sympatico.ca:
>> >
>> >> I will have more faith in the system when higher percentages of welfare
>> >> recipients get off the dole and their children don't end up on it.
>> >
>> > That will only happen if you invest in it. My son's mother was on
>welfare
>> > and because she got the support she needed she was able to get out of
>it,
>> > get a job teaching school and is now about to retire. All the women I
>knew
>> > in the 80's who were on some sort of social safety net have all
>graduated.
>> > Why? Because they were supported in their time of need.
>>
>> The system saved our family's ass when my wife and I moved to CA some 30
>> years ago. As luck would have it, we found out she was pregnant with
>> nether of us with job or health insurance. We were able to get good
>> prenatal care which ended when our son was born. By then, we both had
>> jobs and insurance. I have no idea what would have happened if the
>> system was not available for us but it probably wouldn't have been good.
>> A lot of folks think the welfare system exists to throw good money after
>> bad but wadda they know? You and I know the real story.
>>
>
>
>Are you white...???

you are the stupidest fag i've ever had the displeasure of knowing.

blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:58:26 -1000, dsi1 > wrote:

>Gregory Morrow wrote:
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>> Michel Boucher wrote:
>>>> Dave Smith > wrote in news:488CE79F.7AEB4A07
>>>> @sympatico.ca:
>>>>
>>>>> I will have more faith in the system when higher percentages of welfare
>>>>> recipients get off the dole and their children don't end up on it.
>>>> That will only happen if you invest in it. My son's mother was on
>> welfare
>>>> and because she got the support she needed she was able to get out of
>> it,
>>>> get a job teaching school and is now about to retire. All the women I
>> knew
>>>> in the 80's who were on some sort of social safety net have all
>> graduated.
>>>> Why? Because they were supported in their time of need.
>>> The system saved our family's ass when my wife and I moved to CA some 30
>>> years ago. As luck would have it, we found out she was pregnant with
>>> nether of us with job or health insurance. We were able to get good
>>> prenatal care which ended when our son was born. By then, we both had
>>> jobs and insurance. I have no idea what would have happened if the
>>> system was not available for us but it probably wouldn't have been good.
>>> A lot of folks think the welfare system exists to throw good money after
>>> bad but wadda they know? You and I know the real story.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Are you white...???
>>
>>
>
>You're the first guy to ever ask me that! Boy those "write like a white
>person" lessons are really paying off! My teacher will be so proud...

but you at least smoke crack, don't you?

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:34:49 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
><sf> wrote in message ...
>> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:47:02 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>Are you white...???
>>
>> You don't need to be white to qualify for Healthy Families, Healthy
>> Kids or MediCal (which is specific to California).
>>
>
>The average welfare mom is white and in her 20s, living in a rural area.
>

yeah, but that's money well spent because they're, um, white.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:11:29 -0500, "Colonel Lingus"
> wrote:
>
>Feminist Jokes:
>

faggot joke:

q: how many faggots does it take to change a light bulb?

a: they don't change light bulbs, they just suck dicks all day.

blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:12:42 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>Orlando Enrique Fiol wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>> >I am entitled to Kvetch about cost. I pay taxes. I would rather have the money
>> >for my own use. If you want to donate your own money and throw it into that
>> >bottomless pit of need, feel free.
>>
>> I suspect, given your attitude, that "your own use" wouldn't allow too
>> much of your money to help the needy. So, just because you work for your
>> money, you feel entitled to widen the gap between you and those who have
>> less than you? Where does this sense of entitlement come from?
>>
>
>You don't know much at all about my attitude. I have no problem helping the needy.
>It is the lazy that I resent having to subsidize. I went to school, finished high
>school and went on to university. I got no allowance from the time I was 8. I had a
>paper route to earn my spending money and later had part time and summer jobs. I
>paid my own university tuition and books. The mother in this story never finished
>high school and never worked. Her excuse was that she was disabled after a car
>accident at age 23), by which time I had graduated university and was working full
>time. Call be old fashioned, but she could show just a little bit of effort toward
>supporting herself.
>

such a sturdy lad! all these shiftless fat people should be like you.

blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 11:47:45 -0500, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>Dave Smith > wrote in news:488DE3EB.4A76415
:
>
>> Doing drugs has a lot more to do with being cool and fitting in than with
>> some need to forget.
>
>I am reminded of a Doonesbury cartoon where Mark was interviewing Dr. Dan.
>Dr. Dan's new schtick was "quality time" with children. He pointed out
>that it had to be a good activity and that it needn't involve a lot of time
>but that it had to meet the child's needs.
>
>Mark asked: What is the child's need is more time?
>
>To which Dr. Dan replied: We're not talking about problem children here.
>
>Basically, Dave, I was not talking about people who do it to act cool when
>I mentioned those who are in dire straits, and you know that. What you
>presented was the case of a first nation girl who blew over 200,000$ in
>drugs. I don't think that deep down she spent all that just to look cool,
>but you're entitled to trivialize the issue any way you want. Just make
>sure you clarify that you're trivializing it so we know you're failing to
>address the fundamental point.
>
>I suggest though that you inform yourself first before going any further.
>There is much available on first nations and addiction your local friendly
>google search engine can find for you. Hell, let me get you started:
>
>http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fniah-spnia/s...nlaada-eng.php
>
>http://www.nnapf.org/
>
>That should keep you busy and off the streets for a while :-)

for most aboriginal american people, there seems to be a strong
genetic disposition towards alcoholism. almost as good as the
blankets with smallpox.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:14:31 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
>"Michel Boucher" > wrote:
>>
>> I suggest though that you inform yourself first before going any further.
>> There is much available on first nations and addiction your local friendly
>> google search engine can find for you. Hell, let me get you started:
>>
>> http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fniah-spnia/s...nlaada-eng.php
>>
>> http://www.nnapf.org/
>>
>
>Anybody who has an alcoholic uncle or parent or sibling has seen what
>addiction can do. Multiply the hold that booze can get on some people by ten
>(at least) and you have what crack can do. Add to that the fact that crack
>is illegal so these people wind up with criminal records, and the picture
>begins to emerge. I think the studies that show that body chemistry (such as
>a lack of serotonin/norepinephrine) contributes are right on. It's a
>complicated problem that the smug and self-righteous boneheads are not able
>or willing to understand. Their lack of compassion will come right back on
>them, or at least I hope it will.
>

it is a shame that smug assholism isn't a fatal condition.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:07:03 -0700, "Nexis" > wrote:

>"Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
...
>> Dave Smith > wrote in news:488DE3EB.4A76415
>> @sympatico.ca:
>>
>>> Doing drugs has a lot more to do with being cool and fitting in than with
>>> some need to forget.
>>
>> I am reminded of a Doonesbury cartoon where Mark was interviewing Dr. Dan.
>> Dr. Dan's new schtick was "quality time" with children. He pointed out
>> that it had to be a good activity and that it needn't involve a lot of
>> time
>> but that it had to meet the child's needs.
>>
>> Mark asked: What is the child's need is more time?
>>
>> To which Dr. Dan replied: We're not talking about problem children here.
>>
>> Basically, Dave, I was not talking about people who do it to act cool when
>> I mentioned those who are in dire straits, and you know that. What you
>> presented was the case of a first nation girl who blew over 200,000$ in
>> drugs. I don't think that deep down she spent all that just to look cool,
>> but you're entitled to trivialize the issue any way you want. Just make
>> sure you clarify that you're trivializing it so we know you're failing to
>> address the fundamental point.
>>
>> I suggest though that you inform yourself first before going any further.
>> There is much available on first nations and addiction your local friendly
>> google search engine can find for you. Hell, let me get you started:
>>
>> http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fniah-spnia/s...nlaada-eng.php
>>
>> http://www.nnapf.org/
>>
>> That should keep you busy and off the streets for a while :-)
>>
>
>Don't hold your breath, Michel...Dave has shown more than once in this
>thread that if he can't go off half-cocked, he'd just as soon not join the
>party. Look how many times he droned on and on about the two women in the
>article having compared their own situation to Bafria or
>Ethiopia...something they never even said. Self-educating is obviously not a
>priority for Dave.
>
>kimberly
>

i can see why. others' efforts to educate him have obviously failed,
there's no reason to think he could do a better job on his own.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:19:09 -0500, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>"Nexis" > wrote in :
>
>>> That should keep you busy and off the streets for a while :-)
>>
>> Don't hold your breath, Michel...
>
>Darn, and I was just getting used to oxygen deprivation (starting to feel
>like a consie, think like a consie, check my wallet like a consie...).

and hold on to your balls at all costs! them homosexuals have an
agenda and they're not afraid to use it!

