Shopsmith Forums

keakap wrote:Of course, the truth is that that is not the truth.

Not "as you posted it" at all, but removed from context.
But far be it from me to infer that there was any dishonest purpose in it.

Dishonest? Tell me, sir. In what context would it be truthful to call Hillary Clinton "Hitlery"? Why is it truthful to call MY party anti-american? You have your opinions. They are not facts. Don't pretend to have good intentions and then use Hitler's name.

Also, when you post "B. Hussein Obama" as if you're informing us that his middle name is Muslim... WE KNOW! Can you believe that some Americans actually know his middle name is Hussein and they don't care?! They voted for him ANYWAY?! Does that make me anti-american?

keakap wrote:AGREED!

But do they hear that message?

I think they do,but hearing and acting upon it are two different things!

I have always considered myself a conservative. Both financially and in life. I proudly served my country for twenty years in the U. S. Navy protecting it from Socialism and Communism or so I was told. I remember the words of JFK and did what I could for my country.

Today I see a Socialist in the White House and everyone standing around with their hands out saying "What can the country do for me?"

I voted Republican because I thought they more closely followed my beliefs. But a Republican controlled Congress changed the banking rules and was signed into law by a Democrat President (rules that had been put in place to prevent a depression like the 1930's) which directly lead to our current depression. While those we elected point their fingers at the big bad bankers and say "Shame on you!" Those that do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

In 2006 a Republican run congress and a Republican President signed the new Postal Reform act. Hitting the U. S Postal Service with a 56 Billion dollar bill to be paid off in 10 years. The bill was to pay retired Postal employees health care 75 years in advance. A burden no other company is ever hit with. Now everyone from the President on down stands around saying what a terrible organization the Post Office is because they are losing 5.5 to 5.8 billion dollars every year. Prior to this the Post Office's goal was to break even after having paidALL of its operating expenses. A goal it meet every year for 40 years. 39 of those years putting additional money in the general accounting fund.

This year, because of this, I have to take a $5,000 pay cut as the Post Office trys to meet this unreasonable goal. As we all know stuff roles down hill.

I remember part of my enlistment oath said "To protect my country from enemies both foreign and domestic." More and more I feel the enemy is domestic.

Do you suppose it possible that voters return political candidates to office so they can continue to frustrate us and conversely voters enjoy whipping themselves for having failed to make change? Jim

Hey guys! Maybe this is news to many of you younger folks, but we, as a nation built and fell off of the fiscal cliff many years ago. It started in the early 50s when Ike endorsed the building of a national defense highway system. Now called the Interstate system. There were contracts made that had inflation rules that allowed contractors to collect more than they spent if their costs were reported as increasing.

All this when we still had not paid off WWII and decided to give money to Germany France and Brittan, Belgium, et.al..

Yes, Ike was a Republican and had a good idea that the roadway infrastructure needed repair. The Bureaucrats in the system found and instituted a system called "cost overrun" that soon found it's way into all sorts of contracts, public and private. Now a defense item that was supposed to cost only $10 million winds up costing $60 million.

Soon we found ourselves in an inflation period handcuffed to "The Cold War" that left our children owing more than they could ever pay off in their working lifetime. This was in the mid to late 50s and has snowballed ever since. Adding huge expenses like price stabilization, Medicare and more Social Security benefits. Etc, ETC, ETC........

And that's only a very brief synopsis!

It tickles me to see that the young people and babies of that time are now voters and also now think this impending cliff is the possible end to our way of life. We will definitely have a deflation sooner or later. Our life style will change and the Nation will go on. BUT still our debt is so great that those voting will never be able to pay it off in their lifetime.

What are those little creatures called that jump over cliffs blindly following their leaders. Lemmings I believe. Same concept here but we are the two legged version.

jhut83 wrote:Dishonest? Tell me, sir. In what context would it be truthful to call Hillary Clinton "Hitlery"? Why is it truthful to call MY party anti-american? You have your opinions. They are not facts. Don't pretend to have good intentions and then use Hitler's name.

"Originally Posted by keakap
Of course, the truth is that that is not the truth.
Not "as you posted it" at all, but removed from context.
But far be it from me to infer that there was any dishonest purpose in it."

[I see that the truth of what I said is not contested. Good]

But I see a translation is in order. By the way, you do not tell me what I mean when I say something. We need to be straight about that.
]by me.[/I]
......................

"Why is it truthful to call MY party anti-american?" {Noted: small "a"}

If you mean the Democrat Party, it is quite truthful, by the evidence, for many reasons. The most obvious is the declaration by a Party spokesperson who stated that the Party is now "Communist, bought and paid for."
Now I happen to believe that that was the ranting of a lunatic, but not necessarily- judging by the tumultuous cheering he received- because of what he said as much as I believe he is a raving lunatic, period.
Unfortunately, though, there are many other reasons. One is Hilary. In one of the Party's periodical linguistic smoke screens she decided it was time for a standard device of deceit typical of Liberals, progressives, socialists, Marxists, communists and, yes, Democrats, and declared that she was not a Liberal any more but rather a "progressive". You know, like Woodrow Wilson. (Of course we know why they use this device.) Progessives (aka socialists) are, in this context, by definition anti-American. They dislike or hate the Constitution and want to "fundamentally change the United States of America" (sound familiar?) but NOT by legal or patriotic means or methods, i.e. through Constitutional Amendment.
This is anti-American behavior, and in this case, as well as in the cases of Wilson and Obama, it is quite clearly stated by the offenders.
That violating the Constitution and trying to destroy it illegally is anti-American is not mere opinion, it is indeed fact.

" You have your opinions. They are not facts. Don't pretend to have good intentions and then use Hitler's name."

Do you know what Party Hitler operated through?
(hint: National Socialist...)
and didn't Adolf have a 'problem' with Jews?

But that reminds me of a story about Hilary, maybe you even heard it before. Seems Hilary was 'running' some meeting (which at the time she had NO business in, but she thought she was co-president then so the story goes) in the White House when something wasn't going quite her way. She "admonished", according to multiple sources, a certain member of Staff who just happened to be of the Jewish persuasion, to wit: "you f-cking Jew Basta-d", unquote.

Hitlery.

Hou`oli makahiki hou!

jhut83 wrote:Also, when you post "B. Hussein Obama" as if you're informing us that his middle name is Muslim... WE KNOW! Can you believe that some Americans actually know his middle name is Hussein and they don't care?! They voted for him ANYWAY?! Does that make me anti-american?

"as if you're informing us"

What the...
Did you just hit your "silly bone" on the edge of the desk er somethin?

For the record, I am not a liberal progressive, so when I say something it is not in your purview to tell me what I meant by it.
I believe I was writing the name of a person elected president. I checked, though, since you appeared so discombobulated by it, and fer sher, the man elected president does use the name Hussein. He also uses the name (these days) of Obama, although it is well documented that for a time he went under the name of Soetoro. From what I can tell that has nothing (important) to do with his past KGB connections.

Speaking of weird connections, why do you think that "some Americans" voting for some guy with Hussein as his purported middle name would make you anti-American? {Note: Capital A}

jayp413 wrote:I think they do,but hearing and acting upon it are two different things!

Ah, so true. I guess that was why I had such high hopes when the "Tea Party" gatherings took place, hoping against all hope that the two things might be coming together. But I opine that many more seats will have to be emptied and refilled, this time by Americans, in the Congress before that can really happen.