Hannity interview on CBS Sunday Morning

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: PatboyX
"they are wrong" is hilarious.
ive found that with my friends, the republicans in the group tend to think they are flat-out right while the democrats tend to just "disagree" with how people feel.

there is a fine line between accepting that other people may feel differently and just calling them objectivly "wrong"

<sigh>

Everything's black or white with you, isn't it?

a lot of the times, one group or the other is wrong. it has nothing to do with how one feels. example: i feel murder is ok. well, we all know murder is wrong. period.

Ok, I'll give you that one. Murder is wrong. Pretty cut-n-dried.

how about another: welfare. you're letting people leech on the system for free, no cost to them. you're redistrubuting societies [sic] wealth while a lot of society objects to it. that would be wrong.

Have you ever needed welfare? I have. And I'm damn thankful it was there when I did need it. I also see many young families struggling to get by. If they had assistance to be able to get an education yet keep working w/o losing benefits, they can get a handup. If they had assistance with child care in order to work to better their position and save money, that would be a handup. They don't want a handout. Sure, there are some who will abuse the system but they'll find a way to abuse about anything to feed their selfishness. Should the needs of many be ignored because of the greed of a few?

affirmitive [sic] action? yup, thats wrong too. infringing upon our Constitutional rights. dead wrong.

Not a big fan of affirmative action, myself.

in my experience conservatives are realists, they call the shots as they are not worrying if it offends. liberals however are wistful. they say they dont want to cause trouble or controversy [yeah right] so they just say something to the effect of "you have your opinion and i have mine"

True conservatives may be pragmatic but those in the administration now are FAR from being conservative. They are neoconservatives. They are former liberals with authoritarian leanings.

Liberals seek to find a medium, a common ground. They don't presume to know what is right 100% of the time. They will engage in debate to find that common ground.

yes, everything is pretty much black and white. its either right or its wrong. you cant play a relativist game with important issues like those our government faces every day.

no, i've never been on welfare because my parents have done everything they possibly could to make sure we never needed welfare. we have come close, but never needed welfare. as for myself, i will never find myself on welfare. i will continue to starve untill i find myself another job. and what do you mean by "some will abuse the system"!? go live where i lived and then try and make that statement again! everyone i knew on welfare abused the system! i even had single welfare moms [yes, thats plural] asking me [as an 8 year old child!] for money so she could buy ciggarettes! i see mexicans here in texass who abuse the system! they use their food stamps to buy their food and their WIC coupons to buy their children food, then they whip out a wad of $100 bills and ask to buy one pack of marlboro reds! then they go and load their family into a brand new ford f-350 with the name of their landscaping company on the side of it! i think if they can afford payments on that damn truck, plus afford all the landscaping equipment they own, then surely they can afford to pay for a family and not leech off the system. welfare is long overdue for reform, it cannot stay in its current form for much longer! and its not greed that makes me say what i say. i hear a lot of liberals preach about whats fair, and its definately not fair to those of who have jobs and pay taxes to be supporting our families and snother family in southern california or hicksville, arkansas!

liberals dont seek any common ground [theres that wistful thinking again] they want to enact their "i know whats good for you" attitude on the whole of society. need examples? lets use the previous redistribution of wealth example, plus throw in wanting to outlaw guns, and wanting to eradicate religion from public society, just for good measure. there is no common ground that is able to be achieved on those issues, and if there is, id like you to show me.

Damn...time for you step outside of that brainwashing seminar.

You are one bitter person.

 

[Genesys]

where the hell are you that you can reply to these posts at any time of the day!? and do you ever sleep!?

and im not that bitter of a person [ive only been alive 20 years! ive had no time to become bitter ]. but i dont appreciate leeches. and since i know the libs love welfare, why dont we create a welfare fund that taxpayers can contribute to? make it an optional tax. that would appease you and me and still allow for the govt. to be a crutch to those who make bad decisions in life [or were dealt a crappy hand by God ].

 

[conjur]

Then, at the least, your views are biased based on your own experiences. You don't know the full picture of those who receive welfare.

I went from making about $150,000/yr to being on food stamps for two months while my house was up for sale, and I'd worked thru my savings, as I could no longer afford it and couldn't get a job, despite at least a dozen interviews over a 6 month span.