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:01:43 -0500, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>
>Just as we require drivers to educate themselves in the proper
>manipulation of a large object which will hurtle at great speed, in order
>to avoid causing unnecessary injury (and by the way, that's another thing
>your taxes pay for and you can thank the gods for that), or crane
>operators so they learn not to drop things on top of us (you see where
>I'm going here?), there are massive changes which should be accompanied
>by a training seminar. But I don't think it's going to happen any time
>soon and governments of the dexter variety tend to leave matters like
>that to the appropriately named Invisible Hand.
>
>Steiglitz argues that the invisible hand often seems invisible because it
>in fact is not there.

the invisible hand is busy jerking off free-market conservatives.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 16:49:35 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>
>She probably doesn't feel so good about herself anymore. Sit her down with a
>bunch of church goers and she probably figures they are not at all cool.
>
<derisive snort>

i wonder, how could that be?

blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:14:31 -0400, "cybercat" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Michel Boucher" > wrote:
>>>
>>> I suggest though that you inform yourself first before going any
>>> further.
>>> There is much available on first nations and addiction your local
>>> friendly
>>> google search engine can find for you. Hell, let me get you started:
>>>
>>> http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fniah-spnia/s...nlaada-eng.php
>>>
>>> http://www.nnapf.org/
>>>
>>
>>Anybody who has an alcoholic uncle or parent or sibling has seen what
>>addiction can do. Multiply the hold that booze can get on some people by
>>ten
>>(at least) and you have what crack can do. Add to that the fact that crack
>>is illegal so these people wind up with criminal records, and the picture
>>begins to emerge. I think the studies that show that body chemistry (such
>>as
>>a lack of serotonin/norepinephrine) contributes are right on. It's a
>>complicated problem that the smug and self-righteous boneheads are not
>>able
>>or willing to understand. Their lack of compassion will come right back on
>>them, or at least I hope it will.
>>
>
> it is a shame that smug assholism isn't a fatal condition.
>

Truly it is. And it will be when you and I rule the world.

blake murphy wrote:

>
> >Doing drugs has a lot more to do with being cool and fitting in than with
> >some need to forget. Just like alcohol, the number one favourite drug in
> >North Americium, some people get into the habit. Many others do not. If pot
> >were legal most people would probably rather smoke that than the more
> >addictive drugs.
> >
> that's hard to say. assuming the use of any intoxicant, some people
> are garbageheads, who will take almost anything (to the point of
> swallowing unknown pills), and some are very loyal to their drug of
> choice, eschewing others and looking down on those who use them.

Like those who guzzle beer or martinis but want pot smokers to go to jail?

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:01:43 -0500, Michel Boucher
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>Just as we require drivers to educate themselves in the proper
>>manipulation of a large object which will hurtle at great speed, in order
>>to avoid causing unnecessary injury (and by the way, that's another thing
>>your taxes pay for and you can thank the gods for that), or crane
>>operators so they learn not to drop things on top of us (you see where
>>I'm going here?), there are massive changes which should be accompanied
>>by a training seminar. But I don't think it's going to happen any time
>>soon and governments of the dexter variety tend to leave matters like
>>that to the appropriately named Invisible Hand.
>>
>>Steiglitz argues that the invisible hand often seems invisible because it
>>in fact is not there.
>
> the invisible hand is busy jerking off free-market conservatives.
>
Blake for prez! After what Bush has put us through, nobody will even care if
you don't keep your little blakey zipped up!

<sf> wrote in message ...
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:44:32 GMT, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 07:03:57 -0700, sf wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:04:31 GMT, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> wrote:
>>>
wrote:
>>>>>Curiously, throwing more money at the problem seems to be what many
>>>>>people
>>>>>expect.
>>>>
>>>>Fiscal conservatives often like to remind us that throwing money at
>>>>certain problems won't solve them. Yet, they're fine with our current
>>>>war budget and money being thrown at religious education and faith-based
>>>>charities. What they really mean is that poor people have had money
>>>>thrown at them and it's proven not to work. In truth, many problems can
>>>>in fact be solved with money. Give people more money and they can afford
>>>>to live in better housing, eat better, etc. Of course, more money
>>>>doesn't address people's educational inadequacies or lack of values.
>>>>But, even when it comes to education, more money can mean smaller
>>>>classes taught by better teachers who are better paid and not
>>>>overworked.
>>>>
>>>
>>>You know the saying: If it can be fixed with money, then it's not
>>>really a problem.
>>
>>it ****ing well is if you don't have the money.
>>
> Reread the context.
>
>
I don't need to. I got it the first time and he's right.

