she gives you the capacity to live, without any more or less than what you need
if our distant ancestors were all carrying around some massively overengineered amount of blood filtration capacity, the mutants amongst them with a much smaller capacity would do better reproductively with lower biological overhead in terms of needs. and therefore that much smaller amount of capacity would become the new normal. mutants with below capacity would suffer premature death and lower vigor and vitality and suffer reproductively for that
in other words: no, i'm sorry. whatever mother nature has given us is the right amount, and half that amount is half the amount needed for quality of life. i don't think you are being dishonest, i just don't think you have all the data before you, simply because there is too much obvious weight as to the opinion of what mother nature says is the right amount of kidney capacity
i denigrate both extremes. i am saying that conventional wisdom only denigrates the gullible. i am saying the conspiracy theorists are the same, and deserve the same denigration
"We live in the information age and propaganda is king, this technique of dismissing opposing viewpoints by invoking the magic words, "conspiracy theorist" lowers the level of discourse for all."
conspiracy theorists are the biggest consumers and creators of propaganda. they have to be. their alternative narrative requires a lot more chatter to maintain momentum. no, we're not talking about official propaganda, we're talking about spontaneous informal fanfiction type propaganda blogs. and now the mainstream, like fox news, is noticing and manipulating and fostering these cottage propaganda hobbyists. information age? welcome to the internet age, friend: the golden age of ideological fiefdoms, self-supported by walls of self-made propaganda and denial, the conspiracy theorist's nirvana
everyone understands and is disdainful of trusting fools
but i am saying not many people see the danger of being an untrusting fool
it is dangerous to intelligent perception to be fooled by someone
i am telling you it is equally dangerous to intelligent perception to be fooled by yourself, to believe what your imagination tells you, conspiracy theories, over what just might be true as presented to you
and untrusting fools are actually just as easily manipulated by lies and propaganda. just in a sort of reverse psychology way
we're not talking about people asking intelligent questions. we're talking about lack of intelligence and thought
weak feeble minds- an accurate description, are unable to make an informed choice as to the veracity of a narrative put before them. at that point, these weak minds cut one of two ways:
1. well... they sound nice. i'll just trust them and what they say
2. i don't trust anything these bastards say. i trust my fertile imagination to come up with the fanciful conspiracy theory that explains these events
this is actually the same sort of person, a fool. #1 is fooled by other people. #2 is fooled by himself. both are equally foolish and dangerous to intelligent commentary
there are dumb people. some trust too much. some trust too little. those who are constantly embracing hilarious conspiracy theories are just stupid people, the mirror image of the trusting gullible. the untrusting gullible
and the sad thing is, they are equally dependably manipulated by lies and propaganda just as much as the trusting gullible. you just use reverse psychology on them
people who spend their lives seeing a conspiracy around every corner are pretty sad individuals to me. we are all familiar with the folly of being too trusting, too gullible, too prone to believe everything you hear. to me, even more tragic are those who trust nothing they hear, who would rather believe the little voice in their head spinning more and more fanciful stories. that such a voice is superior to saying "you know, maybe osama bin laden brought down the world trade center and not a vast government conspiracy." or "maybe barack obama is a good decent president, and not a kenyan born secret muslim."
a deficit of trust. what a sad stunted life
you know, maybe DSK is a victim of a political character assassination. or you know, maybe he's a pervy old man who has boundary issues. which is the truth? truth, to me, is the most likely thing. sure, conspiracies are real. but exceedingly rare and difficult to keep the lid on with more and more players required to not wilt in the glare of attention, over a long period of time, with changing agendas, priorities, and allegiances. the media is not complicit here. all these french journalists are angling for a big story. there are periforal players who maybe smell something not right in a bit of communication here or there, and who are all too happy, for career advancement, out of their own paranoia of becoming a fall guy, or some other base motivation, to pull a deep throat and leave a trail of breadcrumbs for some journalist to follow. meaning what? meaning real life isn't a b-grade hollywood plot. meaning real conspiracies of many players almost never work. meaning occam's razor: "when you hear hoofbeats, don't think zebras."
