"Far-left paganism Burning-man crowd?" -reply to Luigi

Submitted by jennifer solis (United States), Sep 7, 2008 at 18:43

I'll reply to your reply:

"The reason there are so many democrats is not because of far-left progressive and world-appeasement ideologies, it's because of agriculture and labor unions, where increasingly, big farmers and union bosses benefit."

Really?

Well, one would have to hold a job before one could feed the belly of that beast.

Remember "welfare mothers"? Which union did they belong to? How about "affirmative action" - all those High-School graduates sure organized themselves quickly, didn't they? And what about "universal healthcare"? Which union would that program fall under? "It takes a villiage" - who's the Mayor - Jimmy Hoffa?

The reason there are "so many Democrats" is because what Kennedy started in the sixtees, namely appealing to the minorities' votes, has escalated as the Democratic Party learned that Uncle Sam could buy votes via promising something for nothing.

So far as "world-appeasment ideolgy" goes, I'm sure you will agree that this is overwhelmingly a hall-mark of the Democratic Party - Clinton's cutting our military divisions in half; Obama's "tea with Ahmadinijad", Clinton inviting Arafat to the White House, THINGS LIKE OBAMA'S $845,000,000,000 GLOBAL POVERTY ACT, etc. Politicians on both sides of the isle regularily indulge in megalomania, but Democrats carry it a bit further with design to be "gods" of the world by way of throwing money at countries that hate us.

Admittedly, Republicans as well are guilty of this; but Democrats favor the employment of the U.N. as their mediator (and partner in crime), so much of these $'s end up in the pockets of enemy governments, instead of the people it seeks to help. Gee, that sound alot like the Democrat's M.O. right here in the good ol' U.S.A.

Quoting you, #2 -

"The far-left paganism Burning-man crowd has taken over the DNC...."

- that statement is so bizzare I'll skip on to your next one.

Quoting you, #3 -

"There is nothing wrong with helping your fellow human being. You and I have talked about the different denominations, and my particular faith (Catholicism) says that the rich have an obligation to share with the poor, HOWEVER, they cannot be FORCED to do it."

Very admirable, Luigi. I'd point out that this obligation is to HELP the poor; how does it HELP when lazy, fat Americans demand a week off (with the help of their union or not) for bruising their pinky at work, while still being paid...and then sue the boss at work for cruelty and negligence (that pinky should have been protected! ) towards it's employees...or for sexual harrasment, as the word "pinky" is definetly feministic and should have been referred to as the "fourth finger".

How does it HELP the poor when this "help" perpetuates the human condition of "gimmie"?

I don't doubt that thousands exist in this country that indeed are poor through no fault of their own; this is one legitament reason for WELFARE; guess where the money for welfare comes from? YOUR TAX DOLLARS (I quite agree that affluent Democrates seldom live next-door to the overwhelming majority of those they seek to "help". I believe this is because they feel they might interupt the breeding process; once the "poor" sees what prosperity can come from not having six kids, the Democratic Party's "base" would shrink and we can't have that now, can we).

If these can't work in the first place, and live off government aid, guess where the money for government aid comes from? You got it, YOUR TAX DOLLARS. So we are, in this regard, "FORCED" to contribute and "share with the poor", as you put it. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's" is a command in the Bible - however, we, in this great country, have a way to decide which "Caesar" will be in the White House...and which party will be strengthened because of it.

"A government, big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have." - Thomas Jefferson

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".