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:47:02 -0500, "Gregory Morrow"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>> Michel Boucher wrote:
>>> > Dave Smith > wrote in news:488CE79F.7AEB4A07
>>> > @sympatico.ca:
>>> >
>>> >> I will have more faith in the system when higher percentages of
>>> >> welfare
>>> >> recipients get off the dole and their children don't end up on it.
>>> >
>>> > That will only happen if you invest in it. My son's mother was on
>>welfare
>>> > and because she got the support she needed she was able to get out of
>>it,
>>> > get a job teaching school and is now about to retire. All the women I
>>knew
>>> > in the 80's who were on some sort of social safety net have all
>>graduated.
>>> > Why? Because they were supported in their time of need.
>>>
>>> The system saved our family's ass when my wife and I moved to CA some 30
>>> years ago. As luck would have it, we found out she was pregnant with
>>> nether of us with job or health insurance. We were able to get good
>>> prenatal care which ended when our son was born. By then, we both had
>>> jobs and insurance. I have no idea what would have happened if the
>>> system was not available for us but it probably wouldn't have been good.
>>> A lot of folks think the welfare system exists to throw good money after
>>> bad but wadda they know? You and I know the real story.
>>>
>>
>>
>>Are you white...???
>
> you are the stupidest fag i've ever had the displeasure of knowing.
>

I keep hoping for some less charitable Chicago brothers to have a word or
two with him. *cackle*

blake murphy wrote:

> >What is funny about it? There are definite advantages to some private
> >schools. They pay for their own kids' education and then they have to pay
> >for the public system too. Some of them send their kids to faith based
> >schools because they disagree with some of the things being taught / allowed
> >in public schools.
>
> what's funny, or rather stupid, about it is that you pay taxes for
> lots of things that don't benefit you directly. do singles get a pass
> on taxes because they have no kids at all?
>
> if you want to have 'faith-based' teachers stuff your kids' heads with
> nonsense like 'creation science,' you pay extra. stop whining.

I wasn't whining about it. I was just pointing out that some people are paying
taxes that support and paying private school fees for their own kids, and that
some of them are faith based. Personally, I have no use for faith based schools
and fully agree that anyone who wants to send their kids to own should have to
pay for it.

blake murphy > wrote in
:

>>Darn, and I was just getting used to oxygen deprivation (starting to
>>feel like a consie, think like a consie, check my wallet like a
>>consie...).
>
> and hold on to your balls at all costs! them homosexuals have an
> agenda and they're not afraid to use it!

My sister is ***. I have been around *** people since she was 16, so I
don't see them as different, or having an agenda.

My grandfather was antisemitic his whole life until he went to visit the
Holy Land and came back a near-Zionist. All he had to do was meet some
Jews to like them. Perhaps all people who are afraid of homosexuals need
to do is actually meet some and find some common ground :-)

French-Canadians like to play a little game we like to call "Yes, we were
talking about you behind your back" when unilingual (needless to say)
anglophones complain that we are not speaking English in their august
presence, even though we were talking about the weather. It increases the
already burgeoning paranoia and gives us a sense of saatisfaction. Same
with gays. If you feel targeted, they're putting you on, because you are
such easy targets. I can't say I blame them either ;-)

cybercat wrote:
> "blake murphy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:01:43 -0500, Michel Boucher
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Just as we require drivers to educate themselves in the proper
>>> manipulation of a large object which will hurtle at great speed, in
>>> order to avoid causing unnecessary injury (and by the way, that's
>>> another thing your taxes pay for and you can thank the gods for
>>> that), or crane operators so they learn not to drop things on top
>>> of us (you see where I'm going here?), there are massive changes
>>> which should be accompanied by a training seminar. But I don't
>>> think it's going to happen any time soon and governments of the
>>> dexter variety tend to leave matters like that to the appropriately
>>> named Invisible Hand. Steiglitz argues that the invisible hand often
>>> seems invisible
>>> because it in fact is not there.
>>
>> the invisible hand is busy jerking off free-market conservatives.
>>
> Blake for prez! After what Bush has put us through, nobody will even
> care if you don't keep your little blakey zipped up!

