Re: bad news: war has been declared

December 13, 2006

sorry, forgot to give the links for reference:

war has been declared:

http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com/announcements.php?aid=2

article:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=2708925 & page=1

Supporters of the bill:

A-CHAMP, Autism One, Autism Society of America, Autism Speaks, COSAC,

Cure Autism Now, Dan Marino Foundation, First Signs, Generation

Rescue, Moms Against Mercury, National Alliance for Autism Research,

National Autism Association, NoMercury, OAR, Southwest Autism

Research & Resource Center, SafeMinds, Talk About Curing Autism,

TalkAutism, The Deirdre Imus Environmental Center for Pediatric

Oncology, Unlocking Autism, and US Autism and Asperger's Association.

http://www.combatautism.org

> Jon Shestack, co-founder of Cure Autism Now, said in a

> statement, " This bill is a federal declaration of war on the

epidemic

> of autism. "

A war on autism is a war on autistics.

http://www.aspiesforfreedom.com

December 13, 2006

I'm not surprised these autism groups are happy about this. They are probably prime beneficiaries of this government largess. No doubt they will be getting lots of money from the government. That will probably be the end of them since, if they take the money, they too will become government clients. Many organizations have gone from useful agencies to puppets in order to keep the government money coming.

December 13, 2006

SURE GOES BACK TO THE KID AND MOMMY THING WELL WAT ABOUT ADULTS. BLANK IT!!! LornamaYa <crna_kuna@...> wrote: Congress Declares War on AutismPublic Outcry Leads to $1 Billion in Autism ResearchThe research funds provided by the Combating Autism Act could go a long way in helping the 1.5 million Americans living with autism. (ABCNEWS.com)By ED O'KEEFEDec. 7, 2006 — In its final hours of business, the Congress criticized as "do nothing" has done something big about autism. The

Senate and House unanimously passed the Combating Autism Act, wide-sweeping legislation that authorizes nearly a billion dollars toward autism research over the next five years.The bill, favored by bipartisan majorities on both sides of Capitol Hill, had been held up by a single member of the House, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas.Barton fought the early versions of the bill because he opposed directing federal funding toward specific priorities, particularly $45 million in the original version of the bill that could be used only to investigate the possible role environmental factors might play in causing autism.A statement from Barton's office said the final bill is "consistent with chairman Barton's view that scientists should determine research priorities, not politicians."The final bill, which drew support from nearly every major autism group across the country, includes environmental factors

in a list of research options that the federal government might pursue.Jon Shestack, co-founder of Cure Autism Now, said in a statement, "This bill is a federal declaration of war on the epidemic of autism."But the road to legislative success was a long one for autism activists.Though it was co-sponsored by 48 members of the Senate and a majority of the Republican-controlled House, the bill's prospects looked dim as Barton persisted, holding up the bill since August, when it first passed the Senate unanimously. The bill and Barton were featured in a segment on "This Week with Stephanopoulos" on Sunday, Oct. 8.Actress Heaton, representing the autism activist group Cure Autism Now, called out Barton by name on "This Week," welling up and demanding, "We need to get politics out of the way here because there are people's lives at stake. And it's heartbreaking. And yet, I see

these parents, and they are so strong … they are fighting for their kids, really fighting for their kids. And that's why I'm here to really beg Joe Barton to pass this bill, because it has the support of everyone else. And I think he needs to do the right thing."Radio personality Don Imus also took Barton to task, repeatedly calling out the congressman for his opposition to the bill, and citing the Heaton interview on his daily program.Cure Autism Now supported the compromise version of the autism legislation that passed this week and issued a letter signed by 10 other autism activist groups. In the letter, the agencies thanked Barton and his staff for "their diligent efforts to reach a mutually agreed position within our community."The letter went on to say, "Chairman Barton is fully aware that the autism community would have preferred House action on the [original] version of this bill. While there

will be many battles ahead to be won in this war, the autism community applauds all its congressional champions who have made this historic moment possible."And so, as the 110th Congress concludes its often-embattled tenure, a last-minute compromise led to a historic agreement and this bill is on its way to President Bush's desk for his signature. The entire "Voices" segment and an extended interview with actress Heaton can be viewed at "This Week's" Web page.________Summary Bill DescriptionThis legislation will accomplish the following goals in the fight against Autism: Double NIH spending on autism research. Empower the Director of the NIH to act as an "autism czar" - developing an annual research budget on autism, based on the best science, and requiring that budget be reported to Congress. Create a screening program in all 50 states for the early identification of

children with autism - short of a cure, early identification leading to early intervention with behavioral services provides the best available outcomes for autistic kids. Fund the efforts of the Autism Treatment Network to identify the best medical practices in the treatment of autistic kids. Continue funding of the epidemiological and public education programs on autism at the CDC. Authorize, overall, nearly 1 billion of federal spending on autism over the next 5 years - a multi-front war on autism from public awareness and early diagnosis to basic biomedical research. http://www.combatautism.org________A war on autism is a war on autistics.

Everyone is raving about the all-new beta.

