BF2S Forums Typical liberal hypocrisy

Diesel_dyk wrote:

lowing wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Go a head a drap yourself in a flag. Some jobs are necessary for society, and its ironic that these jobs are so important that the govt creates, manages and pays for these jobs, sounds socialistic to me. While there are other jobs, like fat govt contractors working for cost plus a fat profit margin that are real parasites. Its good to see that you recognized yourself in what I've said. So go head and collect your govt welfare money, but save the hypocrisy about govt waste. IMO you should be thankful for the generosity of the taxpayer, and don't begrudge another person who the taxpayers want to bestow their generosity on.

BTW, I'm in a profession, I have to kill what I eat, no one writes me a check.

You listed everyone that works for the govt. in your little rant remember, "When you look at govt contractors or people employed by govt contractors or govt employees". You did not say some jobs are necessary for society, you said EVERYONE affiliated with govt. is sucking your taxpayer tit and nothing more.
I did not drap myself in a flag, the flag was drapped over those "govt tit suckers" you so despise. Dipshits like yourself have tried many times to belittle me, or make me feel ashamed for my work in Iraq, it just isn't going to happen. I am proud of my work there, and you simply are not going to get to me, that way.

Again, I ask what you do for a living. So stop with the mystery and tell us.

I learned a long time ago that you don't listen to reason.

Fact is that anyone that is collecting taxpayers money is doing so at the welfare of the govt. So when it comes to how that money is doled out, that's a matter of policy and generousity. Some jobs just shouldn't exist, IMO I would rank the job of a welfare mom raising the next generation of citizens above the a lot of other jobs, especailly the fat govt contractors who really suck hard on the taxpayers. You probably disagree with that ranking, but you can't deny that both are receiving taxpayers money and that my friend is welfare.

BTW the welfare concept goes like this. people are always suggesting that welfare receiptients should perform work for their welfare check. And I agree, in fact we already have that, its called public service.... its just that the word welfare has such bad connotations assocaited with it that people people throw that label out there in order to invoke a knee jerk response. I threw it out there and look at the jerk I found (ROFL I didn't even have to call you out by name, you just knew who you are.) You're a beneficiary of welfare so before you cry "pull up the ladder jack, I'm alright." You might want to evalute where it is you are receving your money from because your a living breathing "hippocrisy" (that's big hypocrit to you)


PS don't snatch a flag off of a coffin and wrap yourself in it and try to invoke the heroic sacrifice of others, because from what I've read here, you're not one of those guys on the front line, so don't try to usurp their voice to spew your crap.

You call your rant, reason?!! Really?

I didn't invoke heroic sacrifices of others as if I made that sacrife, you straight up called these people govt. tit suckers, and now place them no better than a welfare mom, leeching off of the govt. Sorry, I just gotta disagree with you.
are you going to tell us what you do for a living or not?

Last edited by lowing (2009-10-07 21:00:55)

JohnG@lt wrote:

lowing wrote:

You call your rant, reason?!! Really?
are you going to tell us what you do for a living or not?

It was actually a quite well thought out and rational response. He hit the nail on the head imo.

Maybe you should read his first post about EVERYONE that has anything to do with govt. being a tit sucker. While refusing to tell us what he does for a living. This would include cops, firemen, airtraffic controllers, OSHA, EPA, FAA servicemen etc

Last person that made such rediculous claims turned out to work for a company that took on govt. contracts as well.

Only a dishit would expect that no compensation should be rendered to a person for their services, and yes like it or not, the govt. functions from efforts of its nations citizens. If you think it is rational to call these people that work for you tit suckers, and make no distinction between those that WORK for their compensation and those that simply leech,,............ well never mind what I think about that line of "rationality".

Last edited by lowing (2009-10-07 21:10:32)

JohnG@lt wrote:

lowing wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

It was actually a quite well thought out and rational response. He hit the nail on the head imo.

Maybe you should read his first post about EVERYONE that has anything to do with govt. being a tit sucker. While refusing to tell us what he does for a living. This would include cops, firemen, airtraffic controllers, OSHA, EPA, FAA etc....

Last person that made such rediculous claims turned out to work for a company that took on govt. contracts as well.

Yeah, and he's right. They're all living off the government tit. Would you want them to be private businesses? No, not really. But the fact remains that they are dependent on the government for a paycheck in the same way a welfare mom is. The difference is that they work for it. Who he's mostly blasting are government contractors and I happen to feel that 99% of them are the scum of the earth. Looters the lot of them.

Actually no they are not dependent on the govt. Most are skilled and can take their trade elsewhere. THe reality is, just like every other employer, with time served comes more money and more benefits. It would be foolish to leave for most.

Let us also not forget that these very same people also pay taxes to the same govt. you do. I love how you draw such a very thin line between welfare mom and a person who works for you the taxpayer.If they are working for a living, then they are hardly "dependent on the govt. for a paycheck they same way a welfare mom is" are they?  How very "rational" of you. the worker EARNS a PAYcheck, the welfare mom RECIEVES a WELFARE check.

I also love how you call someone who works for the govt. looters, and lends no such distinction to a person who does nothing for a living except wait for a check in the mail from the taxpayer. Again, oh so "rational"


and yet he still refuses to tell us what he does for a living.

How about you?

Last edited by lowing (2009-10-07 21:29:23)

JohnG@lt wrote:

lowing wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Yeah, and he's right. They're all living off the government tit. Would you want them to be private businesses? No, not really. But the fact remains that they are dependent on the government for a paycheck in the same way a welfare mom is. The difference is that they work for it. Who he's mostly blasting are government contractors and I happen to feel that 99% of them are the scum of the earth. Looters the lot of them.

Actually no they are not dependent on the govt. Most are skilled and can take their trade elsewhere. THe reality is, just like every other employer, with time served comes more money and more benefits. It would be foolish to leave for most.

Let us also not forget that these very same people also pay taxes to the same govt. you do. I love how you draw such a very thin line between welfare mom and a person who works for you the taxpayer. How very "rational" of you

I also love how you call someone who works for the govt. looters, and lends no such distinction to a person wh odoes nothing for a living except wait for a check in the mail from the taxpayer. Again, oh so "rational"

and yet he still refuses to tell us what he does for a living.

How about you?

No, the welfare mom is a looter as well. My point is that how many government contracts are based on merit and are not politically motivated? How many of those contracts are handed out by corrupt politicians? The vast majority. I consider the civilian gate guards working in Kuwait for six figure salaries, the guys that replaced an infantryman making 1/3 of that wage to be looters. They're overpaid because they got a government no bid contract. No denying that.

I'm a student finishing up his last year in an electrical engineering degree. I've been working without break since I was 13. I am 28.

With that you can make an argument. However, what you are saying now, is not the "RATIONAL" thought spewed by Diesel ( or whatever his name is) that any and EVERY person working for the tax payer is a tit sucker, no different than that of a welfare mom and is thought of, by him, as even less.
Electrical engineer? Gunna be kinda dicey to land a job that has absolutely no connections with govt. whatsoever......be careful

Last edited by lowing (2009-10-07 21:34:04)

Diesel_dyk wrote:

lowing wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Yeah, and he's right. They're all living off the government tit. Would you want them to be private businesses? No, not really. But the fact remains that they are dependent on the government for a paycheck in the same way a welfare mom is. The difference is that they work for it. Who he's mostly blasting are government contractors and I happen to feel that 99% of them are the scum of the earth. Looters the lot of them.

Actually no they are not dependent on the govt. Most are skilled and can take their trade elsewhere. THe reality is, just like every other employer, with time served comes more money and more benefits. It would be foolish to leave for most.

Let us also not forget that these very same people also pay taxes to the same govt. you do. I love how you draw such a very thin line between welfare mom and a person who works for you the taxpayer. How very "rational" of you

I also love how you call someone who works for the govt. looters, and lends no such distinction to a person wh odoes nothing for a living except wait for a check in the mail from the taxpayer. Again, oh so "rational"

and yet he still refuses to tell us what he does for a living.

How about you?

If you're receiving taxpayers money, then yes, you are dependant on the welfare of the govt. Skill is irrelevent, the fact that a person receives the money and benefits means that the taxpayer is supporting them... though its a little better when the govt receives some services in return. But Like I said in the case of welfare moms, they too are providing society with a valuable service raising the next generation, but I wouldn't expect any understanding on that point.

IMO you guys are all standing in the same dole line, its just a matter of ranking and bickering about whose cutting in front of whom, kind of like hogs at a trough. I just find it sad that some people are all to happy to fill their pockets and cut out the weakest among us... I guess that speaks to character more than anything.


I've posted this before... I'm a professional, I work for myself, I have to kill what I eat, I don't receive a check from anyone.

Nope, just because you CHOSE to work for the govt. does not mean you depend on the govt. like all other marketable people they have a choice.

I still shake my head if you think that a welfare mom earning nothing except the job of raising the next loser in society is just a little worse than working for the govt.

Not sure if you are aware, but out of 25 years in my profession 4 was spent on active duty and 1.5 was collectively spent working on govt. aircraft as a civilian.

So you see, I did not depend on the govt. I chose to work for them, and since then even, I chose to go back to the airlines.

I know what you posted last time, and it does not answer my question, so again I am forced to ask, what do you do for a living?

Last edited by lowing (2009-10-07 21:43:17)

lowing wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

lowing wrote:

Actually no they are not dependent on the govt. Most are skilled and can take their trade elsewhere. THe reality is, just like every other employer, with time served comes more money and more benefits. It would be foolish to leave for most.

Let us also not forget that these very same people also pay taxes to the same govt. you do. I love how you draw such a very thin line between welfare mom and a person who works for you the taxpayer. How very "rational" of you

I also love how you call someone who works for the govt. looters, and lends no such distinction to a person wh odoes nothing for a living except wait for a check in the mail from the taxpayer. Again, oh so "rational"

and yet he still refuses to tell us what he does for a living.

How about you?

If you're receiving taxpayers money, then yes, you are dependant on the welfare of the govt. Skill is irrelevent, the fact that a person receives the money and benefits means that the taxpayer is supporting them... though its a little better when the govt receives some services in return. But Like I said in the case of welfare moms, they too are providing society with a valuable service raising the next generation, but I wouldn't expect any understanding on that point.

IMO you guys are all standing in the same dole line, its just a matter of ranking and bickering about whose cutting in front of whom, kind of like hogs at a trough. I just find it sad that some people are all to happy to fill their pockets and cut out the weakest among us... I guess that speaks to character more than anything.


I've posted this before... I'm a professional, I work for myself, I have to kill what I eat, I don't receive a check from anyone.

Nope, just because you CHOSE to work for the govt. does not mean you depend on the govt. like all other marketable people they have a choice.

I still shake my head if you think that a welfare mom earning nothing except the job of raising the next loser in society is just a little worse than working for the govt.

Not sure if you are aware, but out of 25 years in my profession 4 was spent on active duty and 1.5 was collectively spent working on govt. aircraft as a civilian.

So you see, I did not depend on the govt. I chose to work for them, and since I chose to go back to the airlines.

I know what you posted last time, and it does not answer my question, so again I am forced to ask, what do you do for a living?

Choice is irrelevant. All that matters is that you collected a check and the taxpayer paid you and that's welfare. But if I held your views, I would resist that thought too. You hate losers taking taxpayer money, but winners like yourself taking taxpayers money is ok, so this really comes down to the fact that you don't like "out of luck moms" and other "losers." Anyway, I'm happy that you chose to get off of welfare and are now in the private sector, that's one less family for the taxpayer to feed.

Cybargs wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Liberals are open minded... So you're a liberal now?

Open-mindedness and close-mindedness is completely unrelated to political affiliation.

Definitions of liberal on the Web:
broad: showing or characterized by broad-mindedness; "a broad political stance"; "generous and broad sympathies"; "a liberal newspaper"; "tolerant ...
having political or social views favoring reform and progress
tolerant of change; not bound by authoritarianism, orthodoxy, or tradition
a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties

Actually open-mindedness is one of the strongest characteristic of a liberal.

A more accurate way to look at it is the definition of open- and close-minded, not the definition of conservative or liberal. The former is a state of being, the latter is a political position.

ruisleipa wrote:

lowing wrote:

the worker EARNS a PAYcheck, the welfare mom RECIEVES a WELFARE check.

and yet he still refuses to tell us what he does for a living.

How about you?

a) What do you have against 'welfare moms'? You try being a single mother raising kids with no time or possibility of getting work and see how you fuckin' like it. Many people argue that raising children is in fact a public service since they're, y'know, the future of the country and shit. I'm guessing you have no kids and don't appreciate how fucking hard it is raising a family, especially when you're on your own. But no, they're not EARNING a cheque, they're just RECEIVING it. But you'd rather let them all die in penury I suppose, and deny them education, health care and all the other things you don't think government should provide. Oh, sorry I forgot that all 'welfare moms' do is 'raise the next loser in society'. Do you know any single mothers who are on welfare? All happy are they? Pleased to be scrounging off the state? Don't want anything more for their family than to live in a ghetto all their lives? Sure, that's right. Parasites the lot of them. Your lack of humanity and common sense is amazing.

Let me tell you, I wouldn't trust private businesses to provide national education or health care, or pensions. Why? Because all they're concerned with is making money, irrespective of the effects their services have on other people. Just like those government defence contractors g@lt has mentioned a few times. I'm sure you'd love to feel you're independent of the government and living in a 'society' of one - each to their own, all against all etc. But who pays for the roads you use every day? Who pays the mailman to deliver your post? Who built the sewers carrying away your shit? Like many other hypocrites you're willing to use government services when it suits you, and reject other people for using other aspects of same services.

b) Your spelling sucks (i before e except after c - remember that one?).

c) Incidentally of course I literally didn't laugh out loud at your misspelling of hell-bitch Thatcher's name. Obviously. It's just extremely ironic that you can't spell her name, know nothing about the effect her policies had on the UK, and still seem to love her as much as the other right-wing idealogues you're so much a fan of. Like I said, you may as well quote Hitler. Love it how you concentrate on a very minor, insignificant post of mine without considering the points in the previous one. Picking and choosing is fun isn't it?

d) And WTF do YOU care what Diesel's (or anyone's) job is? He can have his opinions whether he's a garbage man or a bank executive. It makes no difference.

1. what I have against welfare moms, is she shouldn't have kids and be on welfare. It is personally irresponsible to have kids that you can not afford. Octo-mom for example. Now this is where you say I'M GENERALIZING". the fact is, women like Oct-mom is the rule not the exception.

2. Sorry, try something other than insults and spelling corrections in your posts. I know, try actually making an argument. By the way, you misspelled ideologues, it is spelled without the 'a', apparently. glass houses

3. Oh ok, so you really didn't LYAO, or ROTFLYAO, or even LOL, got it now. Yeah yeah yeah, and liberals compare Bush to Hitler as well, like I said it is an old song with people such as yourself. You hate Thatcher I think I got it, was I supposed to convince you to love her or something?

4. to be honest I couldn't give 2 flying fucks what he does for a living. I was asking because his rant pretty much trashed anyone with a job that remotely had any connection to govt. at all. So I was curious to see, after his criticisms, what he did for living. I mean since Cam was busted spouting basically the same line of bullshit, only to find out his company held govt. contracts as well.

Dilbert_X wrote:

lowing wrote:

1. what I have against welfare moms, is she shouldn't have kids and be on welfare.

Not everyone picks that lifestyle through choice.

How would your family get on if you dropped dead, your pension plan went belly up and your mortage foreclosed?

But for 10 years?

lowing wrote:

Actually choice and marketability is very relevant. Only a fool would consider marketability and choice irrelevant when speaking of welfare. You are trying to get under my skin by saying I receive welfare for my work for the govt. You are trying to say an air traffic controller is on welfare, a cop is on welfare, a firemen is on welfare etc...The fact is is these people have jobs and their employer is the taxpayer. The taxpayer needs these services, and yes national defense is also a service. This is not welfare, they are providing a service to you for a fee. This is not welfare. They are also taxpayers.

You know what is really funny here is, with all of your banter, you are and spouting off shit I am pretty sure you do not even believe trying to get under my skin, it would appear my not responding the way you would like is getting under yours. There is no way a sane logical person can deduce that a person who works for the govt. is on welfare JUST LIKE a welfare mother.


Awwwwwwww, how come I woke up only to find you STILL will not tell us what you do for a living? Oh well. Can't you even lie and come up with something good?

"Very relevant" --> only in your mind, I guess to seperate yourself from those you show distain for. But you are in fact capable of work and were  attracted to a lucrative socialist program just like a lazy welfare recipient... that must mean that there is fat to be cut in the private contracting business.

But, alright then, you chose to suck off of the taxpayer, there that makes it better. You know you are just like the kind of person who is in a union or gets union benefits, with obscene wages, yet hates unions and votes against unions and their own self interests. There is no figuring out a contradiction like that. But every piece of the puzzle is helping me get a bead on a prevalent American psychosis.

PS I like to look for hypocrisy, in fact I love to point it out when I see it. So when I see a person collecting a govt check who is trashing welfare moms and other social programs, I just have to point out the fact that you are all sucking off the taxpayer tit. In fact, I bet you were sucking 5 or may be 6 times harder than a welfare mom. But then again they just a POS, while you were integral and mission critical.


On an aside I wonder how much the private security contractors in Iraq make, $90k, $120k??? and how much does the contractor make to create a private army? Too bad the govt policy makers didn't take that obscene amount of money and instead of giving it to their friends they should have provided the enlisted with pay raises instead.

BTW I like my anonymity, I told you I'm a professional, and I'm self employed, if your not satisfied with that then that's too bad so sad.

JohnG@lt wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

lowing wrote:

Actually choice and marketability is very relevant. Only a fool would consider marketability and choice irrelevant when speaking of welfare. You are trying to get under my skin by saying I receive welfare for my work for the govt. You are trying to say an air traffic controller is on welfare, a cop is on welfare, a firemen is on welfare etc...The fact is is these people have jobs and their employer is the taxpayer. The taxpayer needs these services, and yes national defense is also a service. This is not welfare, they are providing a service to you for a fee. This is not welfare. They are also taxpayers.

You know what is really funny here is, with all of your banter, you are and spouting off shit I am pretty sure you do not even believe trying to get under my skin, it would appear my not responding the way you would like is getting under yours. There is no way a sane logical person can deduce that a person who works for the govt. is on welfare JUST LIKE a welfare mother.


Awwwwwwww, how come I woke up only to find you STILL will not tell us what you do for a living? Oh well. Can't you even lie and come up with something good?

"Very relevant" --> only in your mind, I guess to seperate yourself from those you show distain for. But you are in fact capable of work and were  attracted to a lucrative socialist program just like a lazy welfare recipient... that must mean that there is fat to be cut in the private contracting business.

But, alright then, you chose to suck off of the taxpayer, there that makes it better. You know you are just like the kind of person who is in a union or gets union benefits, with obscene wages, yet hates unions and votes against unions and their own self interests. There is no figuring out a contradiction like that. But every piece of the puzzle is helping me get a bead on a prevalent American psychosis.

PS I like to look for hypocrisy, in fact I love to point it out when I see it. So when I see a person collecting a govt check who is trashing welfare moms and other social programs, I just have to point out the fact that you are all sucking off the taxpayer tit. In fact, I bet you were sucking 5 or may be 6 times harder than a welfare mom. But then again they just a POS, while you were integral and mission critical.


On an aside I wonder how much the private security contractors in Iraq make, $90k, $120k??? and how much does the contractor make to create a private army? Too bad the govt policy makers didn't take that obscene amount of money and instead of giving it to their friends they should have provided the enlisted with pay raises instead.

BTW I like my anonymity, I told you I'm a professional, and I'm self employed, if your not satisfied with that then that's too bad so sad.

You're laying it on way too thick now. He already acknowledged that most government contractors are scum. He also said that he doesn't do that work anymore. I dunno why you keep trying to beat him over the head with the same topic.

Comparing a welfare mom to someone who works for a paycheck was a stretch the first time. To keep belaboring the issue just makes you look like you got handed a bunch of square pegs while faced with round holes. You can push all you want but they just won't fit, sorry.