People want a handup, not a handout. That's why welfare needs to be modified to a graduated scale. Either time or becoming self-sufficient reduce the benefits until they reach $0. That's hardly the stance a "commie-lib" (as I've been called many times) would take, is it?

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: conjur
Then, at the least, your views are biased based on your own experiences. You don't know the full picture of those who receive welfare.

I went from making about $150,000/yr to being on food stamps for two months while my house was up for sale, and I'd worked thru my savings, as I could no longer afford it and couldn't get a job, despite at least a dozen interviews over a 6 month span.

People want a handup, not a handout. That's why welfare needs to be modified to a graduated scale. Either time or becoming self-sufficient reduce the benefits until they reach $0. That's hardly the stance a "commie-lib" (as I've been called many times) would take, is it?

The problem is the individuals who will be working unskilled labor for the rest of their lives. Work offers very little reason for many of them to get off of welfare. However, there are some circumstances -- like you said -- where it is being used so those who really are in need will receive it for a short period of time.

 

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: PatboyX

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I don't listen to Hannity on the radio cause it sounds like he's got his testicles in a vise, but I like him on Fox with Combs. I really like the fact that there are two voices there who don't agree and points aren't pounded in like nails without any challenge. I think for the sake of our country the public airwaves should all have this kind of give and take. It's clear from reading these forums that most people have never even learned to think critically and don't even know what it is.

i agree in theory. i just find that hannity is the only voice that gets much play during that show. not that its his fault, he is a very outspoken individual. and alan just doesnt have the personality to push his out of the way. sometimes, he will when he feels strongly enough.
but i, too, wish there was more open discussion on tv and the radio. (radio especially)

They should put James Carville on opposite Hannity. Hannity would be in tears by the end of each show!

No Hannity would come off as sane while Carville would have to be tranquillized and put into a straight jacket.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: PatboyX

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I don't listen to Hannity on the radio cause it sounds like he's got his testicles in a vise, but I like him on Fox with Combs. I really like the fact that there are two voices there who don't agree and points aren't pounded in like nails without any challenge. I think for the sake of our country the public airwaves should all have this kind of give and take. It's clear from reading these forums that most people have never even learned to think critically and don't even know what it is.

i agree in theory. i just find that hannity is the only voice that gets much play during that show. not that its his fault, he is a very outspoken individual. and alan just doesnt have the personality to push his out of the way. sometimes, he will when he feels strongly enough.
but i, too, wish there was more open discussion on tv and the radio. (radio especially)

They should put James Carville on opposite Hannity. Hannity would be in tears by the end of each show!

No Hannity would come off as sane while Carville would have to be tranquillized and put into a straight jacket.

Sorry but Hannity coming off as sane isn't possible. There are few people in the Media that I would love to meet in a dark alley. Hannity is one of those. My GF doesn't like me watching that show because that meat faced Mick pisses me off to no end!

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: PatboyX
"they are wrong" is hilarious.
ive found that with my friends, the republicans in the group tend to think they are flat-out right while the democrats tend to just "disagree" with how people feel.

there is a fine line between accepting that other people may feel differently and just calling them objectivly "wrong"

<sigh>

Everything's black or white with you, isn't it?

a lot of the times, one group or the other is wrong. it has nothing to do with how one feels. example: i feel murder is ok. well, we all know murder is wrong. period.

Ok, I'll give you that one. Murder is wrong. Pretty cut-n-dried.

how about another: welfare. you're letting people leech on the system for free, no cost to them. you're redistrubuting societies [sic] wealth while a lot of society objects to it. that would be wrong.

Have you ever needed welfare? I have. And I'm damn thankful it was there when I did need it. I also see many young families struggling to get by. If they had assistance to be able to get an education yet keep working w/o losing benefits, they can get a handup. If they had assistance with child care in order to work to better their position and save money, that would be a handup. They don't want a handout. Sure, there are some who will abuse the system but they'll find a way to abuse about anything to feed their selfishness. Should the needs of many be ignored because of the greed of a few?

affirmitive [sic] action? yup, thats wrong too. infringing upon our Constitutional rights. dead wrong.