December 13, 2006

War on autism = war on cancer? Two cents worth of two thoughts- One- A lot of money will *hopefully* be going to researchers that will increase our understanding of what aspergers is or is not. That will probably mostly be a good thing, depending on the policies use that information. There is a big difference between the research stage and the policy implementations of research. Many researchers are very idealistic, and more than a few in our area have a touch of AS themselves I suspect, and are rather sympathetic to many of the thoughts expressed on this forum. Two- The "war on Cancer" has, in the minds of many, turned into a debacle. Began in 1972 by the Nixon presidential administration as one of his few major domestic policy intiatives it has spent truly huge amounts of money on

extremely non-productive research... non-productive by nearly any definition of productive. Many articles have been written over the decades pointing this out. One grabbed almost at random is here- http://www.preventcancer.com/publications/pdf/nov04,03.htm So the connection...does the "war on autism" have parallels to the war on cancer? ... a (somewhat) major policy initiative by a failing government that has lost respect on all parts of the political spectrum seeks to divert populace from failed innitiatives elsewhere by throwing mega-billions (over the years) into extremely lucrative but ultimately bureaucratic and yes even corrupt expenditures to a few large "research" corporations? (Sorry- going on a bit of a rant. The war on cancer turned out to be such a complete farce of incompetence ... you don't get that level

without there also being at least a considerable amount of "soft" self-dealing corruption.) Heph girlofthehighlands <lorna1224@...> wrote: SURE GOES BACK TO THE KID AND MOMMY THING WELL WAT ABOUT ADULTS. BLANK IT!!! LornamaYa <crna_kuna > wrote: Congress Declares War on AutismPublic Outcry Leads to $1 Billion in Autism ResearchThe research funds provided by the Combating Autism Act could go a long way in helping the 1.5 million Americans living with autism. (ABCNEWS.com)By ED O'KEEFEDec. 7, 2006 — In its final hours of business, the Congress criticized as "do nothing" has done something big about autism. The Senate and House unanimously passed the Combating Autism Act, wide-sweeping legislation that authorizes nearly a billion dollars toward autism research over the next five years.The bill, favored by bipartisan majorities on both sides of Capitol Hill, had been held up by a single member of the House, Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas.Barton fought the early versions of the bill because he opposed directing federal funding toward specific priorities, particularly $45 million in the original version of the

bill that could be used only to investigate the possible role environmental factors might play in causing autism.A statement from Barton's office said the final bill is "consistent with chairman Barton's view that scientists should determine research priorities, not politicians."The final bill, which drew support from nearly every major autism group across the country, includes environmental factors in a list of research options that the federal government might pursue.Jon Shestack, co-founder of Cure Autism Now, said in a statement, "This bill is a federal declaration of war on the epidemic of autism."But the road to legislative success was a long one for autism activists.Though it was co-sponsored by 48 members of the Senate and a majority of the Republican-controlled House, the bill's prospects looked dim as Barton persisted, holding up the bill since August, when it first

passed the Senate unanimously. The bill and Barton were featured in a segment on "This Week with Stephanopoulos" on Sunday, Oct. 8.Actress Heaton, representing the autism activist group Cure Autism Now, called out Barton by name on "This Week," welling up and demanding, "We need to get politics out of the way here because there are people's lives at stake. And it's heartbreaking. And yet, I see these parents, and they are so strong … they are fighting for their kids, really fighting for their kids. And that's why I'm here to really beg Joe Barton to pass this bill, because it has the support of everyone else. And I think he needs to do the right thing."Radio personality Don Imus also took Barton to task, repeatedly calling out the congressman for his opposition to the bill, and citing the Heaton interview on his daily program.Cure Autism Now supported the compromise version of the autism

legislation that passed this week and issued a letter signed by 10 other autism activist groups. In the letter, the agencies thanked Barton and his staff for "their diligent efforts to reach a mutually agreed position within our community."The letter went on to say, "Chairman Barton is fully aware that the autism community would have preferred House action on the [original] version of this bill. While there will be many battles ahead to be won in this war, the autism community applauds all its congressional champions who have made this historic moment possible."And so, as the 110th Congress concludes its often-embattled tenure, a last-minute compromise led to a historic agreement and this bill is on its way to President Bush's desk for his signature. The entire "Voices" segment and an extended interview with actress Heaton can be viewed at "This Week's" Web page.________Summary Bill

DescriptionThis legislation will accomplish the following goals in the fight against Autism: Double NIH spending on autism research. Empower the Director of the NIH to act as an "autism czar" - developing an annual research budget on autism, based on the best science, and requiring that budget be reported to Congress. Create a screening program in all 50 states for the early identification of children with autism - short of a cure, early identification leading to early intervention with behavioral services provides the best available outcomes for autistic kids. Fund the efforts of the Autism Treatment Network to identify the best medical practices in the treatment of autistic kids. Continue funding of the epidemiological and public education programs on autism at the CDC. Authorize, overall, nearly 1 billion of federal spending on autism over the next 5 years - a multi-front war on

autism from public awareness and early diagnosis to basic biomedical research. http://www.combatautism.org________A war on autism is a war on autistics. Everyone is raving about the all-new beta. Hephaestus

Clubfoothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hephaestushttp://www.pantheon.org/articles/h/hephaestus.htmlhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabeiroi

Want to start your own business? Learn how on Small Business.

