No surprise that life's road can feel different . . . in crappy shoes
 

On Jan 3, 6:52*pm, Giles wrote:
On Jan 3, 8:33*pm, MajorOz wrote:

I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
last paragraph interested me.

Well, we all unaccountably stumble upon things occasionally.

Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
previously opposed?

...or, did I read it wrong?

I won't try to answer for Dave (god knows I'd probably have a
difficult time making much more sense of what he says than he can) but
it's hardly a secret that folks everywhere have always generally
approved of programs from which they benefit and not so much of those
from which they do not. *Thus, clearly, approval ratings tend to
fluctuate somewhat depending on who benefits when and who don't.

Do you know a lot of people who formerly and vigorously opposed one
program or another from which they did not qualify to benefit, and who
now hold fast to that disapproval when they do qualify?

giles
whose mother never raised such a foolish child.

Yep, I think you've got it.
The stain of pain plays mainly on the brain.
Dave

If PITA LOONIES don't fish, and Tories cherish CHEESEBALLS, flyfishers use. . .
 

On 2010-01-03 21:33:57 -0500, MajorOz said:

The food banks and church handout programs are full of confused,
whimpering former big pie hole wingnuts like you right now, begging
for help from program's and people they trashed just months ago,
before their safe little wingnut worlds crumbled leaving their
arrogance naked of security.

I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
last paragraph interested me.

Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
previously opposed?

...or, did I read it wrong?

No, that is what he is saying. However, from my experience, he is
wrong (at least here in the left wingnut state of Massachusetts). I
work in a food pantry and I've yet to meet someone like Dave has
described. Most of our clients have been coming to the pantry for
years. There has been new ones in the past year, but they are the
working poor, and from talking with them, I doubt any are Republicans
let alone conservatives.

Most of the volunteers did not vote for Obama. All of the clients
probably did vote for Obama.

Dave

If PITA LOONIES don't fish, and Tories cherish CHEESEBALLS,flyfishers use. . .
 

On Jan 4, 5:10*am, David LaCourse wrote:
On 2010-01-03 21:33:57 -0500, MajorOz said:



The food banks and church handout programs are full of confused,
whimpering former big pie hole wingnuts like you right now, begging
for help from program's and people they trashed just months ago,
before their safe little wingnut worlds crumbled leaving their
arrogance naked of security.

I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
last paragraph interested me.

Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
previously opposed?

...or, did I read it wrong?

No, that is what he is saying. *However, from my experience, he is
wrong (at least here in the left wingnut state of Massachusetts). *I
work in a food pantry and I've yet to meet someone like Dave has
described. *Most of our clients have been coming to the pantry for
years. *There has been new ones in the past year, but they are the
working poor, and from talking with them, I doubt any are Republicans
let alone conservatives.

Most of the volunteers did not vote for Obama. *All of the clients
probably did vote for Obama.

Dave



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well OK
1. No I am not saying that a disproportionate number of conservatives
are going to food banks. How could I know that? Maybe we have
different definitions of proportionate? For me, it would mean that a
higher proportion (%) of the total universe of conservatives are
coming to food banks, THAN the proportion (%) of the universe of
others who come to food banks.
2. What I am saying is that based on my experiences in the past, and
some current observations and info, I believe that a larger number of
people with conservative political beliefs are coming to food banks
(and other human services) than do in non recessionary times.
And . . .
3. Again from experience, not survey or experiment, these folk are
typically new comers to needing assistance and are often very
emotional, sometimes hostile and demanding, and rarely but regularly
threatening. Its hard times and they are not used to asking for help.
4. Hello, I was responding to Beanster's characterization that libs
typically walk by a beaten man and are more concerned with criminals
than victims. Rightwingers love those kind of jokes which imply that
wingnuts are stand-up heroes, without actually helping anybody.
Bonhoeffer called stuff like this "cheap grace." I think.

Side note: By the way, Working poor people are not somehow immune to
voting R or immune to conservative political belief, particularly
around issues like abortion, unionization, etc.. Karl Rove sure knew
that in the 2004 Ohio election, and wasn't there this Reagan fellow
who . . . .

Since to your knowledge no conservative has come into the food pantry
where you volunteer, to ask for assistance or acted emotionally, you
apparently have touched the elephant in a different place. ;+))

Dave
By the way the most hostile and demanding laid off people in my
experience base were defense workers, engineers and middle managers.
The most appreciative, positive and eager to retrain (?) . . . people
like laid off sawmill workers in Snoqualemie and paper workers out on
the Coast. And all these groups got (get?)enhanced services, and
deeper support. You figure.

