Bernie preaches about free stuff..

[SAYIT]

Welcome back, TN.
It as long been the leftist agenda to play Robin Hood ... taking from "the rich."
In Uncle Bernie's defense he has always been a loyal leftist and as a lifelong politician who has never had a real job, he has never amassed a real fortune. His net worth - at 74 - is only about $500,000.

See what I mean? I toldja there were those who claim he's "not rich enough" to run for POTUS, and I wasn't even thinking of this guy.

What a weird place we've sunk to when we require our candidates to be millionaires...SMH

Exactly where did I say Bernie isn't rich enough to be prez?

Why else would you be whining that he doesn't have enough money?
Do you have half a million? I don't. Nor do I expect to at age 74. Wtf does that have to do with whether I can run for POTUS or not?

And as I indicated, you're not the first to parrot this line. I'm just not sure where such oligarchophilia comes from. But it's kinky.

[I did say, in his defense, that his lack of charitable giving may well be a function of his lifelong adherence to socialist principles - it would be beneath him to benefit from capitalism - and his lack of wealth.

No such "lack of charitable giving" has been established.

Yanno Pogo, you consistently play the idiot.

My comment was a direct response to what was deemed his lack of charitable giving and I gave him a pass.

You managed to read into it something that just wasn't there and I certainly do not find him unfit because he isn't rich ... I find him unfit because he's an American socialist.

Ahem:

as a lifelong politician who has never had a real job, he has never amassed a real fortune. His net worth - at 74 - is only about $500,000.

So where in that quote do I say or imply Uncle Bernie's wealth is or should be a barrier to his election?

Answer: No where.

 

[I amso IR]

All right kiddes, all together now, Bernie, Bernie, he is our man, if he cannot do it, nobody can!. Bah, Humbug! As for "free Stuff", everyone loves free stuff. After all, it is free, free, free! Don't believe me? Ask your local politicians about free stuff. They love it. As for being responsible, we are well beyond that middle age thinking. It is now very well documented that "responsibility" was a middle aged condition which served no real purpose and was supplanted by way of, free stuff. An example would be the Oklahoma Land Rush. Go west young man, it is "free". No Viking tactics required, simply go, go, go! The Mormons went west because it was FREE! Why even the Bible states that, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be" what is that word, FREE. Free stuff is our inheritance, Our Freedom, our free stuff. What part of FREE don't you guys understand? And last but not least, I am FREE to start preparing my 2015 Income Tax statement as it is FREE to do so. FREE< FREE< FREE! This nation is built upon the principle of being FREE! Need I embelish the fact? And finally, again, Bah Humbug!

 

[I amso IR]

Certainly, someone will reply, why, it is FREE to do so.

 

[Pogo]

All right kiddes, all together now, Bernie, Bernie, he is our man, if he cannot do it, nobody can!. Bah, Humbug! As for "free Stuff", everyone loves free stuff. After all, it is free, free, free! Don't believe me? Ask your local politicians about free stuff. They love it. As for being responsible, we are well beyond that middle age thinking. It is now very well documented that "responsibility" was a middle aged condition which served no real purpose and was supplanted by way of, free stuff. An example would be the Oklahoma Land Rush. Go west young man, it is "free". No Viking tactics required, simply go, go, go! The Mormons went west because it was FREE! Why even the Bible states that, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be" what is that word, FREE. Free stuff is our inheritance, Our Freedom, our free stuff. What part of FREE don't you guys understand? And last but not least, I am FREE to start preparing my 2015 Income Tax statement as it is FREE to do so. FREE< FREE< FREE! This nation is built upon the principle of being FREE! Need I embelish the fact? And finally, again, Bah Humbug!

Doesn't look like your meds are free.

In several decades of voting at national, state and local levels, never once has "free stuff" entered my mind. Ever.

Free strawman.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I think tax payer supported college is a investment into our own people. Instead of bringing over millions of h1b's to do the jobs...Why not our own people?

Of course, to you republicans our own people is somehow a boondogoo!!!

Paving our roads = boondogoo

You people are a joke...

 

[Arianrhod]

It's still not "free stuff," but carry on. The only "free stuff" is the entertainment y'all provide the rest of us.