December 13, 2006

Lorna wrote: " SURE GOES BACK TO THE KID AND MOMMY THING WELL WAT

ABOUT ADULTS. BLANK IT!!! "

Lorna, children are not as capable at advocating for their needs as

adults usually are. Because parents are aware of this, they fight

on behalf of their children.

With autism rates in North America being 1 in 166 children with an

autism spectrum disorder, it stands to reason that there will be

many more parents advocating for their children than adults

advocating for themselves.

Unless children receive the supports they require as they are

growing up, they are at great risk of not achieving their full

potential as adults. The time to start helping anyone with a

disability is once the diagnosis has been made because at that

point, you have a place from which to start.

Perhaps you could post what upsets you so much about the

parent/child comments that were made in the article along with the

comments about helping adults with an ASD diagnosis.

Raven

December 14, 2006

,

You have actually brought up a good point without realizing it.

Organizations that are funded by the general public instead of the

federal government stand a better chance of actually serving the needs

of those they purport to be working for since to NOT serve the needs

of their supporters would result in lack of funding.

On the other hand, organizations entirely funded by the public CAN

pose a danger if they simply cater to what the public wants rather

than to what the clients they serve actually need.

What needs to happen, I think, is that government dollars SHOULD go to

assist organizations that are researching autism, but only on a

limited basis that prevents the government from controlling the

entities they are funding.

A prime example of this structure would be PBS. The government

provides limited support to PBS, yet you may recall the government

recently whined that PBS was " too liberal " and " not objective enough. "

Perhaps the government's argument WAS correct, but if the government

HEAVILY funded PBS, they wouldn't need to complain about what PBS airs

because they could simply yank funding and sink the network entirely,

or else make demands on programmers under the threat of withdraw of

funds.

Tom

Administrator

" I'm not surprised these autism groups are happy about this. They are

probably prime beneficiaries of this government largess. No doubt they

will be getting lots of money from the government. That will probably

be the end of them since, if they take the money, they too will become

government clients. Many organizations have gone from useful agencies

to puppets in order to keep the government money coming.

"

December 14, 2006

In a message dated 12/14/2006 1:53:20 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, no_reply writes:

You have actually brought up a good point without realizing it. Organizations that are funded by the general public instead of the federal government stand a better chance of actually serving the needs of those they purport to be working for since to NOT serve the needs of their supporters would result in lack of funding.On the other hand, organizations entirely funded by the public CAN pose a danger if they simply cater to what the public wants rather than to what the clients they serve actually need.

Many organizations have been corrupted by public money, private money too for that matter. Quite a few organizations started out with certain goals, but once the money started coming in, they became fundraising machines. Fundraising became more important to the higher ups than the cause because that is how they earned their personal money.

Now, sometimes these groups have stayed with their goals but have gone astray. This happens when, to keep raising money, they have to keep putting out shocking stories and lean more toward their biggest contributer's point of view. Kind of a catch-22 though since the more radical they get, the more they alienate the moderates and others, thus driving them more firmly into the camp of the big money backers.

On that same note, it is interesting that when people hear that a study put out by a group that got some funding from, say and oil company, will say that the study is biased in favor of the industry, but studies from other groups that receive a larger share of their funding from the government than the other did from the company, they take the latter study at face value. Don't they think that the government is just as capable of swaying people to express its views as a private company. I would say this is even more true of the government because of the greater resources it can bestow upon the chosen, and how much worse it could hurt those who oppose it.

So, in either case an organization can be swayed by whoever holds the purse strings.

December 15, 2006

>

> I'm not surprised these autism groups are happy about this. They are

> probably prime beneficiaries of this government largess. No doubt

they will be

> getting lots of money from the government. That will probably be the

end of them

> since, if they take the money, they too will become government

clients. Many

> organizations have gone from useful agencies to puppets in order to

keep the

> government money coming.

>

War has been declared but not as we think. It is the war to keep

Autistic children needing help and funding from the Government; to take

hostage all the families and children effected and to divide and damage

those people, all to keep the money flowing. If children and adults

are helped if bridges are built and there is no strife, then how can we

abuse the system. How can people manipulate the situation to line

their pockets. They need US the NEW CASH COW

December 15, 2006

In a message dated 12/15/2006 9:32:13 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, mnmimi@... writes:

War has been declared but not as we think. It is the war to keep Autistic children needing help and funding from the Government; to take hostage all the families and children effected and to divide and damage those people, all to keep the money flowing.

Good point. The government is trying to make clients of families of people with Autism. Yet another attempt to enslave a portion of voters.

It is the US taxpayer and US business that is the cash cow because they produce the revenue. The welfare state is the parasite that feeds on them. A smaller, limited government, like the Founders intended, would not be like this. Thank FDR for putting us on the wrong road.

December 15, 2006

In a message dated 12/15/2006 7:39:34 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, nathaninfortuna@... writes:

Welfare saves lives and fights poverty. Not everything is a conspiricy by big business.I'm not a parasite and neither are others that are disabled and have no choice but be the condition which they are.

This is so wrong. Welfare hasn't fought poverty, is only set a floor for it below which it hasn't fallen since the 1960's. Prior to the 1960's, the poverty rate was on the decline, particularly amongst minorities. Once the Great Society kicked in, the poverty rate remained steady and even risen instead of continuing to fall.

What else has welfare done?

