Democrats and the Poor

[sirs]

We've all heard the left, flailing rants at those evil rich folks...how dare they have so much, and the poor have so little.  It's just "not fair".  Putting aside the fact that life isn't fair, and that people make choices, that frequently lead to the effects of those choices, what's patently unfair is taking away what someone has earned to give to someone who hasn't, simply because they don't.  We are an extremely charitable nation.  We already have massive entitlements set up for "the poor".  And who pays for that again?  Yea, "the rich", who can afford it, but also the middle class, who can't

Which brings up the point here.....The Democrats require the poor to survive politically.  They're not "champions of the poor", they perpetuate the poor.  The more poor, the better, since the more poor there is, the more the call for more Government services, and politicians who push that call.  That's why the push for more illegal immigration.  That's why so little is being done to enforce immigration law.  That's why now you see the largest dump of criminals being released from prison, than at any other time in the country.  Democrats require "the poor", much like Hamas/Hezbolla/Islamic Jihad all require the Palestinians.  Neither have any interest in solving the plight of the poor or the Palestinians, since both groups are necessary to advance the power of the former. And no, that doesn't mean Democrats are terrorists, professor literal.  The Palestinians are simply being used by terrorists, much like Democrats are using the poor.

Democrats can talk all they want, its their actions that give it away

[Plane]

  If the Professor is making you careful in speaking precisely , is he doing a good thing?

[sirs]

Well you see Plane....the Professor is very shrewd, which is to say smart.  Meaning, if there's a position that can't be defended, then he falls back on deflection efforts....as in arguing points not being made, or trying to play the literal card, example being in this case, where I'm comparing how 2 entities use other groups to push their positions of power, he would claim that I'm literally comparing the 2 original entities. 

So, no, its not a good thing, when he tries to deflect

[Plane]

  Language is mushy that way, precise language is difficult and sometimes not worth doing.

   Poetry is often intended to be connotative and leave much for the listener to interpret, prose is often intended to be denotative and convey exactly the meaning of the speaker.

 Neither of these is easy.

   Often as not the failures are funny, whether it is super literalism or imprecision that is at fault.

    This place , I consider< good practice>.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The the Republicans should do more to eliminate poverty. shoudn't they?

[sirs]

Poverty will never be eliminated.  The best we can do is provide access and promote opportunity.  And more Government isn't the answer.  It's actually detrimental to decreasing the poor, since the point of the article is that Democrats need MORE poor, in order to push their power

[Plane]

The the Republicans should do more to eliminate poverty. shoudn't they?

The Republicans have done so much to reduce poverty that the Democrats have taken to importing a whole voting demographic.