Not a big fan of affirmative action, myself.

in my experience conservatives are realists, they call the shots as they are not worrying if it offends. liberals however are wistful. they say they dont want to cause trouble or controversy [yeah right] so they just say something to the effect of "you have your opinion and i have mine"

True conservatives may be pragmatic but those in the administration now are FAR from being conservative. They are neoconservatives. They are former liberals with authoritarian leanings.

Liberals seek to find a medium, a common ground. They don't presume to know what is right 100% of the time. They will engage in debate to find that common ground.

yes, everything is pretty much black and white. its either right or its wrong. you cant play a relativist game with important issues like those our government faces every day.

no, i've never been on welfare because my parents have done everything they possibly could to make sure we never needed welfare. we have come close, but never needed welfare. as for myself, i will never find myself on welfare. i will continue to starve untill i find myself another job. and what do you mean by "some will abuse the system"!? go live where i lived and then try and make that statement again! everyone i knew on welfare abused the system! i even had single welfare moms [yes, thats plural] asking me [as an 8 year old child!] for money so she could buy ciggarettes! i see mexicans here in texass who abuse the system! they use their food stamps to buy their food and their WIC coupons to buy their children food, then they whip out a wad of $100 bills and ask to buy one pack of marlboro reds! then they go and load their family into a brand new ford f-350 with the name of their landscaping company on the side of it! i think if they can afford payments on that damn truck, plus afford all the landscaping equipment they own, then surely they can afford to pay for a family and not leech off the system. welfare is long overdue for reform, it cannot stay in its current form for much longer! and its not greed that makes me say what i say. i hear a lot of liberals preach about whats fair, and its definately not fair to those of who have jobs and pay taxes to be supporting our families and snother family in southern california or hicksville, arkansas!

liberals dont seek any common ground [theres that wistful thinking again] they want to enact their "i know whats good for you" attitude on the whole of society. need examples? lets use the previous redistribution of wealth example, plus throw in wanting to outlaw guns, and wanting to eradicate religion from public society, just for good measure. there is no common ground that is able to be achieved on those issues, and if there is, id like you to show me.

Damn...time for you step outside of that brainwashing seminar.

You are one bitter person.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: conjur
Then, at the least, your views are biased based on your own experiences. You don't know the full picture of those who receive welfare.

I went from making about $150,000/yr to being on food stamps for two months while my house was up for sale, and I'd worked thru my savings, as I could no longer afford it and couldn't get a job, despite at least a dozen interviews over a 6 month span.

People want a handup, not a handout. That's why welfare needs to be modified to a graduated scale. Either time or becoming self-sufficient reduce the benefits until they reach $0. That's hardly the stance a "commie-lib" (as I've been called many times) would take, is it?

What did you/do you do for a living?

 

[conjur]

I was a self-employed contract programmer.

The company for whom I was working was going thru budget cuts, because of Medicare cuts that were hurting its bottom-line. They laid off quite a few people over the span of a couple of years, including some mid-management. All of the layoffs were at the corporate HQ and were high-paying, white-collar jobs.

 

[chess9]

Conjur:

A few years ago my best friend, then an engineer with IBM was let go. He was 52 years old with a Down's Syndrome daughter and a mother in a nursing home. He couldn't get a job for two years. He sold his home and moved into a two bedroom apartment and almost got evicted twice. (I hand delivered $500 to him one month.) By the time he got a job with SBC his credit was ruined, his wife had had a nervous breakdown and attempted suicide and his mother died. I don't think he's been the same ever since.

Bad things happen to good people. Fortunately, you are still relatively young and can bounce back. All these older guys who once worked in factories in Pennsylvania/Ohio/Michigan are in deep trouble. Walmart jobs are their future.

-Robert

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: conjur
Then, at the least, your views are biased based on your own experiences. You don't know the full picture of those who receive welfare.

I went from making about $150,000/yr to being on food stamps for two months while my house was up for sale, and I'd worked thru my savings, as I could no longer afford it and couldn't get a job, despite at least a dozen interviews over a 6 month span.