It has destroyed families. The welfare system was designed with that in mind. Women LOST benefits if they were married. So the incentive was not to marry. However, statistics show that marriage and a job is the winning formula to beat poverty.

Welfare devalued children. Women not only lost benefits if they married, but they also got more money for each child they had. The incentive was to have as many kids as possible as fast as possible. This is why in the welfare section of town, it is not uncommon for 14 year olds to be having kids. The youngest so far has been 11. This even though statistics show that a two parent family is the best for raising children.

Welfare has caused to the crime epidemic. It isn't PC to say it, but blacks commit a higher rate of crime than their percentage of the population. This is so because the welfare state didn't give them a chance. In addition to the above points, work was discouraged because it was easier to just get that check and supplement that income with crime. The hopelessness of depending on someone else for everything, in the case the state, is a direct cause of the drug abuse and all its attendant problems.

Try reading The Poverty of Welfare: Helping Others in a Civil Society by Micheal Tanner and Do-Gooders: How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help by Mona Charen. Both of these very clearly lay out how bad the welfare state has been.

You know, I'm really getting sick of you calling the Founding Fathers criminals because a handful of them owned slaves. Given what you have said about your educational background, I'm not surprised you hate America so much. That is that PC education, very dominate in Kalifornia, is meant to do. The textbooks focus on things like slavery and the other mistakes made but ignore the large issues, like that fact that the system of government they set up did in time end slavery and expand the vote. It also ignores that fact that much of the world is still run by dictatorships where the freedoms the Founders established are less than a dream.

Just because SOME of them owned slaves and they did not set up a "perfect" system, does not make them criminals nor does it invalidate the system they established.

Try looking at the bigger picture and what has been accomplished under this system. Right now you are stuck in a emotional rut over slavery. Look objectively at the big picture and your opinion will change.

Minorities don't currently hold that much power. They have in this town for along time, however. The result? One of the highest crime rates in the state, the highest school dropout rate and this year, after 4 years to prepare, only 3 of 11 schools passed accreditation. Their solution to prepare? Several school board members saw that reading scores were very low and decided to try to boost overall scores by dropping reading as a requirement. Fortunately they were stopped. All the city has done is refuse to allow strong businesses to expand, so they left, taking hundreds of jobs with them. What went on the land where those businesses wanted to expand? Welfare projects bringing in hundreds of more welfare people. A private company wanted to convert an old warehouse, which had belonged to one of those companies that was driven out, into middle and up class lofts. The city tried to force them to make it welfare housing instead. That didn't happen, though I think the deal was that some apartments would have to be low rent. The city officials also refused to offer any tax breaks, and taxes are also among the highest in the state, to developers who wanted to build a large shopping mall in town because it was near two interstates. Instead it went the next town over and has very greatly expanded. Had they allowed it, that tax break would have been paid for many, many times over in the last 20 years.

But his reminds me of something, along the lines of how behavior influences racism. In the Mid 1990's, a tornado hit the town. Some of the Historic District was wiped out, nearly including my mother who was working for tourism at the time and the building she was in took a direct hit. Part of that Historic District was Pocahontas Island where free blacks had lived since before the Civil War. Many houses were destroyed. Various groups and agencies came to build new houses, including a religious group similar to the Amish. The residents were getting brand new houses, brand new and modern appliances and furnishings all for free. However, the residents did nothing but complain. The houses "weren't good enough," the appliances "weren't good enough," the TVs were "small not good enough." The residents harassed the workers about the jobs they were doing, that they were working too slowly. Children even took great delight in urinating out of windows on the workers. It was so bad, several groups left, including the religious one. These are people who came to help out fellow humans. You can't tell me that the behavior of those people did not taint how they viewed black after that.

December 15, 2006

I was describing the welfare system itself. I see the people on it as victims of the socialist state. We would be better served with lower taxes and more business providing employment to people. A job if better for the economy and the person's psyche than a welfare check.

"I think you are a hatefull person.. I'm no parasite nor are others in need; it's very disrespectfull, insulting and discriminatory.

'

This applies to you as well. You have been speaking very hatefully and disrespectfully or the Founders, of which I am related to a few, and also about America. A little less passion and a lot more research would prove that, yes, America has had its problems, but the system is allowing it to overcome them without falling to a new revolution.

Yes, I'm a moderator and I'm also human. I've been allowing you your hateful speech without hinderance when it is within my power to silence you. Why? Mainly because I have been trying to get you to see around the hate you have based your position on amd see that without the mistakes of the past, the current US could not exist. The Founders were not criminals nor was their philosophy criminal. They were products of their time just as we products of ours.

"You goto college and learn all that?"

By the way, I did go to college and I have studied extensively on my own. By the way, that is a "very disrespectfull, insulting and discriminatory" comment.

December 15, 2006

In a message dated 12/15/2006 9:10:11 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, nathaninfortuna@... writes:

You got one thing wrong, as a person whom is part of a military family who served this contry and moved all around hardly ever settling in I consider your remarks foolish and ignorant. You must be logically blind to even consider that your reverse hate of the poor, including disabled veterans whom recieve welfare are parasites.

My family has fought in every American war since the French and Indian war. Their number has included everything from infantry grunts to high commanders.