minds that believe in conspiracy theories are weak feeble minds that, contrary to their mental deathgrip on their worry that they are being fooled, are the most easily fooled individuals in the world
i apologize, but with that weak effort, you just took this conversation into a level of intellectual charity i am not willing to sustain. good luck on turning switzerland into haiti
denmark. rich, happy people. strong middle class. a strong social safety net
haiti. poor, desperate people. vast poor and a few ultrarich. no social safety net
you take care of your society. if you don't, we'll make you contribute what you owe for the benefits you accrue by living in it, but apparently are too fucking stupid to recognize or acknowledge. you understand the value of hard work. good for you. you apparently don't fucking understand the value of the civilized infrastructure in which that work happens. they also bust their ass off in haiti, genius
and i'm glad you are lowering taxes in lucerne. good for you. but you're not arguing against raising taxes, you are arguing against the very notion of the need to contribute to society to maintain it
communism: fucking stupid capitalism with social safety nets: intelligent civilization social darwinism: fucking stupid
you don't defeat the stupidity of communism by embracing the equally stupid mirror image of it. communism is an extreme. social darwinism is an extreme. the extremes are the problem. grow a fucking brain
yes, and the rich society that purchases your software is rich because it is maintained. you wish to derive income from the richness of society, but give back nothing to maintain its richness. the more people in society think like you, the poorer society will be overall. sure, it won't happen fast enough to effect you personally, but the 20 year old, 10 year old, yes it will. The more a society is concerned wirth social welfare: denmark on one end, haiti on another, the richer that society is, and the happier people are. it's pretty obvious, moron
not that you care. you're clearly a selfish shortsighted asshole. we're not robbing you, asshole, we're asking you to give back to that which gives you the money you covet, but apparently don't really understand. to you, money is magic stuff that exists in complete independence of the richness of the society it represents. would you like to be paid in Haitian gouds? oh, why not? oh, i see, you do understand in some way that money is really an abstract reflection of the richness of the society it represents
but you won't do anything to maintain that richness. you're the thief. you take, and you give nothing back. it is required that you do. and we will make you. without that compulsion, civilization would cease to exist because, unfortunately, most people are as blind and greedy as you, and they'd happily suckle at the cow and not feed it, until it is drained dry
so, we must compulse you to contribute. and we will. because we like civilization. and unlike you, we're smart enough to see what is required to maintain civilization
"I am not going to be part of a 'society', which forces me to be 'charitable' through government enforcement."
I stopped reading there. Because you live in Switzerland, which is exactly such a society. Move to Haiti. That's the society you get with your ideology: vast swaths of poor, and a few ultrarich.
That you won't admit that that end game is the result of your social darwinism is either stupidity or willfull dishonesty on your part. Either way, you're a selfish shortsighted asshole, and if the Swiss have any smarts about them, and they do, your ignorance won't hurt the well-being of Switzerland.
You are part of society. Your well-being depends upon society's well-being. Those of us know this, willingly contribute. Those of us too ignorant or shortsighted to not give back some of what they derive from society's riches will be forced to give back. That's not robbing you. Because you're robbing society when you derive sustenance from it, as you do, and don't give a little back to continue the sustenance.
Enough assholes like you, and society gets less rich overall, and all of our pocketbooks suffer for that. Where did your money come from genius? You just made it up in your bedroom? What a selfish shortsighted piece of shit you are.
now my question to you is: why do equate giving everyone an xbox, regardless of effort exerted, with guaranteeing healthcare and education for all
the first society guarantees you finish in the same spot, regardless of effort exerted. the second society guaranteers everyone STARTS in the same spot
do you understand the difference? are you ignorant of the difference or willuflly intellectually dishonest?