 

[Conservative65]

I think tax payer supported college is a investment into our own people. Instead of bringing over millions of h1b's to do the jobs...Why not our own people?

Of course, to you republicans our own people is somehow a boondogoo!!!

Paving our roads = boondogoo

You people are a joke...

I choose to invest in my own people. I call them my two daughters. That's as far as the investing in that area goes. If what you said it true, why don't the parents of those kids invest in their own or is it only a good investment for those the left despises?

If someone isn't willing to invest in their own kids, why is it another person's place to be forced to do so?

 

[Conservative65]

It's still not "free stuff," but carry on. The only "free stuff" is the entertainment y'all provide the rest of us.

If one group of people, the leeches, are getting something for which another group, the personally responsible ones, are being forced to fund, they ones getting and not paying are getting free stuff.

 

[Arianrhod]

It's still not "free stuff," but carry on. The only "free stuff" is the entertainment y'all provide the rest of us.

If one group of people, the leeches, are getting something for which another group, the personally responsible ones, are being forced to fund, they ones getting and not paying are getting free stuff.

You mean farm subsidies. I'm not sure whether Sanders has mentioned them, but I'll look into it.

 

[Conservative65]

Only the uninformed believe it's "free stuff." It's not.

If one group of people is getting something another group is funding and the receiving group gets it at no cost, how is that not free?

 

[Conservative65]

It's still not "free stuff," but carry on. The only "free stuff" is the entertainment y'all provide the rest of us.

If one group of people, the leeches, are getting something for which another group, the personally responsible ones, are being forced to fund, they ones getting and not paying are getting free stuff.

You mean farm subsidies. I'm not sure whether Sanders has mentioned them, but I'll look into it.

So farmers don't provide something in return? In fact, some of what they provide is purchased by food stamp recipients using something they don't fund and for which they have to do nothing to get.

 

[Weatherman2020]

but doesn't donate anything to charity?
In fact when I did thishttp://www.bing.com/search?q=does%20bernie%20sanders%20donate%20money%20to%20the%20unfortunate%3F&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=does%20bernie%20sanders%20donate%20money%20to%20the%20unfortunate%3F&sc=0-27&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=ECD6614E1AAC48F79A042A35D467D7A9
bernie sanders and charity - Bing
All I got was a way to donate to HIM and unrelated things.
How can someone preach about giving away all this stuff, when he HIMSELF doesn't do it? If he cant do it willingly, what gives him the right to want to FORCE everyone else?

The left do very little charity work or donating. Studies show as well as my own experience working for charity organizations. Need volunteers for an event in a small Bible Belt community? No problem. Same event in Los Angeles with 3 million people? Forget it, few volunteers.

 

[Arianrhod]

It's still not "free stuff," but carry on. The only "free stuff" is the entertainment y'all provide the rest of us.

If one group of people, the leeches, are getting something for which another group, the personally responsible ones, are being forced to fund, they ones getting and not paying are getting free stuff.

You mean farm subsidies. I'm not sure whether Sanders has mentioned them, but I'll look into it.

So farmers don't provide something in return?

Farm subsidies are to compensate agribusinesses for not producing, i.e., letting some or all of their acreage lie fallow. This keeps prices of certain crops artificially inflated.

 

[Conservative65]

It's still not "free stuff," but carry on. The only "free stuff" is the entertainment y'all provide the rest of us.

If one group of people, the leeches, are getting something for which another group, the personally responsible ones, are being forced to fund, they ones getting and not paying are getting free stuff.

You mean farm subsidies. I'm not sure whether Sanders has mentioned them, but I'll look into it.

So farmers don't provide something in return?

Farm subsidies are to compensate agribusinesses for not producing, i.e., letting some or all of their acreage lie fallow. This keeps prices of certain crops artificially inflated.

It still involves the process of farming and whatever the price may be the food stamp leeches still get the product for nothing.

10%, 20%, 30% can lie fallow and the farmer is still doing more than the food stamp recipient is.

 

[Arianrhod]

It's still not "free stuff," but carry on. The only "free stuff" is the entertainment y'all provide the rest of us.

If one group of people, the leeches, are getting something for which another group, the personally responsible ones, are being forced to fund, they ones getting and not paying are getting free stuff.

You mean farm subsidies. I'm not sure whether Sanders has mentioned them, but I'll look into it.