I don't hate the poor, just the system that has them on the new plantation voting for ever more socialism even though it has never solved any of their problems. Disabled veterans are one of the few groups I think the government should take care. After all, they were wounded in service to the state. However, I don't think it should be welfare. Instead these brave souls should be provided meaningful work whenever possible.

"You make fun of California and my education. I have disabilities which make it hard to be in the class room, I suppose our superioritism has no compassion and like I said is hatefull."

I have disabilities too, that make getting an education hard, but I got one. Have you considered evening classes? That's how I got started going back to college because it was tamer and quieter. Again though, you have expressed negative opinions of me for having an education, so another case of the pot calling the kettle black.

"Family members of mine have died in wars and my father is an outspoken veterans disabilites advocate. You hate a class of people, it's clear and your patriotism is not one I believe my father served for."

As have mine died for the Ideals of America. Some of them risked being executed by the British for treason had the Revolution failed because they were leaders of it. I don't hate a class of people, I hate the welfare system and the pitiful education system we have. Less than 18% of high school graduates now finish college, as of 2004. Clearly the education system is failing the country and we are going to pay for it.

December 15, 2006

In a message dated 12/15/2006 9:30:00 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, nathaninfortuna@... writes:

The founding fathers are the poorist example of freedom, democracy and the love of fellow humans as humans regardless of color. Compared to now they are a stark reminder of what not to be, what philosophy not to follow and not how to respect fellow human beings.

And this shows your hatred and that you refuse to see that the current system evolved from the earlier flawed one and without that flawed one, we would not have corrected those mistakes and be where we are now.

"We have two different patriotism here, one of the old which is you and mine, the newer, the better and what has already replaced the old."

New isn't always better. Ask the Germans about the results of the new government Hitler brought and nearly killed them all. Ask the French about their revolution and its terrors and the 3 that have followed it.

"Your a parasite to humanities, a parasite to the human heart and the impoverished. You must be upper class or upper middle asserting your superiority in education and intelectual ability while clearly discriminating against classes not as lucky as you."

Me a parasite? That's just funny. I own my own business that provides employed for about 20 people. No, I'm one of the productive class that pays taxes the government depends on. Yes I am middle class. Here's something you will really love: I am also descended from English nobility, the lowest rank mind you, but nobility all the same. With this comment, you have shown you own bias and discrimination against the educated and, what I can presume, are higher classes than yours. You're response to this should be golden.

"Have some respect for your fellow humans, slavery nor those who supported it can be defended."

I do have respect for my fellow man. That is why I oppose the welfare state because of the harm it does to the psyche of those on it.

"Maybe it takes a white guy like me, to just say it as I did bravely dispite known opposition."

I'm a white guy too. I've always said slavery wasn't a good thing, but it happened, it was ended, and its time to move on.

"America is better without slavery, the slave owners those in the majority who supported it then are dust now. Thanksfully neither of us are them and America is version 2.0 and beyond."

I agree that we are better off without slavery. We would also be better off without a mammoth welfare state that puts people on the new plantation where they get free money for votes for the socialists.

"Learn some human dignatity and ethic."

I do understand human dignity and ethics. This is why I oppose the welfare state because it denigrates the human spirit. That is why when I was on hard times I worked jobs I absolutely hated rather than go on welfare and food stamps.

Really though. This getting boring. It is one thing to have a debate with someone, but this isn't a debate. I've been trying to use logical against an emotion based argument. I guess I'll concede defeat through boredom and not respond anymore.

December 16, 2006

Welfare saves lives and fights poverty. Not everything is a conspiricy by big business.I'm not a parasite and neither are others that are disabled and have no choice but be the condition which they are.The fonding fathers were criminals of human rights and inslaved people just becuase of their skin color while the superiorist did nothing.If anyting the government now is far better, though ineffeciant by comparision to the small and limited human rights violating government of before. The difference between the government then and now is minorities work for the government and hold power. FDR was disabled himself. YoungVISIGOTH@... wrote: In a message dated 12/15/2006 9:32:13 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, mnmimi@... writes: War has been declared but not as we think. It is the war to keep Autistic children needing help and funding from the Government; to take hostage all the families and children effected and to divide and damage those people, all to keep the money flowing. Good point. The government is trying to make clients of families of people with Autism. Yet another attempt to enslave a

portion of voters. It is the US taxpayer and US business that is the cash cow because they produce the revenue. The welfare state is the parasite that feeds on them. A smaller, limited government, like the Founders intended, would not be like this. Thank FDR for putting us on the wrong road. Turning In Big BrotherMy First Authored BookOnline For Free..http://www.nathanyoung.net __________________________________________________

December 16, 2006

I think you are a hatefull person.. I'm no parasite nor are others

in need; it's very disrespectfull, insulting and discriminatory.

Blaim all the fowls on the assistence of the poor, I bet you call

them white trash to...All they do is suck up your tax money, like

myself and are parasites. Your intelectual discrimination is quite

clear. You goto college and learn all that?

Is this person an actual moderator here, I've seen him or her here

for some time.

>

> In a message dated 12/15/2006 7:39:34 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,

> nathaninfortuna@... writes:

>

> Welfare saves lives and fights poverty. Not everything is a

conspiricy by

> big business.I'm not a parasite and neither are others that are

disabled and

> have no choice but be the condition which they are.