People want a handup, not a handout. That's why welfare needs to be modified to a graduated scale. Either time or becoming self-sufficient reduce the benefits until they reach $0. That's hardly the stance a "commie-lib" (as I've been called many times) would take, is it?

yes, i know my views are very biased based on my experiences, and I do know that there are people out there [such as yourself] who have no desire to be on welfare, but use it as a last resort.

my point is this, there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available. they are able to get more free money from the government than they are able to get from working a minimum wage job. so, instead of trying to get a minimum wage job and work their way up the corporate chain, they become leeching couch potatoes who do nothing productive with their lives. they sit around and smoke, do drugs, and drink all damn day and dont contribute a dime back to society.

the actions and misdeeds of a few ruin the opportunities available to the masses.

edit:
and if the government is going to continue to have a welfare program, i believe that the participants should provide some sort of service to the government in exchange for their foodstamps/housing/whathaveyou. make it as close to a job as you possibly can, that way the participants can gain some sort of skill while theyre at it.

 

[conjur]

Ayup...and, to be honest, I don't blame the white-collar unemployment that's been a scourge for the last few years on any President. It just happened. More directly related to the dot-com bust when salaries and bonuses were riding high.

I now have a full-time job, at lwell ess than 1/2 of what I was making before but I'm happy. It's a great company with great people. But, like you said, I'm relatively young and that helped.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur
Then, at the least, your views are biased based on your own experiences. You don't know the full picture of those who receive welfare.

I went from making about $150,000/yr to being on food stamps for two months while my house was up for sale, and I'd worked thru my savings, as I could no longer afford it and couldn't get a job, despite at least a dozen interviews over a 6 month span.

People want a handup, not a handout. That's why welfare needs to be modified to a graduated scale. Either time or becoming self-sufficient reduce the benefits until they reach $0. That's hardly the stance a "commie-lib" (as I've been called many times) would take, is it?

yes, i know my views are very biased based on my experiences, and I do know that there are people out there [such as yourself] who have no desire to be on welfare, but use it as a last resort.

my point is this, there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available. they are able to get more free money from the government than they are able to get from working a minimum wage job. so, instead of trying to get a minimum wage job and work their way up the corporate chain, they become leeching couch potatoes who do nothing productive with their lives. they sit around and smoke, do drugs, and drink all damn day and dont contribute a dime back to society.

the actions and misdeeds of a few ruin the opportunities available to the masses.

That's pure opinion and rhetoric.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur
Then, at the least, your views are biased based on your own experiences. You don't know the full picture of those who receive welfare.

I went from making about $150,000/yr to being on food stamps for two months while my house was up for sale, and I'd worked thru my savings, as I could no longer afford it and couldn't get a job, despite at least a dozen interviews over a 6 month span.

People want a handup, not a handout. That's why welfare needs to be modified to a graduated scale. Either time or becoming self-sufficient reduce the benefits until they reach $0. That's hardly the stance a "commie-lib" (as I've been called many times) would take, is it?

yes, i know my views are very biased based on my experiences, and I do know that there are people out there [such as yourself] who have no desire to be on welfare, but use it as a last resort.

my point is this, there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available. they are able to get more free money from the government than they are able to get from working a minimum wage job. so, instead of trying to get a minimum wage job and work their way up the corporate chain, they become leeching couch potatoes who do nothing productive with their lives. they sit around and smoke, do drugs, and drink all damn day and dont contribute a dime back to society.

the actions and misdeeds of a few ruin the opportunities available to the masses.

That's pure opinion and rhetoric.

ive seen it with my own eyes.

 

[HardWarrior]

Originally posted by: Genesys


ive seen it with my own eyes.

Minutiae like personal experience don't count when debating a person who's taken PERSONAL responsibility for the down-trodden. Mindsets like this helped turn the contemporary "liberal" into a political joke.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur
Then, at the least, your views are biased based on your own experiences. You don't know the full picture of those who receive welfare.

I went from making about $150,000/yr to being on food stamps for two months while my house was up for sale, and I'd worked thru my savings, as I could no longer afford it and couldn't get a job, despite at least a dozen interviews over a 6 month span.

People want a handup, not a handout. That's why welfare needs to be modified to a graduated scale. Either time or becoming self-sufficient reduce the benefits until they reach $0. That's hardly the stance a "commie-lib" (as I've been called many times) would take, is it?

yes, i know my views are very biased based on my experiences, and I do know that there are people out there [such as yourself] who have no desire to be on welfare, but use it as a last resort.

my point is this, there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available. they are able to get more free money from the government than they are able to get from working a minimum wage job. so, instead of trying to get a minimum wage job and work their way up the corporate chain, they become leeching couch potatoes who do nothing productive with their lives. they sit around and smoke, do drugs, and drink all damn day and dont contribute a dime back to society.

the actions and misdeeds of a few ruin the opportunities available to the masses.