So farmers don't provide something in return?

Farm subsidies are to compensate agribusinesses for not producing, i.e., letting some or all of their acreage lie fallow. This keeps prices of certain crops artificially inflated.

It still involves the process of farming

It involves the process of not farming.

10%, 20%, 30% can lie fallow and the farmer is still doing more than the food stamp recipient is.

You're right. They're probably sitting in the middle of their 1,000 acres watching "Dancing with the Stars."

 

[I amso IR]

With reference to post # 42 which I made earlier, my point is this. Most folks with a high school education or higher understand that there is no such thing as a free lunch. I recall back during Obama's first run, a news person was interviewing a Latino young woman who had stormed the border and had made it to California. He asked her a simple question, "why have you come to America"? Her response was, "America is free". Freedom had nothing to do with the response, just the fact that she truly expected America to be a free ride. I am assuming that most of us, with a bit of education, that the phrase, "America is free" does not mean what some folks take it to mean. Surely, free and freedom have two different meanings, however that thought does does not register with some folks. And an awful lot of them are citizens who fall into that class. And the sad thing is, there are learned people, who are born and bred citizens of this nation, who continue to feed these "ner do wells" that the true meaning of America is to do as you wish and you will be cared for. With out a class of people who can be told anything and they will believe it, those educated folk fostering that false idea will have no way to influence the remainder of the population, the working and the executive class. Bernie simply wants to enslave the producers to care for the non producers. And kudo's to you POGO, my meds are certainly not freebies but they are over priced. Why, in part to pay for the freebies going to the "free". Perhaps the word "free" should be stricken from our english speak. Perhaps " at no cost" which we all recognize for what it means, even those of lesser education understand, "it will or will not" cost you this much. Is the above statement to clarify my post # 42, one of satire, now usplained clearly enough? Then again, some splanations are never sufficent.

 

[Arianrhod]

With reference to post # 42 which I made earlier, my point is this. Most folks with a high school education or higher understand that there is no such thing as a free lunch. I recall back during Obama's first run, a news person was interviewing a Latino young woman who had stormed the border and had made it to California. He asked her a simple question, "why have you come to America"? Her response was, "America is free". Freedom had nothing to do with the response, just the fact that she truly expected America to be a free ride.

You had to work really hard to misinterpret what she said.

 

[Conservative65]

If one group of people, the leeches, are getting something for which another group, the personally responsible ones, are being forced to fund, they ones getting and not paying are getting free stuff.

You mean farm subsidies. I'm not sure whether Sanders has mentioned them, but I'll look into it.

So farmers don't provide something in return?

Farm subsidies are to compensate agribusinesses for not producing, i.e., letting some or all of their acreage lie fallow. This keeps prices of certain crops artificially inflated.

It still involves the process of farming

It involves the process of not farming.

10%, 20%, 30% can lie fallow and the farmer is still doing more than the food stamp recipient is.

You're right. They're probably sitting in the middle of their 1,000 acres watching "Dancing with the Stars."

They're still farming whatever percentage is left. Even your words indicate that. You said that what subsidies do by paying not to farm is done to artificially drive up prices. In order to drive up prices, something has to be farmed. That means even if it's only 10% of their land, that's 10% more than the food stamp leeches have to do in order to buy the products farmers grow.

 

[Arianrhod]

They're still farming whatever percentage is left.

And working-class people (Walmart employees being the most highly-publicized example) who rely on SNAP benefits to make sure their kids eat work all the hours they're given.

Who do you admire more - the small percentage of farmers who refuse "free stuff" or those who can't get enough of it?

 

[Conservative65]

They're still farming whatever percentage is left.

And working-class people (Walmart employees being the most highly-publicized example) who rely on SNAP benefits to make sure their kids eat work all the hours they're given.

Who do you admire more - the small percentage of farmers who refuse "free stuff" or those who can't get enough of it?

Walmart, etc. employees aren't making sure their kids eat. Since they use food stamps to do it, those of us paying the taxes that fund it are making sure their kids eat. They can't even provide the most basic needs to their kids. The rest of us who provide it to our own are forced to provide it to theirs, too.

I won't ask who you admire more. You hold leeches who get something for nothing on a much higher level than those who provide it to them.