communism is fucking moronic. capitalism with socialist safety nets is the ideal. social darwinistic classism is evil. do you understand what i stand for yet? you seem to be unclear on the issues
the poor shouldn't be rewarded the same as the rich, you should be more rewarded for working hard and achieving in life. but by the same token, the poor shouldn't be doomed to substandard healthcare and education, just for being poor. or a class divide hardens and deepends. a poor child should have roughly the same chance to succeed in life as a rich child. a poor child should not be doomed by poverty simply because of where he was born
what i would like you to do, is to try hard and try to stay on the fucking subject matter: it's about kids starting out on equal footing. it's not about guaranteeing that everyone finish at the same economic level, regardless of effort exerted. that's called nepotism actually: you know, who your rich father knows getting you your position in life, rather than the hard working guy who couldn't rise any further in the company because your useless ass needed to be pampered
it's not about every kid getting an xbox, its about every kid getting a good education and good healthcare. you of course confuse the two topics. either out of ignorance or willful intellectual dishonesty. and so leadership of society should not be left to the selfish shortsighted assholes who have no problem letting society slide towards vast gaping inequalities. some people don't have a problem with such a society. because they are simply ignorant or don't care that that is what their ideology results in
and i believe you are in lucerne, maybe not swiss though. you sound like the product of the upper middle class or rich of a highly unequal society. certainly classism exists everywhere, including switzerland, such are your obvious blinders
but thanks for playing, marie antoinette. i would let the conversation occur between adults honestly interested in society's well-being. we'll try to to put too much of a damper on the allowance your dad gives you monthly for clubbing and ski holidays
philosophically, they are the same in that you are talking about supplementing the resources of the poor with the resources of the rich in order to reach a society of equals. only when all people in a society have the same access to basic resources like healthcare and education can you talk about meritocracy. but if you allow the poor to receive substandard healthcare and education, you perpetuate and deepen class divides. you then have a society of unequals, whose end game is vast swaths of poor and a few ultrarich
i don't believe all rich and all poor can or should have the exact same footing. this is an impossible goal. but much effort should be exerted in order to keep the footing as equal as possible, to achieve something as close to a meritocracy as you can. the poor shouldn't be rewarded the same as the rich, you should be more rewarded for working hard and achieving in life. but by the same token, the poor shouldn't be doomed to substandard healthcare and education, just for being poor. or a class divide hardens and deepends. a poor child should have roughly the same chance to succeed in life as a rich child. a poor child should not be doomed by poverty simply because of where he was born
and so leadership of society should not be left to the selfish shortsighted assholes who have no problem letting society slide towards vast gaping inequalities. some people don't have a problem with such a society. because they are simply ignorant or don't care that that is what their ideology results in
why don't you to move to haiti, where your ideology is working wonders
i prefer to grow and protect the middle class, by endorsing policies that makes sure all citizens are on equal footing in terms of education and healthcare
you have a problem with that goal. because you are a selfish shortsighted asshole who doesn't recognize what it takes to maintain a fair and just society of equals
to you, it's not a problem if society is highly unequal. that's just normal and natural to you. and in fact, it is normal and natural. in parts of the world with vast swaths of poor and a few ultrarich. that's the society your ideology results in. it sounds like oyu are a product of such a society, and simply don't know any better, out of ignorance
the free market fairy does not solve healthcare or education problems. this is because healthcare and education are mandates. the free market will naturally create tiers of service based on pre-existing economic status. this is an injust society i will not be a part of
yes, government has efficiency problems. waste and ineffectiveness must be constantly fought. but it is not superior to just allow the poor to continue being poor, and stupid, and unhealthy. that is a classist society, not a meritocracy, not a society of equals
every other industrial country has figured this out. why not the usa? because of this moronic american cult: free market fundamentalism, the free market solves all problems. actually, it doesn't. it only solves some problems. on some issues, healthcare and education for instance, the government must run, or at least regulate stringently, how services function, because the free market will continue, and deepen, social inequalities