>

> This is so wrong. Welfare hasn't fought poverty, is only set a

floor for it

> below which it hasn't fallen since the 1960's. Prior to the

1960's, the

> poverty rate was on the decline, particularly amongst minorities.

Once the Great

> Society kicked in, the poverty rate remained steady and even

risen instead of

> continuing to fall.

>

> What else has welfare done?

>

> It has destroyed families. The welfare system was designed with

that in

> mind. Women LOST benefits if they were married. So the incentive

was not to

> marry. However, statistics show that marriage and a job is the

winning formula to

> beat poverty.

>

> Welfare devalued children. Women not only lost benefits if they

married, but

> they also got more money for each child they had. The incentive

was to have

> as many kids as possible as fast as possible. This is why in the

welfare

> section of town, it is not uncommon for 14 year olds to be having

kids. The

> youngest so far has been 11. This even though statistics show

that a two parent

> family is the best for raising children.

>

> Welfare has caused to the crime epidemic. It isn't PC to say it,

but blacks

> commit a higher rate of crime than their percentage of the

population. This is

> so because the welfare state didn't give them a chance. In

addition to the

> above points, work was discouraged because it was easier to just

get that

> check and supplement that income with crime. The hopelessness of

depending on

> someone else for everything, in the case the state, is a direct

cause of the

> drug abuse and all its attendant problems.

>

> Try reading The Poverty of Welfare: Helping Others in a Civil

Society by

> Micheal Tanner and Do-Gooders: How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim

to Help by

> Mona Charen. Both of these very clearly lay out how bad the

welfare state has

> been.

>

> You know, I'm really getting sick of you calling the Founding

Fathers

> criminals because a handful of them owned slaves. Given what you

have said about

> your educational background, I'm not surprised you hate America so

much. That is

> that PC education, very dominate in Kalifornia, is meant to do.

The

> textbooks focus on things like slavery and the other mistakes

made but ignore the

> large issues, like that fact that the system of government they

set up did in

> time end slavery and expand the vote. It also ignores that fact

that much of

> the world is still run by dictatorships where the freedoms the

Founders

> established are less than a dream.

>

> Just because SOME of them owned slaves and they did not set up

a " perfect "

> system, does not make them criminals nor does it invalidate the

system they

> established.

>

> Try looking at the bigger picture and what has been accomplished

under this

> system. Right now you are stuck in a emotional rut over slavery.

Look

> objectively at the big picture and your opinion will change.

>

> Minorities don't currently hold that much power. They have in this

town for

> along time, however. The result? One of the highest crime rates in

the state,

> the highest school dropout rate and this year, after 4 years to

prepare, only

> 3 of 11 schools passed accreditation. Their solution to prepare?

Several

> school board members saw that reading scores were very low and

decided to try to

> boost overall scores by dropping reading as a requirement.

Fortunately they

> were stopped. All the city has done is refuse to allow strong

businesses to

> expand, so they left, taking hundreds of jobs with them. What

went on the land

> where those businesses wanted to expand? Welfare projects

bringing in

> hundreds of more welfare people. A private company wanted to

convert an old

> warehouse, which had belonged to one of those companies that was

driven out, into

> middle and up class lofts. The city tried to force them to make

it welfare

> housing instead. That didn't happen, though I think the deal was

that some

> apartments would have to be low rent. The city officials also

refused to offer any

> tax breaks, and taxes are also among the highest in the state, to

developers

> who wanted to build a large shopping mall in town because it was

near two

> interstates. Instead it went the next town over and has very

greatly expanded.

> Had they allowed it, that tax break would have been paid for

many, many times

> over in the last 20 years.

>

> But his reminds me of something, along the lines of how behavior

influences

> racism. In the Mid 1990's, a tornado hit the town. Some of the

Historic

> District was wiped out, nearly including my mother who was working

for tourism at

> the time and the building she was in took a direct hit. Part of

that Historic

> District was Pocahontas Island where free blacks had lived since

before the

> Civil War. Many houses were destroyed. Various groups and agencies

came to

> build new houses, including a religious group similar to the

Amish. The

> residents were getting brand new houses, brand new and modern

appliances and

> furnishings all for free. However, the residents did nothing but

complain. The houses

> " weren't good enough, " the appliances " weren't good enough, " the

TVs were

> " small not good enough. " The residents harassed the workers about

the jobs they

> were doing, that they were working too slowly. Children even took

great

> delight in urinating out of windows on the workers. It was so

bad, several groups

> left, including the religious one. These are people who came to

help out

> fellow humans. You can't tell me that the behavior of those

people did not taint

> how they viewed black after that.

>

December 16, 2006

VISIGOTH@...

" Given what you have said about> your educational background, I'm

not surprised you hate America so much.. "

You got one thing wrong, as a person whom is part of a military

family who served this contry and moved all around hardly ever

settling in I consider your remarks foolish and ignorant. You must

be logically blind to even consider that your reverse hate of the

poor, including disabled veterans whom recieve welfare are parasites.

You make fun of California and my education. I have disabilities

which make it hard to be in the class room, I suppose our

superioritism has no compassion and like I said is hatefull.