LOL you just crease me up

"Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
...
> blake murphy > wrote in
> :
>
>>>Darn, and I was just getting used to oxygen deprivation (starting to
>>>feel like a consie, think like a consie, check my wallet like a
>>>consie...).
>>
>> and hold on to your balls at all costs! them homosexuals have an
>> agenda and they're not afraid to use it!
>
> My sister is ***. I have been around *** people since she was 16, so I
> don't see them as different, or having an agenda.
>
> My grandfather was antisemitic his whole life until he went to visit the
> Holy Land and came back a near-Zionist. All he had to do was meet some
> Jews to like them. Perhaps all people who are afraid of homosexuals need
> to do is actually meet some and find some common ground :-)
>
You know Blake was playing, right?

Michel Boucher wrote:

> My sister is ***. I have been around *** people since she was 16, so I
> don't see them as different, or having an agenda.


Hmmm...so *** people don't have an "agenda"? You need to get out a bit more
I guess...

My suggestion is that you peruse some of the *** press/media. Then get back
to us...


--
Best
Greg

Michel Boucher wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote in
> :
>
> >>You know the saying: If it can be fixed with money, then it's not
> >>really a problem.
> >
> > it ****ing well is if you don't have the money.
>
> The basic problem is that society generally sets a monetary value on goods
> and services and requires ownership as a badge of belonging. With all
> lands in some form of ownership (state or private), people can no longer
> just go out into the woods and survive on their own without referring to
> others unless they play into the game to start, ie buy or lease land.
> Without the resources to do that, they are stuck in urban areas in order
to
> obtain services they are told they need.

> I guess the fundamental of liberalism which were instilled in the anglo-
> Saxon world (self-reliance, individualism, Star Trek) re no longer valid,
> but they are still being used as reasons to deny basic services, as if
> there actually was a choice. For most, there is not.


As much as you admire communism, it doesn't work in real life and in fact
failed about 20 - odd years ago...

In the meantime the capitalist market system rulz...and it's a system that
is enabling a larger percentage of folks around the world to live better
lives than at any time in history.

[Of course you are lucky in that your income is derived primarily from the
taxpayer's purse...]

Them's the breaks...

:-)

--
Best
Greg

" I find Greg Morrow lowbrow, witless, and obnoxious. For him to claim that
we are some
kind of comedy team turns my stomach."
- "cybercat" to me on rec.food.cooking

"cybercat" > wrote in news:g6nmfp$3ft$1
@registered.motzarella.org:

> You know Blake was playing, right?

Of course. It was a generic statement, not directed at a person in
particular.

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in
news
> As much as you admire communism,

Wrong.

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in
m:

> Michel Boucher wrote:
>
>> My sister is ***. I have been around *** people since she was 16, so
>> I don't see them as different, or having an agenda.
>
> Hmmm...so *** people don't have an "agenda"? You need to get out a
> bit more I guess...
>
> My suggestion is that you peruse some of the *** press/media. Then
> get back to us...

I'm a French-Canadian. We fought the free-masons, orangemen, and what
nots, and we won. When I say agenda, I mean a hidden plan which is fronted
by an acceptable one, like the conservatives have to change everyone into
Stepford people while pretending to be just ordinary folk themselves.
Organizing to win a battle waged against you is not an agenda...it's
strategy.

"Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Gregory Morrow" > wrote in
> news >
>> As much as you admire communism,
>
> Wrong.

There is no sport in arguing with the simpleminded.

"cybercat" > wrote in news:g6nopj$79h$1
@registered.motzarella.org:

> "Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> "Gregory Morrow" > wrote in
>> news >>
>>> As much as you admire communism,
>>
>> Wrong.
>
> There is no sport in arguing with the simpleminded.

Actually, there is some sport, but it just isn't much of a challenge.

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:45:36 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
><sf> wrote in message ...
>> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:44:32 GMT, blake murphy
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 07:03:57 -0700, sf wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:04:31 GMT, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> wrote:
>>>>
wrote:
>>>>>>Curiously, throwing more money at the problem seems to be what many
>>>>>>people
>>>>>>expect.
>>>>>
>>>>>In truth, many problems can
>>>>>in fact be solved with money. Give people more money and they can afford
>>>>>to live in better housing, eat better, etc. Of course, more money
>>>>>doesn't address people's educational inadequacies or lack of values.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You know the saying: If it can be fixed with money, then it's not
>>>>really a problem.
>>>
>>>it ****ing well is if you don't have the money.
>>>
>> Reread the context.
>>
>>
>I don't need to. I got it the first time and he's right.
>
>
I see. You two are saying that voters and the community in general
(if they don't vote - they can participate through community hearings)
aren't part of the process of where to spend our tax dollars.