if you agree that the problem is waste, then you defund on the basis of a line item list of the wastes. you don't just defund, and expect someone who hasn't done their job to suddenly do it. fire them
and i agree that administrators are paid too well to do too piss poor of a job. so fore them or line item their salary: redefine their salary as merit based, based on how well they do they do their job: ie, get rid of waste
of course, those graduates of the wealthy private schools will cite hard work and meritocracy, rather than connections and nepotism, in their continued good life
they will look down their noses at the "lazy" undeserving poor who want to get their grubby hands on their "hard-earned" money. all the while proclaiming great love for america, as they willfully abandon their fellow americans
Slashdot Mirror
she gives you the capacity to live, without any more or less than what you need
if our distant ancestors were all carrying around some massively overengineered amount of blood filtration capacity, the mutants amongst them with a much smaller capacity would do better reproductively with lower biological overhead in terms of needs. and therefore that much smaller amount of capacity would become the new normal. mutants with below capacity would suffer premature death and lower vigor and vitality and suffer reproductively for that
in other words: no, i'm sorry. whatever mother nature has given us is the right amount, and half that amount is half the amount needed for quality of life. i don't think you are being dishonest, i just don't think you have all the data before you, simply because there is too much obvious weight as to the opinion of what mother nature says is the right amount of kidney capacity
i am saying that those who embrace conspiracy theories have a deficit of trust and are no more intelligent than those who unwisely trust
i am not entirely sure why that modest point is inspiring such venom
but i have my ideas
you are a clever meta-troll, well played sir
or... a genuine moron
hard to tell nowadays
i denigrate both extremes. i am saying that conventional wisdom only denigrates the gullible. i am saying the conspiracy theorists are the same, and deserve the same denigration
"We live in the information age and propaganda is king, this technique of dismissing opposing viewpoints by invoking the magic words, "conspiracy theorist" lowers the level of discourse for all."
conspiracy theorists are the biggest consumers and creators of propaganda. they have to be. their alternative narrative requires a lot more chatter to maintain momentum. no, we're not talking about official propaganda, we're talking about spontaneous informal fanfiction type propaganda blogs. and now the mainstream, like fox news, is noticing and manipulating and fostering these cottage propaganda hobbyists. information age? welcome to the internet age, friend: the golden age of ideological fiefdoms, self-supported by walls of self-made propaganda and denial, the conspiracy theorist's nirvana
untrusting fools
everyone understands and is disdainful of trusting fools
but i am saying not many people see the danger of being an untrusting fool
it is dangerous to intelligent perception to be fooled by someone
i am telling you it is equally dangerous to intelligent perception to be fooled by yourself, to believe what your imagination tells you, conspiracy theories, over what just might be true as presented to you
and untrusting fools are actually just as easily manipulated by lies and propaganda. just in a sort of reverse psychology way
we're not talking about people asking intelligent questions. we're talking about lack of intelligence and thought
weak feeble minds- an accurate description, are unable to make an informed choice as to the veracity of a narrative put before them. at that point, these weak minds cut one of two ways:
1. well... they sound nice. i'll just trust them and what they say
2. i don't trust anything these bastards say. i trust my fertile imagination to come up with the fanciful conspiracy theory that explains these events
this is actually the same sort of person, a fool. #1 is fooled by other people. #2 is fooled by himself. both are equally foolish and dangerous to intelligent commentary
there are dumb people. some trust too much. some trust too little. those who are constantly embracing hilarious conspiracy theories are just stupid people, the mirror image of the trusting gullible. the untrusting gullible
and the sad thing is, they are equally dependably manipulated by lies and propaganda just as much as the trusting gullible. you just use reverse psychology on them
people who spend their lives seeing a conspiracy around every corner are pretty sad individuals to me. we are all familiar with the folly of being too trusting, too gullible, too prone to believe everything you hear. to me, even more tragic are those who trust nothing they hear, who would rather believe the little voice in their head spinning more and more fanciful stories. that such a voice is superior to saying "you know, maybe osama bin laden brought down the world trade center and not a vast government conspiracy." or "maybe barack obama is a good decent president, and not a kenyan born secret muslim."