Family members of mine have died in wars and my father is an

outspoken veterans disabilites advocate. You hate a class of people,

it's clear and your patriotism is not one I believe my father served

for.

Young

December 16, 2006

The truth is not a posive thing, the founding fathers and anyone who

supported slavery was a criminal. To bash people who supported

slavery is patriotic, your a hatefull person in defence.

You calling me hatefull shows your bigotry to the truth when I stand

for what is right..

The founding fathers are the poorist example of freedom, democracy

and the love of fellow humans as humans regardless of color.

Compared to now they are a stark reminder of what not to be, what

philosophy not to follow and not how to respect fellow human beings.

We have two different patriotism here, one of the old which is you

and mine, the newer, the better and what has already replaced the

old.

Your a parasite to humanities, a parasite to the human heart and the

impoverished. You must be upper class or upper middle asserting your

superiority in education and intelectual ability while clearly

discriminating against classes not as lucky as you.

Have some respect for your fellow humans, slavery nor those who

supported it can be defended. An America for Human Rights

Empowerment is one that realises it's past in the full truth and

moves on.

Maybe it takes a white guy like me, to just say it as I did bravely

dispite known opposition. I think of myself as not a traditional

thinker, someone who will oppose his own class, racial identity

group and even past ideals to assert the truth directly and with

candor.

America is better without slavery, the slave owners those in the

majority who supported it then are dust now. Thanksfully neither of

us are them and America is version 2.0 and beyond.

As far as the socialist milarky that might just have to do with hate

laws and liberal attempt to stop bigots from speaking.. Fundimental

freedoms are fundimental and I don't agree dispite the damage they

do to the innocent.

Including hate writtings that call poor disabled welfare folk

parasites.

Sometimes the truth of anothers heart is so appearent that they

don't realize it themselves until they are embarressed by it's

obvious nature which you displayed.

Learn some human dignatity and ethic. The religion of the founding

fathers in the form of old patriotism is gone, it's dust and an

embarressment to what this nation is now.

>

> I was describing the welfare system itself. I see the people on it

as

> victims of the socialist state. We would be better served with

lower taxes and more

> business providing employment to people. A job if better for the

economy and

> the person's psyche than a welfare check.

>

> " I think you are a hatefull person.. I'm no parasite nor are

others

> in need; it's very disrespectfull, insulting and discriminatory.

> '

>

> This applies to you as well. You have been speaking very hatefully

and

> disrespectfully or the Founders, of which I am related to a few,

and also about

> America. A little less passion and a lot more research would prove

that, yes,

> America has had its problems, but the system is allowing it to

overcome them

> without falling to a new revolution.

>

> Yes, I'm a moderator and I'm also human. I've been allowing you

your hateful

> speech without hinderance when it is within my power to silence

you. Why?

> Mainly because I have been trying to get you to see around the

hate you have

> based your position on amd see that without the mistakes of the

past, the

> current US could not exist. The Founders were not criminals nor

was their

> philosophy criminal. They were products of their time just as we

products of ours.

>

> " You goto college and learn all that? "

>

> By the way, I did go to college and I have studied extensively on

my own. By

> the way, that is a " very disrespectfull, insulting and

discriminatory "

> comment.

>

December 16, 2006

You clearly stated people were parasites. You don't support the

disabled getting help and know them as parasites. I don't get your

reasonings but feel free to back away from your clearly hatefull

comments.

You got to realize how harmfull what your saying is. or policy if it

was endorsed by a majority would actually result in the distruction

of life and streets more filled with homeless.

The philosophy of Christ, which I am conditioned to somewhat is far

better then the acceptence of slavery by the majority back when.

Letting go of the founding fathers and realizing the true crime,

damage and hurt they and others cuased is best. Americans back then

who opposed slavery were the true heroes and the replacement of the

founding fathers who did not.

>

> In a message dated 12/15/2006 9:10:11 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,

> nathaninfortuna@... writes:

>

> You got one thing wrong, as a person whom is part of a military

> family who served this contry and moved all around hardly ever

> settling in I consider your remarks foolish and ignorant. You

must

> be logically blind to even consider that your reverse hate of the

> poor, including disabled veterans whom recieve welfare are

parasites.

>

> My family has fought in every American war since the French and

Indian war.

> Their number has included everything from infantry grunts to high

commanders.

>

> I don't hate the poor, just the system that has them on the new

plantation

> voting for ever more socialism even though it has never solved any

of their

> problems. Disabled veterans are one of the few groups I think the

government

> should take care. After all, they were wounded in service to the

state. However,

> I don't think it should be welfare. Instead these brave souls

should be

> provided meaningful work whenever possible.

>

> " You make fun of California and my education. I have disabilities

> which make it hard to be in the class room, I suppose our

> superioritism has no compassion and like I said is hatefull. "

>

> I have disabilities too, that make getting an education hard, but

I got one.

> Have you considered evening classes? That's how I got started

going back to

> college because it was tamer and quieter. Again though, you have

expressed

> negative opinions of me for having an education, so another case

of the pot

> calling the kettle black.

