Human Rights

Come on RSR, what's with the trying to score political points? Doesn't work on me, I have no allegience to any party in the US.

If you are arguing that welfare can be used to create dependency, then yes, it can. But that doesn't negate the idea of welfare itself.
 
AnyOldIron said:
Come on RSR, what's with the trying to score political points? Doesn't work on me, I have no allegience to any party in the US.

If you are arguing that welfare can be used to create dependency, then yes, it can. But that doesn't negate the idea of welfare itself.
Click to expand...

That is how the left builds it power - by making people dependent on government
 
That is how the left builds it power - by making people dependent on government

Anymore RW slogans you've got?
 
red states rule said:
It was Congress - the President cannot spend any taxpayer money

What libs hate to have out in the open is the Bush tax cuts have provided RECORD revenues to the government and the annual budget deficit has been shrinking for the last four years

Libs are scratching their pointy heads trying to understand how tax CUTS and INCREASE revenues
Click to expand...

that is true it was a Republican congress and Bush seemed to lose his Veto pen :)
Sadam must have hidden The veto pen with the WMD's.
 
red states rule said:
It is not a RIGHT. It is something one has to go out and earn

I am fed up with libs wanting me to finance someones elses wants and desires

Libs has flushed $9 trillion down the toilet in social programs, and all they say is that more money is needed
Click to expand...

It is not a RIGHT. It is something one has to go out and earn



Tell me please, how in "rightwing world" a seven year old child, a disabled person, or a mentally handicapped person "earns" the right to guaranteed healthcare?

Does "rightwing world" have some rock quarry's were we put them on a chaingang breaking rocks for a few years, before they have any guarantee of healthcare?
 
Topspin said:
Cypress is morphing into Castro, he once worked for an oil company and is now guilt ridden by his enourmus wealth and is a card carrying limosine liberal.
Click to expand...


I challenge you to find any post ever, where I said corporations are evil. Or one single post where I ever advocated for communism.

If you can't find one, please return to this thread and admit you lied.



for the record, corporations are neither bad nor good. They are amoral entities set up simply to make a profit.

Neither do I hate domestic oil companies. I think we need to have a domestic oil industry. However, when oil is over 60 dollars a barrel, I don't think the oil industry still needs the special tax breaks bush gave them in 2003. Other industries are doing far worse than oil companies: including the domestic airline industry and the domestic car industry. Until oil falls to below 15 dollars a barrel, I don't know why they still need the special tax breaks bush gave them.
 
red states rule said:
It is unreal that after the libs have taken $9 trillion from the producers and gave it to the non producers - they say the need is still there and taxpayers need to fork more of their money over

$9 trillion has been spent on the libs War on Poverty - and like spoiled ball players they say they want more money
Click to expand...
If I wanted a producer like you I'd go out and buy a steer.

Far better the War on Poverty than the cons' War on Drugs . . . or War on Iraq for that matter. Bad metaphors all, but some are more destructive than others.
 
Cypress said:
Every now and then I hear a Con claim that the United States does not recognize a right to health care, nor a right to a minimum level of economic security and justice (housing, social services, food, etc).

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United States and other member states of the United Nations, indicates otherwise:
Click to expand...


Does the Universal Declaration of Human Rights trump the Constitution?
 
cawacko said:
Does the Universal Declaration of Human Rights trump the Constitution?
Click to expand...
No, but it is equal to the constitution. It is a treaty, ratified by Congress. That makes it, like the constitution, the "Supreme Law of the Land."

Hiya cawacko! Long time, no type, dude. :)
 
OrnotBitwise said:
If I wanted a producer like you I'd go out and buy a steer.

Far better the War on Poverty than the cons' War on Drugs . . . or War on Iraq for that matter. Bad metaphors all, but some are more destructive than others.
Click to expand...

The only solution the left has to any problem is to throw more money at it
 
cawacko said:
Does the Universal Declaration of Human Rights trump the Constitution?
Click to expand...


the UDHR is not a legal document, so the answer is no.

However, the U.S. formally declares in it, that it considered healthcare and basic social services a human right. So we recognize in a formal sense, this basic human right.

Also, numerous treaties signed by the U.S. incorporate elements of human rights that are similar to those stated in the UDHR. And any treaty the US signs becomes "the supreme law of the land", as stated in the Constitution. Effectively making it equal to the constitution.
 
red states rule said:
The only solution the left has to any problem is to throw more money at it
Click to expand...
Oh, nice slogan. How long did it take you to memorize it? I'm impressed, though: you even spelled it correctly. Most cons can't.

You can turn around now, bossie: we've got all we need. Go fertilize a flowerbed or something useful, okay?
 
OrnotBitwise said:
Oh, nice slogan. How long did it take you to memorize it? I'm impressed, though: you even spelled it correctly. Most cons can't.

You can turn around now, bossie: we've got all we need. Go fertilize a flowerbed or something useful, okay?
Click to expand...


There is a valid argument here. The left does only want to throw money, they don't want to address the pathologies which underly personal failure. they just want to expand the funding of their silo, by getting more funding, but not REALLY helping anyone.
 
red states rule said:
The only solution the left has to any problem is to throw more money at it
Click to expand...

Like the right throwing more money at IRAQ ?
Like the right throwing more money at the pill bill ?
the Republican congress fattened up really well at the pork trough.
That myth about Dems throwing money at the problem is busted. they all do it.
 
AssHatZombie said:
There is a valid argument here. The left does only want to throw money, they don't want to address the pathologies which underly personal failure. they just want to expand the funding of their silo, by getting more funding, but not REALLY helping anyone.
Click to expand...
Oh, here we go with that mythical monolithic "Left" again.

There is no "The Left," dingbat. There are as many different strains of progressives as there are of cons. More, since we're less conformist and somewhat more confrontational than y'all are.

I do admit that some lib-leaning politicians -- and liberal activists, too -- do indeed prefer to maintain existing programs than establish new ones. That's the more conservative side of their natures coming out. Take the known route and all that. That says little about progressives in general, however.

We're very fractious, you know. That's why you lot are generally better organized: you take orders better.

You just think we're not interested in helping anyone because you have a mystical notion of How To Help People, based on your ideology. We don't share that notion. We think you help people by actually helping them, for the most part.

:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top