|
Post by Rockoonz on Oct 10, 2013 23:54:33 GMT -5
The White House reported earlier this week that they would be stopping all money and military supplies to Egypt because "the president doesn't want to appear to support actions against the muslim brotherhood". This was an actual news release from the White house that I heard myself.
Lee
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2013 8:01:15 GMT -5
Either way we should not be supporting the entire world or messing in their politics. Let them kill off themselves like they have been doing for 4000 years. The only thing that hurts is the children suffering. If we could fund just that I would be all for it but all we do is line the pockets of those in charge at the moment.
If we had spent all the money we have spent pissing in everyone elses wheaties on our borders we would be so impenetrable a mouse cold not get through and drugs would have to be manufactured at home. It would have saved thousands of lives in Mexico, central and south America because there would be no drug wars. The benefits would have been endless.
Giving a bunch of dictators money and weapons that they eventually toss back at us is really bad economics no matter what the supposed reason for it.
Why don't some of these countries give us some money or weapons. If we just got back what is owed to us from WWII we would be a lot better off. Everyone bitches about our own people wanting to be supported and a bunch of other countries get pissed if we stop supporting them.
I would like someone to explain it to me. We have no money for schools, infrastructure and health care but if we do not give a bunch of countries more money they want to kill us for it. Stay home, build up our borders and tell them to bring it on. Non of them are going to sail a bunch of ships over here and try to take over our country. But NO, we have to spend trillions of dollars on military might so we can go over there and mess with them. It has been this way almost since the beginning of man and we just keep perpetuating it.
Insanity, insanity, insanity. I cry for the innocent children. Jim
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Oct 11, 2013 8:41:10 GMT -5
Jim, It is even worse than you said. We are giving money to countries that want to kill us regardless, the money is just an added naivety tax.
Once again, it mostly boils down to Globalism. As long as our country is connected to the global money system, we are not insulated. As long as our country is reliant on others for energy, we are not insulated. We 'buy' the favor and compliance of other nations much as we now buy voters here. Our adversaries do the same.
I am also at a loss as to why we are supporting the Islamofascists in Syria. I suspect we are doing the bidding of the Saudis, UAE, and Qutar. . . They are Sunni, and this is a battle against the Shia. Both hate us, and they hate Christians. It is the Shia that are the most vocal against us and our way of life. Question is, why was a leftie like Obama actually leading the charge to fund the radicals, and attempt to attack a sovereign country that has not done anything to us? (Pleased to meet you, can you guess my name)
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Oct 11, 2013 9:38:28 GMT -5
Either way we should not be supporting the entire world or messing in their politics. Let them kill off themselves like they have been doing for 4000 years. The only thing that hurts is the children suffering. If we could fund just that I would be all for it but all we do is line the pockets of those in charge at the moment. If we had spent all the money we have spent pissing in everyone elses wheaties on our borders we would be so impenetrable a mouse cold not get through and drugs would have to be manufactured at home. It would have saved thousands of lives in Mexico, central and south America because there would be no drug wars. The benefits would have been endless. Giving a bunch of dictators money and weapons that they eventually toss back at us is really bad economics no matter what the supposed reason for it. Why don't some of these countries give us some money or weapons. If we just got back what is owed to us from WWII we would be a lot better off. Everyone bitches about our own people wanting to be supported and a bunch of other countries get pissed if we stop supporting them. I would like someone to explain it to me. We have no money for schools, infrastructure and health care but if we do not give a bunch of countries more money they want to kill us for it. Stay home, build up our borders and tell them to bring it on. Non of them are going to sail a bunch of ships over here and try to take over our country. But NO, we have to spend trillions of dollars on military might so we can go over there and mess with them. It has been this way almost since the beginning of man and we just keep perpetuating it. Insanity, insanity, insanity. I cry for the innocent children. Jim Jim, great post. For the US, in our current shift towards a banana republic form of government, to be so arrogant as to think we should be deciding the outcomes of other peoples conflicts is pure insanity. Kind of like when someone is on a diet and losing weight all the folks ready to critique his diet are fat people? Lee
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Oct 11, 2013 9:40:37 GMT -5
Jim, It is even worse than you said. We are giving money to countries that want to kill us regardless, the money is just an added naivety tax. Once again, it mostly boils down to Globalism. As long as our country is connected to the global money system, we are not insulated. As long as our country is reliant on others for energy, we are not insulated. We 'buy' the favor and compliance of other nations much as we now buy voters here. Our adversaries do the same. I am also at a loss as to why we are supporting the Islamofascists in Syria. I suspect we are doing the bidding of the Saudis, UAE, and Qutar. . . They are Sunni, and this is a battle against the Shia. Both hate us, and they hate Christians. It is the Shia that are the most vocal against us and our way of life. Question is, why was a leftie like Obama actually leading the charge to fund the radicals, and attempt to attack a sovereign country that has not done anything to us? (Pleased to meet you, can you guess my name) Naivety tax? No lets just call it what it is. Stupid tax. Lee
|
|
panamark
fully equipped rock polisher
Member since September 2012
Posts: 1,343
|
Post by panamark on Oct 11, 2013 13:34:41 GMT -5
Come on people, use more care in what you listen to and what you believe! This was a satirical piece!!! www.snopes.com/politics/satire/museum.aspThere is enough true incredible stuff to believe without believing made up lies. Don't let your feelings lead you astray. Use your brains and check your facts. This kind of erroneous name calling (on all sides!) is what has this country onto this useless, hateful track. </soapbox off> edit: Okay, I see this has already been hashed. I didn't read the second page before I jumped right over to snopes to check it out. My point still stands though. PS: what's the "cloak Mt Rushmore" story?
