The origins of the gimmie-gimmie mentaltiy ? The entitlement mindset.
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Sunday, August 9, 2026 14:33
VIEWED: 10247
PAGE 8 of 12
Quote:Yeah, I can, when the choices of having kids becomes a burden on society, and endangers the health and well being of her other kids. It's not the fact that she's having kids, or so many, but that she refuses to take ANY responsibility.
Originally posted by M52NICKERSON:Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Your view of freedom is far different than mine. She had no 'right' to take from society with so little regard. That's not 'freedom', that's selfishness and an abuse of society's generosity.
You can't have claim to believe in freedom and want to dictate to people when and if they can have children.
Quote:
Some people will always take advantage of the generosity and freedoms of society. As I said that is part of their costs.
On this, we disagree.
"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Little Rappy favors money over freedom. Little Rappy favors security over freedom. Little Rappy favors torture over freedom. In fact little Rappy seems to favor pretty much everything over freedom.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
This surprises you exactly why?
sorry, you just come off as a totally judgemental bastard in this matter, and someone who is obsessed with the contents of their own hip pocket.Quote:
I have a long-time friend who has (last I heard) six kids by three different fathers--two of them were the result of being raped by one of her husbands (she wouldn't have an abortion unless her life was threatened--and even then, only because she wouldn't be able to take care of the remaining children). She's had a tough time of it, no question; she's had to fight for her kids periodically and had them taken a couple of times, once in areas where what would have happened to the children would probably have been pretty awful. She was targeted by Child Welfare, who searched to find SOMETHING each time to take the kids. In the end she always won.
so for the sake of not knowing anything about this woman, you can't assume that because she has 15 children to 3 different fathers that will not be a good parent
The last time I heard from her, she had moved to LA and was doing fine. She adores each of her kids and yes, while a few times she had to take assistance, mostly she busted ass to work and care for her kids. They never went hungry, tho' they came close a few times. She had found a good guy who loved her and yes, was expecting again. And still working. There is no way taking her kids from her at a bad point in her life would ever have been good for the children; they're beautiful kids and each of them excels in their own way...and they know they are loved beyond anything.
She is, by the way, as Caucasian as you get.
I don't think anyone knows if she is incapable of raising "even ONE of them", which only reflects the attitude mentioned.
Wish, I don't know you very well, but I understand your fury, in both this and the other thread. However, I too would argue as to how you propose to actually find out who is and isn't, or won't be, a good parent. I often quote Keanu Reeves line from "Parenthood" that Quote:
But it's meant as a snark, not as reality, because having seen the failings of every system we've instituted for protecting children, I don't presume to think I have the answer, either.
You know, Mrs. Buckman, you need a license to buy a dog, to drive a car - hell, you even need a license to catch a fish. But they'll let any butt-reaming asshole be a father.Quote:
This is quite a different stance from the one you took during the Gulf oil spill. At that time, you DEMANDED that the government take over and fix it, because it was simply too big to expect the oil company to carry the load.Quote:
Ohhh, Mike: " This surprises you exactly why?" And no, I know it doesn't surprise you in the least, so the question ought to be "So why do you repeat again what everyone already knows?" And yes, I know the answer to THAT one too; you enjoy playing his game.
How many times has Rappy refused to read the articles linked in threads, yet still insists on throwing in his 2 cents?
There IS no viable answer at this time to the issue this presents. It pretty much comes down to "do you believe a society should provide safety nets for the weakest among it?" Which is easy, as many great people have said, in one form or another, " Aristotle has often been quoted as saying you can judge a nation by the way it treats its most vulnerable citizens. Many, many more have said a variation of the same, including Ghandi. The validity of the statement should be so obvious to anyone that questioning it is only possibly by Randroids and people with the same mentality, and we know who that describes. So attempting to "debate" people like that is just a waste of time. Calling it "white man's burdeny" is also ridiculous, as people throughout history, of every race, have made the statement. It
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Oops, first mistake.
my views aren't in the least 'fact free', but based in the writings of the US Constitution. Try giving it a read, sometime.
Where in the Constitution does it guarantee the right to own property, to make a profit, or to form corporations? Where in the Constitution does it guarantee the right to wage foreign wars, to hold Americans in indefinite detention, torture suspects, or to try them before a military panel?