"No surprise that life's road can feel different . . . in crappyshoes
 

On Jan 4, 5:10*am, David LaCourse wrote:

No, that is what he is saying. However, from my experience, he is
wrong (at least here in the left wingnut state of Massachusetts). I
work in a food pantry and I've yet to meet someone like Dave has
described. Most of our clients have been coming to the pantry for
years. There has been new ones in the past year, but they are the
working poor, and from talking with them, I doubt any are Republicans
let alone conservatives.


Most of the volunteers did not vote for Obama. All of the clients
probably did vote for Obama.


Dave


- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -



Well OK
1. No I am not saying that a disproportionate number of conservatives
are going to food banks. How could I know that? Maybe we have
different definitions of proportionate? For me, it would mean that a
higher proportion (%) of the total universe of conservatives are
coming to food banks, THAN the proportion (%) of the universe of
others who come to food banks.
2. What I am saying is that based on my experiences in the past, and
some current observations and info, I believe that a larger number of
people with conservative political beliefs are coming to food banks
(and other human services) than do in non recessionary times.
And . . .
3. Again from experience, not survey or experiment, these folk are
typically new comers to needing assistance and are often very
emotional, sometimes hostile and demanding, and rarely but regularly
threatening. Its hard times and they are not used to asking for help.
4. Hello, I was responding to Beanster's characterization that libs
typically walk by a beaten man and are more concerned with criminals
than victims. Rightwingers love those kind of jokes which imply that
wingnuts are stand-up heroes, without actually helping anybody.
Bonhoeffer called stuff like this "cheap grace." I think.

Side note: By the way, Working poor people are not somehow immune to
voting R or immune to conservative political belief, particularly
around issues like abortion, unionization, etc.. Karl Rove sure knew
that in the 2004 Ohio election, and wasn't there this Reagan fellow
who . . . .


Since to your knowledge no conservative has come into the food pantry
where you volunteer, to ask for assistance or acted emotionally, you
apparently have touched the elephant in a different place. ;+))


Dave
By the way the most hostile and demanding laid off people in my
experience base were defense workers, engineers and middle managers.
The most appreciative, positive and eager to retrain (?) . . . people
like laid off sawmill workers in Snoqualemie and paper workers out on
the Coast. And all these groups got (get?)enhanced services, and
deeper support. You figure.

If PITA LOONIES don't fish, and Tories cherish CHEESEBALLS,flyfishers use. . .
 

On Jan 4, 2:15*am, DaveS wrote:
On Jan 3, 6:33*pm, MajorOz wrote:



On Jan 2, 11:34*am, DaveS wrote:

On Jan 2, 8:16*am, "~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:

yawn.........did you say something DaveS?

On Jan 1, 7:32*pm, DaveS wrote:

On Dec 31 2009, 8:08*pm, "~^ beancounter ~^"
wrote:

It's a fact: you're a Tory fisherperson. Tories fish cheeseballs. You
fish cheeseballs.
Don't fight it. Be comfortable with your inner Tory.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

. . . *flies.

Don't struggle with it too much; I might adjust the reading level down
if maybe you could share your recipe for your go-to Velvetta
Cheeseball fly.?

Easily led, simple answer seekers like you, believers in witchcraft
like Palin, and arm chair warriors like Cheney are unfortunate but
disposable political fellow travelers for real conservatives. These
folks will have their papa's money, high heels, book contracts and
born-again scams to keep them in German wheels. But what about your
kind?

The food banks and church handout programs are full of confused,
whimpering former big pie hole wingnuts like you right now, begging
for help from program's and people they trashed just months ago,
before their safe little wingnut worlds crumbled leaving their
arrogance naked of security.

I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
last paragraph interested me.

Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
previously opposed?

...or, did I read it wrong?

cheers

oz- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Fair question. Disproportionate? No, I have no basis for saying that
in this specific downturn, people who hold conservative political
views, are more likely to be seeking assistance from agencies/churches
than people who do not have such views. Don't think what I did say
implied that.

It would be pretty hard to tease out answers to that question even if
I were still active professionally. For one, educational levels are
associated with political outlook, as is geography, gender, ethnicity
etc. ie just too many complex variables for a straight up analysis,
and I never felt good about ANOVA or factor analysis anyway. My
opinions are based on personal and shared experiences, no more.