--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

<sf> wrote in message ...
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:45:36 -0400, "cybercat" >
> wrote:
>
>>
>><sf> wrote in message ...
>>> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:44:32 GMT, blake murphy
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 07:03:57 -0700, sf wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:04:31 GMT, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> wrote:
>>>>>
wrote:
>>>>>>>Curiously, throwing more money at the problem seems to be what many
>>>>>>>people
>>>>>>>expect.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In truth, many problems can
>>>>>>in fact be solved with money. Give people more money and they can
>>>>>>afford
>>>>>>to live in better housing, eat better, etc. Of course, more money
>>>>>>doesn't address people's educational inadequacies or lack of values.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You know the saying: If it can be fixed with money, then it's not
>>>>>really a problem.
>>>>
>>>>it ****ing well is if you don't have the money.
>>>>
>>> Reread the context.
>>>
>>>
>>I don't need to. I got it the first time and he's right.
>>
>>
> I see. You two are saying that voters and the community in general
> (if they don't vote - they can participate through community hearings)
> aren't part of the process of where to spend our tax dollars.
>
>
>
> --
> I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the
> number of carats in a diamond.
>
Reread the context.

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:43:26 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>blake murphy wrote:
>
>>
>> >Doing drugs has a lot more to do with being cool and fitting in than with
>> >some need to forget. Just like alcohol, the number one favourite drug in
>> >North Americium, some people get into the habit. Many others do not. If pot
>> >were legal most people would probably rather smoke that than the more
>> >addictive drugs.
>> >
>> that's hard to say. assuming the use of any intoxicant, some people
>> are garbageheads, who will take almost anything (to the point of
>> swallowing unknown pills), and some are very loyal to their drug of
>> choice, eschewing others and looking down on those who use them.
>
>Like those who guzzle beer or martinis but want pot smokers to go to jail?
>
In regard to the use of intoxicant's, if you can't control your urge
for it, get help. In every state in the union, and with universal
health care in Canada, there are free places to go for rehab.

As to not being able to afford to eat meat, GET A JOB.
The mother has been disable from the time she was 23, she couldn't
do house keeping in a hotel,or else where, the younger woman couldn't
walk to a local McDonalds for work?

Unfortunately these remedies require some self reliance.
I don't mind picking some one up when they're down.
I don't mind carrying someone who can't do for themselves.
But I object to carrying some one who has two good feet.

The evil done to the member in your family ( My grandfather was a
slave) do not give you a right to complain now. Stand on your own two
feet. If you truly need help you will get it. But if you do not truly
need help and you take it, you are a thief.

"Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
. ..
> "cybercat" > wrote in news:g6nopj$79h$1
> @registered.motzarella.org:
>
>> "Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>> "Gregory Morrow" > wrote in
>>> news >>>
>>>> As much as you admire communism,
>>>
>>> Wrong.
>>
>> There is no sport in arguing with the simpleminded.
>
> Actually, there is some sport, but it just isn't much of a challenge.

So you like shooting fish in a barrel, eh?