How do you expect me... or anyone, for that matter... when you make such egregious mis-statements? So before you tell others to read the Constitution (I have) maybe you should read it yourself, and not have right wing entertainers read it, like some Pope interpreting the Bible for you?
Quote:Hogwash. You bring up points only when they're brought up for you. You change "your" mind only when the past becomes an inconvenient embarrassment for the right wing, and the narrative gets changed for you and you go along with it, and never even notice. That is why your topic du jour changes from one breathless talking point after another... if it isn't WMD, it's ACORN, then Palin, and if not that then Fannie and Freddie, and when THAT is no longer a viable scapegoat they (and you) shift to something else.
Claims of 'puppets', 'mind numbed robots ', etc... have been raised since Rush was first on the air. But his critics have it 180degrees backwards. I was already thinking this stuff, before Rush.
You have no intellectual anchor, rappy. You drift when and where the right wing media tells you to, not noticing where you've been, where you're going, or even that you shot yourself in the foot a couple of dozen times.
Quote:OMG, you're using later events to justify your own wildly mistaken assessments?
I'm pretty sure it was well before the economy crashed that I made that comment about it being on 'fire'. And even if the comment was a bit of hyperbole, ( it was ) that was only in retaliation to the non stop claims of how BAD the economy had been, for months , if not years. Compared to what we have now, yes, the economy WAS on fire. So, no contradiction there.
As for the so-called "retaliation" to "non-stop" claims... rappy, I don't know if the claims were non-stop, but what they were (from me, at any case) was not a state of current performance but a warning and a prediction. What I said was... the wealth gap is so large, the debt burden is so huge, that it WILL bring the economy down. And, it did. Meanwhile, you were too stupid to listen, and because the facts were coming at you from a source that you didn't like, you were so busy "reacting" that you never even noticed the monster creeping up behind you, despite that fact that people kept pointing and shouting. At one point, you intimated that you were some kind of financial advisor, that people paid you "good money" for your insight.
If you suck so badly even in your area of so-called expertise, I just hope peeps didn't pay you TOO much. Or lose TOO much money on account of your stupidity. Because in the end, I was right and you were wrong.
Quote:You KNOW this pony aint' gonna trot for you no more, don't you? Your lack of response is typical (for you) when you realize that you were wrong. How can you ever learn if you never admit you were ... gasp! .... wrong!. The answer is: you can't. Which is why you will never learn.
WMD ? Are you serious ? That's not even worth my time to respond. Next.
Quote:Ah, well, see, you presumed a response on my part, and you are wrong about this too. But before I tell you what I think,: How can you square with the idea of freedom with the idea of forced sterilization? I would like to know what exceptions
So, in YOUR mind, this lady should be "free " to have as many kids as she wants, regardless of her ability to take care of them, and put as much strain on the social services as she damn well pleases? Sorry, that ain't freedom. That's recklessness, and child cruelty.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Little Rappy favors money over freedom. Little Rappy favors security over freedom. Little Rappy favors torture over freedom. In fact little Rappy seems to favor pretty much everything over freedom.
Not one of your inane, silly claims can be backed up. Your fantasy of claiming I chose A over B, is simply childish, and nothing more.
"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I made no misstatements. Read the 5th Amendment, per private property.
http://constitution.i2i.org/2011/03/21/the-constitution-and-property-r
ights/
The rest of your first paragraph is just nonsense.
Quote:
Hogwash. You bring up points only when they're brought up for you. You change "your" mind only when the past becomes an inconvenient embarrassment for the right wing, and the narrative gets changed for you and you go along with it, and never even notice. That is why your topic du jour changes from one breathless talking point after another... if it isn't WMD, it's ACORN, then Palin, and if not that then Fannie and Freddie, and when THAT is no longer a viable scapegoat they (and you) shift to something else.
You have no intellectual anchor, rappy. You drift when and where the right wing media tells you to, not noticing where you've been, where you're going, or even that you shot yourself in the foot a couple of dozen times.
Complete fantasy. I've been so consistent, it infuriates you.