But I will venture this; This recession has dug deeper into some of
the small independent business sectors (than past downturns, when we
had a larger manufacturing base) specifically residential
construction, FIRE (finance, insurance and reat estate), and some of
the tech service areas. These are the "newcomers" in the unemployment
offices and foodbanks. And generally, they break toward the Republican
side, even in the NW. In the foodbanks its some of the above, but more
noticeably, elderly and single parent suburban females that are more
in evidence, as well as male construction and home service
businessmen.

Ive talked to lots of ES and UI staff and customers over decades and
in many states, Red and Blue. The worse the economy, the better was my
consulting business. From personal experience in past recessions and
some mass layoffs I worked professionally, I know that the newly and
rarely unemployed tend to be more conservative. How do I know this?
Because people tell you all kinds of stuff when they are up against
the wall, whether you want to know or not. Most often they want you to
know that they are "not that kind" or this is their first time blah
blah blah. And they do say things like "6 months ago I thought this
program was for bums" etc.

And sometimes they think weird stuff and bring it with them: for
example I remember one guy who wanted the employment counselor helping
him fired because a man in the poster on the wall had arm muscles and
therefore was Marxist in his eyes, seriously. I recall another example
when I found several laid off "patriots" had intimidated a young
counselor into approving expensive helicopter retraining. *There are
also folks who want to scream out their beliefs and a few want to hurt
someone as a part of their employment service experience.. And there
are a very few people who bring guns with them. Bottonline, there is
lots of emotion concentrated in one place when the labor market goes
cacahuate, and people want to "tell their story."

Foodbanks are somewhat different. The best try to mimic a grocery
store, with carts, choices and pleasant space. However, humiliation
for people who are not used to being dependent is never far away.
People know why they are there. I traveled lots for work but Ive lived
in the same 22k affluent community for 38 years. I know something of
peoples politics and I know who I see at the food bank. This recession
is not skipping conservatives.

All of this is not saying that people with rightwing views get their
"comeuppance" when they come for help. Ive never seen public or non-
profit program staff use this vulnerability as a supposed "teaching
moment" for making conservatives somehow more compassionate and
liberal. Rightwing politics in these service environments is just
baggage and slows up service for other people. But there are
occasions, as program staff will tell you, that they have to take
ideological **** and abuse at the same time they are helping the same
people get thru their bad times. Its just the way it is.

However I personally believe that most adults learn understanding and
compassion from life's experiences, and I believe that these
experiences moderate rigid political beliefs. I also believe that all
public human services facilities should have "safe rooms" for when the
inevitable whackjob (wingnut or otherwise) wants to hasten
Gotterdammerung. But that's a whole nuther rant.

Dave
As to your "playground" insult . . . duely noted culero.

Thank you.

I now more fully understand what you seem to have previously meant.
And, I appreciate your experiences and observations in the area.
Although marginally greater than mine, conclusions and interpretations
(and neither of us have predispositions, do we, now :) ) are somewhat
different.

cheers

oz, who noted a distinctly different tone, not at all in the
playground style (perhaps it rubs off from those who shall remain
unmentioned) of some previous posts.

"No surprise that life's road can feel different . . . in crappy shoes
 

On 2010-01-04 14:48:33 -0500, DaveS said:

On Jan 4, 5:10*am, David LaCourse wrote:

No, that is what he is saying. However, from my experience, he is
wrong (at least here in the left wingnut state of Massachusetts). I
work in a food pantry and I've yet to meet someone like Dave has
described. Most of our clients have been coming to the pantry for
years. There has been new ones in the past year, but they are the
working poor, and from talking with them, I doubt any are Republicans
let alone conservatives.


Most of the volunteers did not vote for Obama. All of the clients
probably did vote for Obama.


Dave


- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -



Well OK
1. No I am not saying that a disproportionate number of conservatives
are going to food banks. How could I know that? Maybe we have
different definitions of proportionate? For me, it would mean that a
higher proportion (%) of the total universe of conservatives are
coming to food banks, THAN the proportion (%) of the universe of
others who come to food banks.
2. What I am saying is that based on my experiences in the past, and
some current observations and info, I believe that a larger number of
people with conservative political beliefs are coming to food banks
(and other human services) than do in non recessionary times.

Could be true, I guess. But, in my experience looking over the past
year most of the new clients at the food bank I volunteer at are the
working poor, blue collar workers, not your typical conservative. This
is also true at three or four other food banks/pantries in the area
that I am familiar with, including one in a well-to-do community.

And . . .
3. Again from experience, not survey or experiment, these folk are
typically new comers to needing assistance and are often very
emotional, sometimes hostile and demanding, and rarely but regularly
threatening. Its hard times and they are not used to asking for help.

I have experienced many new comers to the food pantry and all find it
humiliating. A single black mom, very well dressed, came in about two
months ago for the first time. She took her number and had a seat in
the corner were she silently cried. She had been employed in a well
paying job from the looks of her clothes, and during a conversation I
got the feeling she was obviously educated. I talked with her in
private and tried to assure her that there was no shame in asking for
help and that it would only be temporary in her case. Others also
seemed humiliated and embarrassed by the experience. And, yes, I would
be too.

4. Hello, I was responding to Beanster's characterization that libs
typically walk by a beaten man and are more concerned with criminals
than victims. Rightwingers love those kind of jokes which imply that
wingnuts are stand-up heroes, without actually helping anybody.
Bonhoeffer called stuff like this "cheap grace." I think.

Well, to begin with, to have "grace" they would need to be Christian.
I'm not arguing with Bonhoeffer, but I believe a true Christian is a
loving person, willing to give back with his/her time, treasures, and
talents. There is no "cheap grace". You can't earn grace, and
although good works are not necessary, every Christian I know does some
sort of extra work and is generous with his/her time and money. As far
as making a joke about libs walking past a beaten man...... well, that
attitude, true or false, had to start somewhere. I once heard a women
friend in the singing group I once belonged to say that she felt sorry
for this particular criminal who had killed someone. She said he was a
"product of his environment." She showed no such pity for the innocent
person killed as we talked about the crime. I have seen this same
attitude at a national level. Can't recall the name of the guilty
person in jail, but he was black, "a product of his environment", was
found guilty by overwhelming evidence, yet the liberal press and
hollywood types *demanded* he be let go. I think that there is a
history of such things happening. I grew up dirt poor. I was NOT a
product of my environment. No one is. We all have choices in life.

Side note: By the way, Working poor people are not somehow immune to
voting R or immune to conservative political belief, particularly
around issues like abortion, unionization, etc.. Karl Rove sure knew
that in the 2004 Ohio election, and wasn't there this Reagan fellow
who . . . .

No they aren't. But the poor I see on a daily basis are 100% Obamites,
and the "change" they want is more entitlements. I know, I know,
someone will brand me as a bigoted blowhard ******* for having said
that, but it is the truth. They truly need help, but many have made
bad decisions and continue to make more bad decisions, and ride the
system for all it's worth. They are happy with their lives, afaik, and
wouldn't change if it meant working for what they get.


Since to your knowledge no conservative has come into the food pantry
where you volunteer, to ask for assistance or acted emotionally, you
apparently have touched the elephant in a different place. ;+))

Well, it all depends on one's perspective, but that has been my
experience, Dave. One must also remember that being a conservative
does not automatically mean that person is a Republican. I grew very
poor and my parents were conservative Democrats. d;o) (After thought:
I doubt my parents, if alive, would today vote Democrat. Their
Democrat party has changed. It is not the party today of JFK.
Remember the first thing he did when he became prez? I will never
forget - he gave everyone a very nice tax break. More money to spend
meant more income for the government.)


Dave
By the way the most hostile and demanding laid off people in my
experience base were defense workers, engineers and middle managers.
The most appreciative, positive and eager to retrain (?) . . . people
like laid off sawmill workers in Snoqualemie and paper workers out on
the Coast. And all these groups got (get?)enhanced services, and
deeper support. You figure.

Hmmmm. Well, I know of two 6 figure friends, both engineers, who have
been unemployed for awhile (one for almost two years). They are both
in their 50s, would accept under-paid positions, and both have been
retrained, one as a truck driver. Neither has given up hope of finding
a job. One, married to a working nurse, is slowly spending his 401K
and has moved into a smaller home. They'll survive.

You and I, Dave, are very fortunate. I count my blessings daily, and
I'm sure you do too.

Dave

"No surprise that life's road can feel different . . . in crappy shoes
 

"David LaCourse" wrote in message
news:201001041720588930-dplacourse@aolcom...
No they aren't. But the poor I see on a daily basis are 100% Obamites,
and the "change" they want is more entitlements.

sure they do......sigh


someone will brand me as a bigoted blowhard ******* for having said that

why should they bother, when your own words do it themselves.