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:05:01 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 17:43:00 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 15:54:46 -0700, "Nexis" > wrote:
>>
>>>True...but many wouldn't feel they need to if they had other options.
>>>Obviously there are people who will be criminals no matter what...
>>
>>Not necessarily. We don't have a caste system. Everyone has a chance
>>to succeed here.
>>
>>>but there
>>>are plenty of others resorting to stealing because they don't see another
>>>choice.
>>
>>Honestly, I think those days are over in the united states (let's just
>>keep this to legal citizens and not kitchen sink it). IMO: There is
>>no more crime due to lack of choices. In my city, we have too many
>>social outreach programs for that excuse to hold water anymore.
>
>and those programs are so well-funded they never have to turn anyone
>away? where do you live?
>
Food programs, no. Drug programs have a waiting list.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:08:12 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:45:22 -0700, sf wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 23:46:21 GMT, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> wrote:
>>
>>>sf wrote:
>>>>And armed guards to protect them. There's a reason why decent
>>>>groceries and other retail businesses are not near public housing
>>>>projects.
>>>
>>>See my other post. When people need or want things they can't afford,
>>>they often resort to theft. Grocery stores would have to be subsidized
>>>so that their merchandise was consistently affordable or even free to
>>>the poorest people in greatest need.
>>>
>>People in America are not that poor. Drugs are at the root of the
>>problem, not poverty. Drug dealers don't barter, they deal in cold
>>cash. People steal to get money to buy drugs. If they receive
>>welfare, their priority is drugs not food. Even so, stealing food
>>isn't a necessity here in America. All they need to do is show up at
>>a soup kitchen and they are fed. There is NO valid excuse to steal
>>food in this day and age.
>
>again, your soup kitchens are so well-founded or -stocked they never
>turn anyone away? everyone eats until they're full? where do you
>live?
>
Hell, there are people on the streets giving sandwiches to people who
won't go to a soup kitchen here.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:57:33 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
><sf> wrote in message ...
>> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:45:36 -0400, "cybercat" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><sf> wrote in message ...
>>>> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 15:44:32 GMT, blake murphy
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 07:03:57 -0700, sf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:04:31 GMT, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> wrote:
>>>>>>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>Curiously, throwing more money at the problem seems to be what many
>>>>>>>>people
>>>>>>>>expect.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In truth, many problems can
>>>>>>>in fact be solved with money. Give people more money and they can
>>>>>>>afford
>>>>>>>to live in better housing, eat better, etc. Of course, more money
>>>>>>>doesn't address people's educational inadequacies or lack of values.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>You know the saying: If it can be fixed with money, then it's not
>>>>>>really a problem.
>>>>>
>>>>>it ****ing well is if you don't have the money.
>>>>>
>>>> Reread the context.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I don't need to. I got it the first time and he's right.
>>>
>>>
>> I see. You two are saying that voters and the community in general
>> (if they don't vote - they can participate through community hearings)
>> aren't part of the process of where to spend our tax dollars.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the
>> number of carats in a diamond.
>>
>Reread the context.
>
I included it. Your turn to read.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

Pan > wrote:

>The evil done to the member in your family ( My grandfather was a
>slave) do not give you a right to complain now.

People have every right to complain, regardless. That is part of
the right to free speech.


Steve

--
--
Best
Greg

" I find Greg Morrow lowbrow, witless, and obnoxious. For him to claim that
we are some
kind of comedy team turns my stomach."
- "cybercat" to me on rec.food.cooking

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > "Gregory Morrow" > wrote in
> > news > >
> >> As much as you admire communism,
> >
> > Wrong.
>
> There is no sport in arguing with the simpleminded.


"Message from discussion For USAins (Knowledge of Geography)

From: Michel Boucher >
Subject: For USAins (Knowledge of Geography)
Date: 2000/05/18
Message-ID: >#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 624775658
References: >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> >
>
>
> >
> >
X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x30.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 192.197.82.230
Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy.
X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu May 18 00:54:06 2000 GMT
X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDalsandor
Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.08 [en] (WinNT; U ;Nav)

In article >,
Alan Zelt > wrote:

> Michel Boucher wrote:
>
> > You know, it's pretty pathetic when a foreigner (moi) has to set
> > USAians (not every USAian) straight about their own frikking history
> > when the documents are there and are available to all to set
> > themselves straight.
> > Oy!
>
> For some, the flag waving so hard in front of them makes it very hard
> to concentrate on facts. Besides, for some, facts are only a nuisance,
> getting in the way of belief.

Don't worry Alan, you're not on my hit list ;-)

I've been rereading Hannah Arendt's book On Revolution in the last few
days and I'm seeing it with new eyes. Her essay on the social question
(chapter 2, central to European revolutions) clearly establishes the
distinction between the creation of the US and that of France (and
consequently all of modern Europe) which I believe are still present to
this day.

Without passing judgment on either choice, it is clear that the European
one focuses intently on the alleviation of poverty and the subjugation
of individual choices to the common weal (socialism, communism, and in
its essence Christianity), whereas the US revolution brought about the
institutionalization of ownership by all (white males) and the right to
defend that against encroachments. This is something which is foreign to
nations where the alleviation of poverty has had to be the first diktat.

I can see snippets of this dichotomy in the debate here. It may also
explain why, with all the good will in the world, the US will never be
able to do more than manipulate purse strings abroad and their system
of government is redundant in places like Africa. In their fundament,
they don't understand the forces that drive less fortunate states.
Until wealth is more evenly distributed in the entire world, it's never
going to happen.

Enough rambling. Back to the fireworks! :-) "

</>

"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
...
> Pan > wrote:
>
>>The evil done to the member in your family ( My grandfather was a
>>slave) do not give you a right to complain now.
>
> People have every right to complain, regardless. That is part of
> the right to free speech.
>
>
Yep. People have a right to complain even if they have no grounds for
complaint.