And funny, how you thought the debt burden was such a crisis of impending doom under Bush, but now , for some reason, your cries of alarm have fallen silent. Why is that ? Obama has only pushed the debt up further, but it's fine for him now, huh?
Quote:
At one point, you intimated that you were some kind of financial advisor, that people paid you "good money" for your insight.
If you suck so badly even in your area of so-called expertise, I just hope peeps didn't pay you TOO much. Or lose TOO much money on account of your stupidity. Because in the end, I was right and you were wrong.
Huh? I never 'intimated' any such thing.Never claimed any thing remotely of the sort. Where in the hell are you getting this crap from ? I think it may be a clue as to your ( and others here ) whole mistaken imagination of who I and from where my views come.
I've never been, or ever claimed to be any sort of a financial advisor, adviser, or having anything to DO w/ being employed in the financial industry.
WOW. Talk about a huge swing and miss!
As for the issue of WMD, yeah, the intel was incomplete, and much of what we were TOLD was not the case. Still doesn't mean that Saddam and Iraq weren't in compliance with UN resolutions. Iraq wasn't, it played a game of deception, and paid the price. But I still contend that Saddam, who did try to assassinate a former US President, was aiding terrorist organizations ,and did have plans for expanding his WMD program, regardless of whether he had the 'vast warehouses ', stockpiled of lethal chemicals or not.
As for the welfare broodmare, I merely asked a question, which you didn't feel inclined to answer.
How many in this country have jobs, who are NOT bankers ? Your unhinged vitriol against the bankers has completely blinded you to the real issue at hand, the concept of individuals, living free and earning a living, by LEGAL means, doing the best they can, and how much of that which they earn belongs to the federal govt. I know you love trying to dodge the issue by interjecting your class warfare mantra, but most folks aren't bankers. Try to remember that, when you're vilifying freedom and capitalism.
If ya can.
"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're so consistent it infuriates me? Okay yeah, whatever.
Quote:No, it is NOT fine for him now. I have been consistently maintaining that we need to tax the rich.
And funny, how you thought the debt burden was such a crisis of impending doom under Bush, but now , for some reason, your cries of alarm have fallen silent. Why is that ? Obama has only pushed the debt up further, but it's fine for him now, huh?
Quote:I will answer it when you tell me how you can claim to be for "freedom" and yet advocate forced sterilization. I DO have an answer, and it prolly isn't what you think. So, after you....
As for the welfare broodmare, I merely asked a question, which you didn't feel inclined to answer.
Quote:Okay, let's make banking and investment illegal then. They produce nothing, they hold a large portion of wealth, and they've taken the economy down in flames many times in our nation's history. And there's nothing in the Constitution... nothing... which makes us a capitalist nation, despite your desire otherwise.
How many in this country have jobs, who are NOT bankers ? Your unhinged vitriol against the bankers has completely blinded you to the real issue at hand, the concept of individuals, living free and earning a living, by LEGAL means, doing the best they can, and how much of that which they earn belongs to the federal govt. I know you love trying to dodge the issue by interjecting your class warfare mantra, but most folks aren't bankers. Try to remember that, when you're vilifying freedom and capitalism.
If ya can.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I'll answer your broodmare question when you come back and tell me where you got the idea that I was some sort of financial advisor.
" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Yeah, I can, when the choices of having kids becomes a burden on society, and endangers the health and well being of her other kids. It's not the fact that she's having kids, or so many, but that she refuses to take ANY responsibility.
The only reason it is a burden on society is because we choose to not abandon those kids and let them die. If we as a society decided that we would not support those kids there would be no burden.
Here what I find funny. You talk about how this burden on society should not be allowed to happen but will scream about something like universal health care.
Sorry you can't believe in freedom and say that we should take away someones freedom to have children. Doing so make you a hypocrite.
I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:...And it's okay to act on incomplete intel & what someone TELLS you.
Originally posted by AURaptor:
As for the issue of WMD, yeah, the intel was incomplete, and much of what we were TOLD was not the case.
LOL, that's you AU. In a nutshell. Emphasis on nut.
You're never wrong if you can say someone else made you LOOK that way. The perfect excuse for everything. And you get to be continually correct!
And your fear level goes down, your self esteem rises...
Yeah, truth & objectivity are highly over-rated!
The laughing Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME