How do a person's political views relate to self sufficiency?

[dacjohns]

Post 255.

 

[hikerchick]

You said you "couldn't wrap your head around" how people could believe both

That was me. And I can't because with my belief system, they are a contradiction. I don't do contradictions.

Here was my exact statement...
"It does look like a contradiction to me to support a political party with policies that create dependency at the same time you are trying for self-sufficiency. Can't wrap my brain around that."

Of course, I haven't read most of the last 24 pages or so, so I can't comment on what anyone else said.

You said that quite clearly, WZ. And since you didn't see the need to belittle others and tear apart their every post, no one "scrutinized" your post. People accepted your opinion as food for thought and went on with their lives. At no point did you ever try to get people to spar with you about your stance.

So, yeah, you win.

 

[On Our own]

Post 255.

Don't feel bad dac I asked a very specific question way back when and he never even came close to answering it. I was invisible too.



Some people want to start arguments not debate civilly.

 

[ScottSD]

Scott have you read, "Why Conservatives Abandoned The Free Market and Why Liberals Should Too?

In keeping with the demands of questions being answered......

No I haven't

 

[FarmerChick]

alright here
ScottD made some points I disagree with, and some I do agree with, I think his style of writing is a "tad" confusing, lol, but interesting. He buries his replies into more text that is all.

read careful and you know what he is saying.

NOW----Scott has every right to post his posts and not to be totally butched by the demand for more and more explanation.....seriously people, get a grip here..LOL

 

[reinbeau]

I have no problem whatsoever following what Scott is saying, mainly because I read his posts for comprehension, not to find something I can jump on and prove wrong. FC has it exactly right, read what he writes and don't filter it through a microscope and you'll 'get' what he's saying.

 

[patandchickens]

You know, I am being 100% straight with you when I tell you that what Scott turned out to be saying is NOT what 'reading for comprehension' (i.e. trying to read between the lines, not necessarily take things at literal face value) had me thinking.

Just because one person, who oh by coincidence happens to believe the same way to begin with, is not confused or misled by posts CERTAINLY does not mean that anyone else who IS confused or misled is just trying to pick an argument.

Sheesh.

Pat

 

[hikerchick]

Just because one person, who oh by coincidence happens to believe the same way to begin with, is not confused or misled by posts CERTAINLY does not mean that anyone else who IS confused or misled is just trying to pick an argument.

Sheesh.

Pat

apparently, it does.

 

[reinbeau]

And yet other conservatives, who preferred to keep it to PMs, comprehended exactly what he was saying, too. I'm telling you, the difference in philosophies is telling here. The conservatives who are reading this are all on the 'same page' - while the more 'liberal' people here are obviously on their 'same page' - so you can contend that it isn't so, Pat, yet it seems to really be true - the picking apart of Scott's posts is obvious, at least to those of us on the conservative side.

 

[Wifezilla]

You said that quite clearly, WZ. And since you didn't see the need to belittle others and tear apart their every post, no one "scrutinized" your post. People accepted your opinion as food for thought and went on with their lives. At no point did you ever try to get people to spar with you about your stance.

So, yeah, you win.

Actually I gave up since I figured it would be a fruitless exercise trying to explain the contradictions involved in trying to be SS while supporting chaining people together in a way that prevents many from being SS, but I will take the win anyway