Tom
p.s. David, you shouldn't try to divine the thoughts of those who you
clearly don't understand.

If PITA LOONIES don't fish, and Tories cherish CHEESEBALLS,flyfishers use. . .
 

On Jan 4, 2:13*pm, MajorOz wrote:

Thank you.

I now more fully understand what you seem to have previously meant.
And, I appreciate your experiences and observations in the area.
Although marginally greater than mine, conclusions and interpretations
(and neither of us have predispositions, do we, now :) ) are somewhat
different.

cheers

oz, who noted a distinctly different tone, not at all in the
playground style (perhaps it rubs off from those who shall remain
unmentioned) of some previous posts.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Good we could have this exchange. As to the tone, sure its different
and I try to meet folks at least half way when I can. My tone with the
Beanster and others when they adopt the strategy of posting the days'
whackjob spin press release is to hit back.

The last few months have been flooded with drug company paid attempts
to sabotage health care reform, straight up lies about Medicare and
diversionary attacks on Obama to block out a number of other stories,
including a very ugly Mideast story on organ trafficking which has
incensed Muslims worldwide, and is currently being heavily censored in
the US.

I decided to start answering the Beansters nonsense the day I saw the
signs at the Tea Party rallies that said "Keep the Government's hands
off my Medicare." That was it for me. I decided on that day that if
the GOP was going to stoop to that level to score some transitory
point with a blatant lie intentionally meant to exploit ill informed
elderly people, it was time to crack some heads. Beanster and even
Dean are just go along puppies in this. But I think radicals have
captured control of what was the Republican Party and heavily
infiltrated ethical conservative circles and are presently a threat to
the Constitution in the same sense that the Russian controlled
Communist Party USA was in the 1940s. And I would hope that every bit
of their propaganda is answered from here on out. With humor if
possible.

As to individuals who are more conservative than I am? Vive la
difference. American patriots are ok by me. However I don't think many
have much of an idea of just who is calling the shots and just how
radical is the ideology at the core of whackdom right now. If you want
to do some self study, track back on the key figures behind the "house
on C street" story, the Dominionists, and the current Uganda story.
Then make up your own mind if that radical theocratic dictatorship is
what you believe American conservatism is all about. They say they
want to overthrow the US government, our democratic republic, and I
believe them.

Cheers
Dave

If PITA LOONIES don't fish, and Tories cherish CHEESEBALLS,flyfishers use. . .
 

On Jan 4, 4:13*pm, MajorOz wrote:
On Jan 4, 2:15*am, DaveS wrote:





On Jan 3, 6:33*pm, MajorOz wrote:

On Jan 2, 11:34*am, DaveS wrote:

On Jan 2, 8:16*am, "~^ beancounter ~^" wrote:

yawn.........did you say something DaveS?

On Jan 1, 7:32*pm, DaveS wrote:

On Dec 31 2009, 8:08*pm, "~^ beancounter ~^"
wrote:

It's a fact: you're a Tory fisherperson. Tories fish cheeseballs. You
fish cheeseballs.
Don't fight it. Be comfortable with your inner Tory.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

. . . *flies.

Don't struggle with it too much; I might adjust the reading level down
if maybe you could share your recipe for your go-to Velvetta
Cheeseball fly.?

Easily led, simple answer seekers like you, believers in witchcraft
like Palin, and arm chair warriors like Cheney are unfortunate but
disposable political fellow travelers for real conservatives. These
folks will have their papa's money, high heels, book contracts and
born-again scams to keep them in German wheels. But what about your
kind?

The food banks and church handout programs are full of confused,
whimpering former big pie hole wingnuts like you right now, begging
for help from program's and people they trashed just months ago,
before their safe little wingnut worlds crumbled leaving their
arrogance naked of security.

I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
last paragraph interested me.

Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
previously opposed?

...or, did I read it wrong?

cheers

oz- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Fair question. Disproportionate? No, I have no basis for saying that
in this specific downturn, people who hold conservative political
views, are more likely to be seeking assistance from agencies/churches
than people who do not have such views. Don't think what I did say
implied that.

It would be pretty hard to tease out answers to that question even if
I were still active professionally. For one, educational levels are
associated with political outlook, as is geography, gender, ethnicity
etc. ie just too many complex variables for a straight up analysis,
and I never felt good about ANOVA or factor analysis anyway. My
opinions are based on personal and shared experiences, no more.