>

> " Family members of mine have died in wars and my father is an

> outspoken veterans disabilites advocate. You hate a class of

people,

> it's clear and your patriotism is not one I believe my father

served

> for. "

>

> As have mine died for the Ideals of America. Some of them risked

being

> executed by the British for treason had the Revolution failed

because they were

> leaders of it. I don't hate a class of people, I hate the welfare

system and the

> pitiful education system we have. Less than 18% of high school

graduates now

> finish college, as of 2004. Clearly the education system is

failing the

> country and we are going to pay for it.

>

December 16, 2006

Oh I'm so sorry, to hate hate itself and it's injustice of the old mechenism of superiority known as slavery is hate. Which hate is a greator evil? A hate the inslaves people and when free hated and still hated by some or one that hates hate for the truth it is. You deflect saying I hate the educated when I buy books from the educated, I have a whole personal library by the educated in the form of textbooks. It was smart remark but now your human rights must be so violated in your psyche I must be a hatefull monster to even ponder the idea of making fun of the educated folk, when I don't have me an official mainstream edu-ma-cation. I'm not the deluted view your used to, more truthfull and direct, something of a better design. A sort of rightiousness of a harsh truth this country I think is embarressed of, really I think it is. The founding fathers who had slaves, agreed to slavery and Americans

who agreed to slavery were not, they were the inequalitists and reason for the profound and savere damage. The criminals which were defeated in ideology by the Yanks.. What reall is propaganda is the teaching of in schools of how good they were.. You use the same tactics that a slave owner used once about taxes and being insalved by them. The quality of life of disabled and the VERY poor mean hardly anything to you, the parasites just take money from you don't they? VISIGOTH@... wrote: In a message dated 12/15/2006 9:30:00 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, nathaninfortuna writes: The founding fathers are the poorist example of freedom, democracy and the love of fellow humans as humans regardless of color. Compared to now they are a stark reminder of what not to be, what philosophy not to follow and not how to respect fellow human beings. And this shows your hatred and that you refuse to see that the current system evolved from the earlier flawed one and without that flawed one, we would not have corrected those mistakes and be where we are now.

"We have two different patriotism here, one of the old which is you and mine, the newer, the better and what has already replaced the old." New isn't always better. Ask the Germans about the results of the new government Hitler brought and nearly killed them all. Ask the French about their revolution and its terrors and the 3 that have followed it. "Your a parasite to humanities, a parasite to the human heart and the impoverished. You must be upper class or upper middle asserting your superiority in education and intelectual ability while clearly discriminating against classes not as lucky as you." Me a parasite? That's just funny. I own my own business that provides employed for about 20 people. No, I'm one of the productive class that pays taxes the government depends on. Yes I am middle class. Here's something you will really

love: I am also descended from English nobility, the lowest rank mind you, but nobility all the same. With this comment, you have shown you own bias and discrimination against the educated and, what I can presume, are higher classes than yours. You're response to this should be golden. "Have some respect for your fellow humans, slavery nor those who supported it can be defended." I do have respect for my fellow man. That is why I oppose the welfare state because of the harm it does to the psyche of those on it. "Maybe it takes a white guy like me, to just say it as I did bravely dispite known opposition." I'm a white guy too. I've always said slavery wasn't a good thing, but it happened, it was ended, and its time to move on. "America is better without slavery, the slave owners those in the majority who

supported it then are dust now. Thanksfully neither of us are them and America is version 2.0 and beyond." I agree that we are better off without slavery. We would also be better off without a mammoth welfare state that puts people on the new plantation where they get free money for votes for the socialists. "Learn some human dignatity and ethic." I do understand human dignity and ethics. This is why I oppose the welfare state because it denigrates the human spirit. That is why when I was on hard times I worked jobs I absolutely hated rather than go on welfare and food stamps. Really though. This getting boring. It is one thing to have a debate with someone, but this isn't a debate. I've been trying to use logical against an emotion based argument. I guess I'll concede defeat through boredom and not respond anymore. Turning In Big BrotherMy First Authored BookOnline For Free..http://www.nathanyoung.net __________________________________________________

December 16, 2006

Here is something everyone would do well to consider:

If you put ignorant and uneducated people in power, the manner in

which they will use that power will be ignorant and uneducated.

The fact that more ignorant and uneducated people are gaining power

is because society as a whole is becoming more ignorant and

uneducated.

Tom

Administrator

Minorities don't currently hold that much power. They have in this

town for along time, however. The result? One of the highest crime

rates in the state, the highest school dropout rate and this year,

after 4 years to prepare, only 3 of 11 schools passed accreditation.

Their solution to prepare? Several school board members saw that

reading scores were very low and decided to try to boost overall

scores by dropping reading as a requirement. Fortunately they were

stopped. All the city has done is refuse to allow strong businesses

to expand, so they left, taking hundreds of jobs with them. What

went on the land where those businesses wanted to expand? Welfare

projects bringing in hundreds of more welfare people. A private

company wanted to convert an old warehouse, which had belonged to

one of those companies that was driven out, into middle and up class

lofts. The city tried to force them to make it welfare housing

instead. That didn't happen, though I think the deal was that some

apartments would have to be low rent. The city officials also

refused to offer any tax breaks, and taxes are also among the

highest in the state, to developers who wanted to build a large

shopping mall in town because it was near two interstates. Instead

it went the next town over and has very greatly expanded. Had they

allowed it, that tax break would have been paid for many, many times

over in the last 20 years.

December 16, 2006