Socialized medicine of 2014 Kraft t

[kraft-t]

I'll be glad to as i wish most of my tax dollars were going to make life better for americans rather than slinging bombs at those other people.

[kraft-t]

Who is apt to be on the road for long weary hours? Professional drivers or mom and pop on a quick trip to the grocery stores?

[Nebrfarmr]

Again,

Shift the subject, and

Ignore what was said

I gave up 20% guaranteed benefits, with no guarantee of getting any of it back.  I got nothing for it, except the potential for better coverage, in case of crop failure, or severe drop in prices, which goes along with the whole thing I was saying, that I personally thing the farm program would be better if it were more 'safety net' and less 'free money'.  I consider that being consistant.

Also, what I said in the first post was this (a direct quote) :I am liberal in the sense that I don't see a problem in helping out the needy with their basic needs, but am conservative in that I think it should be only basic needs, and don't consider things like cell phones a 'right'.

NOTHING at all about the poor not being 'able' to have one (you put those words in my mouth), nothing about the poor having to sell their cell phones before they could get benefits (you came up with that one, as well),  and nothing about having to get rid of a cell phone, when the cell company won't let someone out of a deal (guess who mentioned that one).  All I said is I don't consider things like cell phones a "right".  You DO know the differences between 'rights' and 'privelages', don't you?  I consider a cell phone a 'privelage', not a 'right', much the same way as car ownership.  Now, if someone is poor, and can prove that they have need for a cell phone, I have no gripe about that, I'm just saying, it is not a 'right'. 

I will ask you one more very direct question, it is a simple yes/no question, so let's see if you can answer it.

Yes, or no, do you believe that a cell phone is a 'right'?

[Nebrfarmr]

That much, I think we can agree on.  However, if it comes down to a choice between slinging bombs, and sending in drones vs, American troops, I'd rather keep the troops out of combat where we can.

[Nebrfarmr]

---

@Hawken Cougar wrote:

---

@Nebrfarmr wrote:

Read it, and liked it.  I'd say I agree with most of what that guy said. 
Now, does that make me Liberal, or Conservative.

---

It appears to me that you might well be an American citizen with common sense. That class of people are a minority these days and at the current rate will become an endangered species in the not too distant future.

HC, coming from you, I take that as a high compliment.

---

[rawhide]

one of the most deadly accidents in the country was caused by a drunk driver in a toyota so lets outlaw drinking AND toyotas

[kraft-t]

The truth is Neb is that much of that intrusion into foreign affairs need not be done. Listen to Ron Paul and what he is saying. Watch him be labeled part of the blame america crowd. But the truth is we have been ivolved in international affairs and using covert action to intrude in the politics of other countries. I knw we wouldn't like it if they did such to us. It's bad enough having so much zionist influence in our politics.

I feel the same way about corporate involvement in politics. Not all shareholders are american and foreign stockholders should not have an influence inn our cxampaigns.

[kraft-t]

Do you have any idea how many tax dollars are transferred from the people in urban states to people in rural states. There are many states that get back most or more from the federal government than they pay in.

BTW. don't ask for a link documenting those facts but they are true.

[Nebrfarmr]

Now, I don't know the 'feelings' of the country for very far back, as I am not very old to have a lot of memories of that, but it would seem to me, we would be better off protecting our borders, instead of pouring money into the black hole of 'nation building'.  Just my opinion, and I can't prove it, but I think a lot of our involvement in foreign countries, is because of corporate investment overseas, with big bucks to be made, or lost, depending on the situation over there, and that's not right.  The Federal government should be protecting only US citizens, and national security, not providing security for big business.  It would seem that if they were willing to take the risks of making deals with Momar, they should face the consequences of it.

[dagwud]

Don: "I don't think you should be on crop suibsides either for 30 years."

Yet you repeatedly defend BTO receiving millions of tax payer dollars to farm tens of thousands of acres while at the same time causing untold damage to their local communities???