But I will venture this; This recession has dug deeper into some of
the small independent business sectors (than past downturns, when we
had a larger manufacturing base) specifically residential
construction, FIRE (finance, insurance and reat estate), and some of
the tech service areas. These are the "newcomers" in the unemployment
offices and foodbanks. And generally, they break toward the Republican
side, even in the NW. In the foodbanks its some of the above, but more
noticeably, elderly and single parent suburban females that are more
in evidence, as well as male construction and home service
businessmen.

Ive talked to lots of ES and UI staff and customers over decades and
in many states, Red and Blue. The worse the economy, the better was my
consulting business. From personal experience in past recessions and
some mass layoffs I worked professionally, I know that the newly and
rarely unemployed tend to be more conservative. How do I know this?
Because people tell you all kinds of stuff when they are up against
the wall, whether you want to know or not. Most often they want you to
know that they are "not that kind" or this is their first time blah
blah blah. And they do say things like "6 months ago I thought this
program was for bums" etc.

And sometimes they think weird stuff and bring it with them: for
example I remember one guy who wanted the employment counselor helping
him fired because a man in the poster on the wall had arm muscles and
therefore was Marxist in his eyes, seriously. I recall another example
when I found several laid off "patriots" had intimidated a young
counselor into approving expensive helicopter retraining. *There are
also folks who want to scream out their beliefs and a few want to hurt
someone as a part of their employment service experience.. And there
are a very few people who bring guns with them. Bottonline, there is
lots of emotion concentrated in one place when the labor market goes
cacahuate, and people want to "tell their story."

Foodbanks are somewhat different. The best try to mimic a grocery
store, with carts, choices and pleasant space. However, humiliation
for people who are not used to being dependent is never far away.
People know why they are there. I traveled lots for work but Ive lived
in the same 22k affluent community for 38 years. I know something of
peoples politics and I know who I see at the food bank. This recession
is not skipping conservatives.

All of this is not saying that people with rightwing views get their
"comeuppance" when they come for help. Ive never seen public or non-
profit program staff use this vulnerability as a supposed "teaching
moment" for making conservatives somehow more compassionate and
liberal. Rightwing politics in these service environments is just
baggage and slows up service for other people. But there are
occasions, as program staff will tell you, that they have to take
ideological **** and abuse at the same time they are helping the same
people get thru their bad times. Its just the way it is.

However I personally believe that most adults learn understanding and
compassion from life's experiences, and I believe that these
experiences moderate rigid political beliefs. I also believe that all
public human services facilities should have "safe rooms" for when the
inevitable whackjob (wingnut or otherwise) wants to hasten
Gotterdammerung. But that's a whole nuther rant.

Dave
As to your "playground" insult . . . duely noted culero.

Thank you.

I now more fully understand what you seem to have previously meant.
And, I appreciate your experiences and observations in the area.
Although marginally greater than mine, conclusions and interpretations
(and neither of us have predispositions, do we, now :) ) are somewhat
different.

cheers

oz, who noted a distinctly different tone, not at all in the
playground style (perhaps it rubs off from those who shall remain
unmentioned) of some previous posts.

You never know what rubs off until you rub up against it. Hey.....pat
yourself on the back and you may get **** on your hands.

And I don't believe you understand anything more than you did 48 hours
ago.

But you could demonstrate that I'm wrong.....if you really wanted
to......right? :)

g.
predispose that.

If PITA LOONIES don't fish, and Tories cherish CHEESEBALLS,flyfishers use. . .
 

On Jan 4, 7:10*am, David LaCourse wrote:
On 2010-01-03 21:33:57 -0500, MajorOz said:



The food banks and church handout programs are full of confused,
whimpering former big pie hole wingnuts like you right now, begging
for help from program's and people they trashed just months ago,
before their safe little wingnut worlds crumbled leaving their
arrogance naked of security.

I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
last paragraph interested me.

Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
previously opposed?

...or, did I read it wrong?

No, that is what he is saying. *However, from my experience, he is
wrong (at least here in the left wingnut state of Massachusetts). *I
work in a food pantry and I've yet to meet someone like Dave has
described. *Most of our clients have been coming to the pantry for
years. *There has been new ones in the past year, but they are the
working poor, and from talking with them, I doubt any are Republicans
let alone conservatives.

Most of the volunteers did not vote for Obama. *All of the clients
probably did vote for Obama.

Dave

Dimwit.

g.