a deficit of trust. what a sad stunted life
you know, maybe DSK is a victim of a political character assassination. or you know, maybe he's a pervy old man who has boundary issues. which is the truth? truth, to me, is the most likely thing. sure, conspiracies are real. but exceedingly rare and difficult to keep the lid on with more and more players required to not wilt in the glare of attention, over a long period of time, with changing agendas, priorities, and allegiances. the media is not complicit here. all these french journalists are angling for a big story. there are periforal players who maybe smell something not right in a bit of communication here or there, and who are all too happy, for career advancement, out of their own paranoia of becoming a fall guy, or some other base motivation, to pull a deep throat and leave a trail of breadcrumbs for some journalist to follow. meaning what? meaning real life isn't a b-grade hollywood plot. meaning real conspiracies of many players almost never work. meaning occam's razor: "when you hear hoofbeats, don't think zebras."
minds that believe in conspiracy theories are weak feeble minds that, contrary to their mental deathgrip on their worry that they are being fooled, are the most easily fooled individuals in the world
i got dibs on "bishoe.com"
for my bisexual shoe fetish site
ahhh... the usa is to blame
i apologize, but with that weak effort, you just took this conversation into a level of intellectual charity i am not willing to sustain. good luck on turning switzerland into haiti
what a fucktard
denmark. rich, happy people. strong middle class. a strong social safety net
haiti. poor, desperate people. vast poor and a few ultrarich. no social safety net
you take care of your society. if you don't, we'll make you contribute what you owe for the benefits you accrue by living in it, but apparently are too fucking stupid to recognize or acknowledge. you understand the value of hard work. good for you. you apparently don't fucking understand the value of the civilized infrastructure in which that work happens. they also bust their ass off in haiti, genius
and i'm glad you are lowering taxes in lucerne. good for you. but you're not arguing against raising taxes, you are arguing against the very notion of the need to contribute to society to maintain it
communism: fucking stupid
capitalism with social safety nets: intelligent civilization
social darwinism: fucking stupid
you don't defeat the stupidity of communism by embracing the equally stupid mirror image of it. communism is an extreme. social darwinism is an extreme. the extremes are the problem. grow a fucking brain
yes, and the rich society that purchases your software is rich because it is maintained. you wish to derive income from the richness of society, but give back nothing to maintain its richness. the more people in society think like you, the poorer society will be overall. sure, it won't happen fast enough to effect you personally, but the 20 year old, 10 year old, yes it will. The more a society is concerned wirth social welfare: denmark on one end, haiti on another, the richer that society is, and the happier people are. it's pretty obvious, moron
not that you care. you're clearly a selfish shortsighted asshole. we're not robbing you, asshole, we're asking you to give back to that which gives you the money you covet, but apparently don't really understand. to you, money is magic stuff that exists in complete independence of the richness of the society it represents. would you like to be paid in Haitian gouds? oh, why not? oh, i see, you do understand in some way that money is really an abstract reflection of the richness of the society it represents
but you won't do anything to maintain that richness. you're the thief. you take, and you give nothing back. it is required that you do. and we will make you. without that compulsion, civilization would cease to exist because, unfortunately, most people are as blind and greedy as you, and they'd happily suckle at the cow and not feed it, until it is drained dry
so, we must compulse you to contribute. and we will. because we like civilization. and unlike you, we're smart enough to see what is required to maintain civilization
deal with it, little parasite
sure, you live in denial anyways
"I am not going to be part of a 'society', which forces me to be 'charitable' through government enforcement."
I stopped reading there. Because you live in Switzerland, which is exactly such a society. Move to Haiti. That's the society you get with your ideology: vast swaths of poor, and a few ultrarich.