That's pure opinion and rhetoric.

ive seen it with my own eyes.

See the bolded part above.

Until you've seen every person who is on welfare or otherwise receiving benefits, statements like:

there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available

are completely meaningless.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Genesys

Originally posted by: conjur
Then, at the least, your views are biased based on your own experiences. You don't know the full picture of those who receive welfare.

I went from making about $150,000/yr to being on food stamps for two months while my house was up for sale, and I'd worked thru my savings, as I could no longer afford it and couldn't get a job, despite at least a dozen interviews over a 6 month span.

People want a handup, not a handout. That's why welfare needs to be modified to a graduated scale. Either time or becoming self-sufficient reduce the benefits until they reach $0. That's hardly the stance a "commie-lib" (as I've been called many times) would take, is it?

yes, i know my views are very biased based on my experiences, and I do know that there are people out there [such as yourself] who have no desire to be on welfare, but use it as a last resort.

my point is this, there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available. they are able to get more free money from the government than they are able to get from working a minimum wage job. so, instead of trying to get a minimum wage job and work their way up the corporate chain, they become leeching couch potatoes who do nothing productive with their lives. they sit around and smoke, do drugs, and drink all damn day and dont contribute a dime back to society.

the actions and misdeeds of a few ruin the opportunities available to the masses.

That's pure opinion and rhetoric.

ive seen it with my own eyes.

See the bolded part above.

Until you've seen every person who is on welfare or otherwise receiving benefits, statements like:

there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available

are completely meaningless.

when youve gone and lived amongst the ones that DO abuse welfare, you have a certian right to be able to make such claims. for multiple city blocks there would be numerous families living off of welfare. but the welfare moms and dads would always have big screen tv's, playstations, and a kicking stereo. you may have lived off of welfare for 2 months, but i was a living witness to welfare for 12 years.

Minutiae like personal experience don't count when debating a person who's taken PERSONAL responsibility for the down-trodden. Mindsets like this helped turn the contemporary "liberal" into a political joke.

i guess donating to multiple charities [both monetary donations and donations to the good will] doesnt count as taking personal responsibility for the downtrodden?

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: conjur

Until you've seen every person who is on welfare or otherwise receiving benefits, statements like:

there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available

are completely meaningless.

So using that mentality, no one every can make any statement about people on welfare. How in the hell can anyone see every person? I'd have to say what he is saying is probably more true than what you are get across.

KK

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: conjur

Until you've seen every person who is on welfare or otherwise receiving benefits, statements like:

there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available

are completely meaningless.

So using that mentality, no one every can make any statement about people on welfare. How in the hell can anyone see every person? I'd have to say what he is saying is probably more true than what you are get across.

KK

Would you care to rewrite that in English?

 

[KK]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: KK

Originally posted by: conjur

Until you've seen every person who is on welfare or otherwise receiving benefits, statements like:

there are 10 fold many more people that abuse welfare because it is available

are completely meaningless.

So using that mentality, no one every can make any statement about people on welfare. How in the hell can anyone see every person? I'd have to say what he is saying is probably more true than what you are trying to get across.

KK

Would you care to rewrite that in English?

Would you like me to explain it too?

KK

 

[HardWarrior]

This is typical hyper-liberal thinking you?re dealing with, KK. Be kind and caring towards everyone (preferably with someone else?s money), except those who happen to disagree with your feigned compassion. Reserve for THEM every bit of contempt and arrogance you can muster.

 

[conjur]

LMAO!!

Hannity got his a** handed to him by Doug Hattaway, former Gore campaign spokesman.

And he's getting it handed to him again by Carl Bernstein!

Hannity is such a tool!!

If anyone has a chance to watch replay of this, it's great for some laughs at Hannity's expense. I don't see how this guy has his own show. Oh wait, look at the network he's on....

 

[arsbanned]

So using that mentality, no one every can make any statement about people on welfare. How in the hell can anyone see every person? I'd have to say what he is saying is probably more true than what you are trying to get across

That is some sad grammar and is basically unintelligible. *shrug*