<sf> wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:08:12 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:45:22 -0700, sf wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 23:46:21 GMT, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>>sf wrote:
> >>>>And armed guards to protect them. There's a reason why decent
> >>>>groceries and other retail businesses are not near public housing
> >>>>projects.
> >>>
> >>>See my other post. When people need or want things they can't afford,
> >>>they often resort to theft. Grocery stores would have to be subsidized
> >>>so that their merchandise was consistently affordable or even free to
> >>>the poorest people in greatest need.
> >>>
> >>People in America are not that poor. Drugs are at the root of the
> >>problem, not poverty. Drug dealers don't barter, they deal in cold
> >>cash. People steal to get money to buy drugs. If they receive
> >>welfare, their priority is drugs not food. Even so, stealing food
> >>isn't a necessity here in America. All they need to do is show up at
> >>a soup kitchen and they are fed. There is NO valid excuse to steal
> >>food in this day and age.
> >
> >again, your soup kitchens are so well-founded or -stocked they never
> >turn anyone away? everyone eats until they're full? where do you
> >live?
> >
> Hell, there are people on the streets giving sandwiches to people who
> won't go to a soup kitchen here.


There are a number of homeless here in my Chicago 'hood. Years ago I'd buy
food for some of these "hungry" people, I stopped that when the last several
I bought for laughed at me and threw the grub in the trash can...sorry, I'm
not giving you cash so you can feed your booze or crack or lottery ticket
habit.

There's a number of street people that will simply refuse to get help. A
number of my pals are in social services, they've attempted to steer some of
these souls into rehab programs, etc. They've all refused. These
particular street people are mostly ***, a coupla blocks away there is a
huge *** social service agency which could give them all kinds of help with
rehab, benefits, job training, finding an apartment, etc. (there is also a
huge Salvation Army facility nearby). They'd rather stand on the street and
beg and so bother passerby or engage in petty crime for their income
stream...

It's awfully tough to have a bleeding heart when one encounters this every
day. I used to volunteer with social service agencies too (I won't go into
my endless stories), but it was largely a wasted effort; I can only do so
much, I've not the energy to light a fire under someone who makes no attempt
to help themselves.. One only has so much patience...


:-|


--
Best
Greg

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 01:51:44 GMT, Orlando Enrique Fiol
> wrote:

wrote:
>>I don't think it is antipathy for the poor as much as it is for these two very
>>large women who compared their situation to the famines in Ethiopia or Biafra. They
>>aren't starving. They are gigantic.
>
>The daughter described how her sister often helps her out when she runs
>out of food, which suggests near starvation to me.
>
>>The mother has never worked and never finished
>>high school. She claims to have been left depressed and unable to work since she
>>was involved in a car accident 17 years ago. Being 40, that means the accident
>>happened when she was 23, well past the age when she should have finished high
>>school, and even after leaving school she never worked, even when she could have.
>
>Okay, let's just come out and say it: the bitch is lazy. Does that mean
>we, in the most affluent country on Earth, should leave the lazy to die?
>

for many people here, the answer is emphatically 'yes.' along with
the stupid or just plain unlucky people.

charming, no?

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:11:58 -0400, Goomba >
wrote:

>Orlando Enrique Fiol wrote:
> Gloria Nunez describes her middle-class
>> working husband. But, we all know those factory jobs are growing ever
>> more scarce. Why don't some of you affluent people who look down upon
>> the poor actually contribute to their improvement by donating vehicles
>> and funding child care so they can get to work? What about gardening
>> supplies so they can grow fresh fruits and vegetables in their housing
>> complexes? What about cash subsidies or gift cards from organic
>> groceries that could deliver fresh produce to their homes?
>>
>> Orlando
>
>What about getting a job?
>Factory jobs never seemed very "middle class" to me? But in actuality,
>there is no firm definition of middle class. Apparently if asked, about
>10 percent of the public will say they are lower class, and something
>like 10 percent will say they're upper class, but the rest of us place
>ourselves in the "middle class"
>Hmmmmmmmm.... ?

people consistently misjudge their 'class.' people lower in class
wish to think themselves 'middle' and some upper-middle and upper
figure they must be 'middle' because they don't have as much money as
they want to have. as with most areas, people have trouble seeing
themselves clearly. you rarely hear someone say, 'i am a bigot' or 'i
have no sense of humor,' yet we know they are out there.

your pal,
blake