Last edit - Here's the difference between a man who is in a union and a man who is not. You may feel they are both overpaid but the man that is not in a union set his own price and didn't have an extortion racket backing him. By this reasoning the man not in a union is getting paid exactly what he deserves. Union members always have the threat of violence, work stoppages and extortion in their back pocket so their wages are ALWAYS overinflated.

Now, if you're comparing a union member to a government contractor who received the contract via graft, then yes, that is a very valid comparison. They've both used morally corrupt (and often illegal) paths to receiving more pay than they deserve.

I never said govt. contractors were scum, I said you could make an argument with that point of view that didn't sound irrational and desperate.

I feel what most of them do is provide a service needed by the govt.

As for me, I got paid yes, I will not apologize for working for compensation be it by the govt. or a private company. My skill and my time is worth money regardless as to who is paying for it.

Last edited by lowing (2009-10-08 07:29:18)

JohnG@lt wrote:

lowing wrote:

I never said govt. contractors were scum, I said you could make an argument with that point of view that didn't sound irrational and desperate.

I feel what most of them do is provide a service needed by the govt.

As for me, I got paid yes, I will not apologize for working for compensation be it by the govt. or a private company. My skill and my time is worth money regardless as to who is paying for it.

I'm not disputing that you were working for what you considered to be a reasonable wage. Did the contractor you work for receive the contract on the up and up though? That's my point. You were just a worker bee so you don't bear any blame for just seeking a well paying job. Nor should you feel any guilt attached to it based on who was signing the check.

My issue is with the contracting companies themselves who live off the government tit and political connections and knowingly rip off the public for profit. The politicians that grant the contracts and the contractors that seek the contracts are equally scum in my eyes.

This is a far cry different and more rational argument than you backed up Diesel on earlier.

My company bid on the contract and was awarded it. I can tell you that when the contract comes up for renewal, there is a battle between companies to win it. So no, I do not get the feeling that it was an under the table no bid awarded contract.

I think people are missing the point of the posts.

Lowing you are transposing your own hatred of welfare on what I've posted, IMO there is nothing wrong with welfare and therefore nothing wrong in welfare for service. But your response shows I've hit a nerve because I know that the term "welfare" is a word used to seperate the other and when you hit a nerve that's when you make people think.

Lowing here is the difference between me an you, I don't complain if someone is collecting a govt check, whether serving the country or sitting on welfare. What I am pointing out is that some individuals (meaning that there is a lot of people out there with this view point) who collect govt checks or benefits look down their noses and brow beat other people who are also receiving govt funds. Shit... you could probably find alot of people actually on welfare that hate people on welfare and that's psychotic. IMO these people pretty much lose their credibility to brow beat others and I'm not really interested in beating you up about it or belaboring the point. What I am pointing out to others who are reading these posts that there is some hypocrisy in all this. When you shake things up a little, like viewing all govt pay as welfare for service, it can help you gain new perspective on a subject and highlight areas of inconsistent thought.... But peronsally I'm all for looking out for your own self interest.

So using the union example
1. Individuals receiving the benefit that they would try to withhold from others = hypocrisy
2. Individuals belonging to a union voting for conservative anti-union govts = going against your own self interests
Both don't make any sense


Hey Lowing here's two simple questions

What do you think about the govt paying for a person's post secondary education?
What do you think about the govt paying for someones training?

Because my guess is that the govt paid for your training, and then you went over to a private contractor as soon as you could to make 2 or 3 times the amount that the govt was paying you. That is pretty much the career path right? Now, if that were the case then you as an individual would certainly be acting rationally and in your own self interest and there is nothing wrong with that, save that the policy makers permitted or encouraged people by making it a possibility that you could be trained at taxpayers expense and then permitted to go work for a private contractor hired by the govt.... which is more expensive to taxpayers and so that doesn't make a whole lot sense from a financial standpoint. But the opportunity was there, you took advantage, you made out alright and sincerely good for you.


Point is... If you received benefit of the taxpayer, you should at least be a little gracious when judging others when they are in need of public benefit. Otherwise it simply looks like its OK if you receive the money but totally unacceptable when someone else receives it... and to me that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Hating welfare moms is irrational and in the total scheme of things a few people collecting welfare or having a few social programs are not going to bankrupt the system, if anything, the past few years has shown us what it takes to drives the country to bankruptcy.