|
|
bushmanbilly
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2008
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by bushmanbilly on Oct 11, 2013 13:44:06 GMT -5
Come on people, use more care in what you listen to and what you believe! This was a satirical piece!!! www.snopes.com/politics/satire/museum.aspThere is enough true incredible stuff to believe without believing made up lies. Don't let your feelings lead you astray. Use your brains and check your facts. This kind of erroneous name calling (on all sides!) is what has this country onto this useless, hateful track. </soapbox off> edit: Okay, I see this has already been hashed. I didn't read the second page before I jumped right over to snopes to check it out. My point still stands though. PS: what's the "cloak Mt Rushmore" story? Mt. Rushmore blockage stirs angry SD visitors.All this does is ruin some vacations and prove what a jackass he is. Helen/Abbie will likely say "this is a genius move to show how government effects our lives every day". From this chair it looks petty and childish. Once again government proves itself an adversary. Just wait until the IRS says "I am sorry ma'am, you can't have that hip replacement until you pay your $600 in back taxes".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2013 14:08:30 GMT -5
I love that Obama thinks pissing off voters is a good thing. Somehow its bad for rupublicans to make people angry but OK for Obama and crew to do the same!
I also love that Daniel is so passionate about this he felt the need to make an ad hominum attack on folks who jumped the gun.
|
|
panamark
fully equipped rock polisher
Member since September 2012
Posts: 1,343
|
Post by panamark on Oct 11, 2013 14:20:17 GMT -5
Now that cloaking IS funny! In this case I think everyone can tell it is not true, so it is not just to stir the pot. Funny. Thx.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2013 14:32:08 GMT -5
Now that cloaking IS funny! In this case I think everyone can tell it is not true, so it is not just to stir the pot. Funny. Thx. cloaking was a gag. of course! Cones on a non-park highway to keep visitors from viewing the monument is governmental overreach.
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Oct 11, 2013 14:32:26 GMT -5
I love that Obama thinks pissing off voters is a good thing. Somehow its bad for rupublicans to make people angry but OK for Obama and crew to do the same! I also love that Daniel is so passionate about this he felt the need to make an ad hominum attack on folks who jumped the gun. I'd love to see Daniel do the same with some of the stupid, childish crap that SubnormalPerson/Helen posts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2013 17:58:54 GMT -5
Now that cloaking IS funny! In this case I think everyone can tell it is not true, so it is not just to stir the pot. Funny. Thx. cloaking was a gag. of course! Cones on a non-park highway to keep visitors from viewing the monument is governmental overreach. Are you serious? ? ? They put cones on a non park road? ? ? OVERREACH IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT FOR SURE. Jim
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Oct 11, 2013 18:09:08 GMT -5
Yup Jim, serious as a heart attack. Just heard on the local news that S.D. is reopening it. Gonna cost the state $15,000.00 per day to keep it opened.
|
|
robsrockshop
has rocks in the head
Member since August 2012
Posts: 715
|
Post by robsrockshop on Oct 14, 2013 9:02:10 GMT -5
I think we're just too conditioned to believe everything you see on the news has to be true. Too easily to fall for seeing stuff you see on the net as news and so it certainly has to be true. Then there's other problems like all the crazy crap going on that actually is true so often you'll just fall for it.
I'm not an overly intelligent person so I still fall for it myself time to time but i'm trying to get better and change direction. I'm just a typical white redneck that likes to drink beer, ride 4 wheelers and cut rocks so the info overload is all a bit much for me and spending 20 years around construction workers didn't help any.
I know i've posted this vid in other areas but this is some advice im following for now. I watch this guy because I also like to lift weights:
I admit.....i've watched this more than once lately trying to stay focused.
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Oct 14, 2013 11:13:08 GMT -5
About South Dakota reopening Mt Rushmore, It reopens today at a cost of $12,200.00 per day. Private donors have at last count come up with enough money to keep it opened for 14 days, with no state taxpayer funds being used. Hopefully this foolishness over the shutdown will be settled before those 14 days end. And before I come under attack by a certain few, (You know who you are). I blame both sides for this shutdown. twitchy.com/2013/10/11/mount-rushmore-to-reopen-monday-thanks-to-donated-funds/ The Argus Leader quoted is the local news paper for Rapid City and the Black Hills, for those who may wonder what the source was.
|
|
phoenix1647
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since March 2013
Posts: 186
|
Post by phoenix1647 on Oct 14, 2013 11:32:26 GMT -5
Question....are the fees people are paying to go into the parks going to the State that is paying to keep it open or to the idiots that shut it down? Just a thought..
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Oct 14, 2013 12:02:07 GMT -5
Question....are the fees people are paying to go into the parks going to the State that is paying to keep it open or to the idiots that shut it down? Just a thought.. Mt Rushmore is a National Monument. I suspect the feds are getting the fees. However the state benefits from all of the tourist dollars that are brought into the state. OK, just did a google search. Mt Rushmore is under the control of the National Parks Service.
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Oct 14, 2013 19:44:51 GMT -5
They're damned lucky they didn't shut it down a month earlier, during the Sturgis bike rally. Sturgis is only a few miles away. Them NPS boys would have been in deep dodo, trying to keep 10,000 bikers out.
|
|
Jasper-hound
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since June 2010
Posts: 208
|
Post by Jasper-hound on Oct 14, 2013 21:04:06 GMT -5
Charlie, you are correct.
|
|
|
Post by rockpickerforever on Oct 14, 2013 21:07:19 GMT -5
Yes, Chuckles, we all know you are correct, especially me. Can we please let this thread die an undignified death? Let it slip away?
|
|