Obama and O'Reilly

[Venkman]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Nice debate.

On Obama and redistribution of neighborly wealth, he and his wife have got to be some of the stingiest charitable givers in the U.S. Especially for people that have done so well by giving back to the community by not taking those big wall street jobs.

Notice the increase when Obama considers running for President.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_b...-releases.html

Too bad there's no social program to help poor old George Obama living in a mud hut in Africa. Don't worry though, I'm sure Barry will throw a few more billion their way. After the dictators and tribal leaders take their cut I'm sure it'll be enough for another bowl of rice a day. Ahhh, compassion!

[Coonass]

Originally Posted by Venkman

Too bad there's no social program to help poor old George Obama living in a mud hut in Africa. Don't worry though, I'm sure Barry will throw a few more billion their way. After the dictators and tribal leaders take their cut I'm sure it'll be enough for another bowl of rice a day. Ahhh, compassion!

Now we're talking POOR.

I'm just curious what a dollar of aid for an African POOR would yield compared to a dollar of aid for an American POOR?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Coonass

So what you're saying is that Social experience has no value. You really believe that? Or were our revolutionary forefathers just a bunch of ass-holes?

Sure it has value. But it isn't a trump card in a debate. Relying on such too much is more a sign of weakness in argument.

[Coonass]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Sure it has value. But it isn't a trump card in a debate. Relying on such too much is more a sign of weakness in argument.

Too much? What does that mean in this context?

I asked the question once and I didn't get an answer.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Coonass

Too much? What does that mean in this context?

In this case, "too much" = "any".

Originally Posted by Coonass

I asked the question once and I didn't get an answer.

But that was a different question.

[Coonass]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

In this case, "too much" = "any".

Sorry I didn't read that in the forum rules. Or is that tradition?

But that was a different question.

Which would that be?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Coonass

Which would that be?

First of all, don't add comments inside of the quotes. It's confusing. Feel free to edit the quote tags to split up the quotes.

I recall you asking for the definition of "poor". I am not going to attempt that.

[Coonass]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

I recall you asking for the definition of "poor". I am not going to attempt that.

I guess its exactly that "definition" issue that makes this topic so thorny. Without it, whose to say what justification government has for social programs? Define the POOR and you then have thesis for giving precious resources away.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Coonass

I guess its exactly that "definition" issue that makes this topic so thorny. Without it, whose to say what justification government has for social programs? Define the POOR and you then have thesis for giving precious resources away.

Now you are arguing about scale/magnitude (I am assuming you are not crazy enough to argue that we have zero poor in America). Which means that I have made my point.

[Coonass]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Now you are arguing about scale/magnitude (I am assuming you are not crazy enough to argue that we have zero poor in America). Which means that I have made my point.

Are you really thinking I'm arguing there are NO poor?

And, are you really attempting to so blatantly form my arguments.

JL you played the ultiimate trump card when you say my arguments are illegitamate. Take a look in the mirror.