That you won't admit that that end game is the result of your social darwinism is either stupidity or willfull dishonesty on your part. Either way, you're a selfish shortsighted asshole, and if the Swiss have any smarts about them, and they do, your ignorance won't hurt the well-being of Switzerland.
You are part of society. Your well-being depends upon society's well-being. Those of us know this, willingly contribute. Those of us too ignorant or shortsighted to not give back some of what they derive from society's riches will be forced to give back. That's not robbing you. Because you're robbing society when you derive sustenance from it, as you do, and don't give a little back to continue the sustenance.
Enough assholes like you, and society gets less rich overall, and all of our pocketbooks suffer for that. Where did your money come from genius? You just made it up in your bedroom? What a selfish shortsighted piece of shit you are.
right, shoot everyone who is poor
i see that i've painted a picture of stereotypical republican stupidity, and you've gladly accepted the description
hilarious, if it weren't for the fact that so many of you fucktards keep talking this ignorance
right, shoot everyone who is poor
i see that i've painted a picture of stereotypical republican stupidity, and you've gladly accepted the description
fucking pathetic
guaranteeing equal access to education and healthcare is soul destroying?
are you just a complete fucktard or am i supposed to laugh? sorry, it's hard to tell clever trolls from earnest morons nowadays
ok, i am wrong about your background, apologies
now my question to you is: why do equate giving everyone an xbox, regardless of effort exerted, with guaranteeing healthcare and education for all
the first society guarantees you finish in the same spot, regardless of effort exerted. the second society guaranteers everyone STARTS in the same spot
do you understand the difference? are you ignorant of the difference or willuflly intellectually dishonest?
communism is fucking moronic. capitalism with socialist safety nets is the ideal. social darwinistic classism is evil. do you understand what i stand for yet? you seem to be unclear on the issues
the poor shouldn't be rewarded the same as the rich, you should be more rewarded for working hard and achieving in life. but by the same token, the poor shouldn't be doomed to substandard healthcare and education, just for being poor. or a class divide hardens and deepends. a poor child should have roughly the same chance to succeed in life as a rich child. a poor child should not be doomed by poverty simply because of where he was born
what i would like you to do, is to try hard and try to stay on the fucking subject matter: it's about kids starting out on equal footing. it's not about guaranteeing that everyone finish at the same economic level, regardless of effort exerted. that's called nepotism actually: you know, who your rich father knows getting you your position in life, rather than the hard working guy who couldn't rise any further in the company because your useless ass needed to be pampered
it's not about every kid getting an xbox, its about every kid getting a good education and good healthcare. you of course confuse the two topics. either out of ignorance or willful intellectual dishonesty. and so leadership of society should not be left to the selfish shortsighted assholes who have no problem letting society slide towards vast gaping inequalities. some people don't have a problem with such a society. because they are simply ignorant or don't care that that is what their ideology results in
and i believe you are in lucerne, maybe not swiss though. you sound like the product of the upper middle class or rich of a highly unequal society. certainly classism exists everywhere, including switzerland, such are your obvious blinders
but thanks for playing, marie antoinette. i would let the conversation occur between adults honestly interested in society's well-being. we'll try to to put too much of a damper on the allowance your dad gives you monthly for clubbing and ski holidays
philosophically, they are the same in that you are talking about supplementing the resources of the poor with the resources of the rich in order to reach a society of equals. only when all people in a society have the same access to basic resources like healthcare and education can you talk about meritocracy. but if you allow the poor to receive substandard healthcare and education, you perpetuate and deepen class divides. you then have a society of unequals, whose end game is vast swaths of poor and a few ultrarich
i don't believe all rich and all poor can or should have the exact same footing. this is an impossible goal. but much effort should be exerted in order to keep the footing as equal as possible, to achieve something as close to a meritocracy as you can. the poor shouldn't be rewarded the same as the rich, you should be more rewarded for working hard and achieving in life. but by the same token, the poor shouldn't be doomed to substandard healthcare and education, just for being poor. or a class divide hardens and deepends. a poor child should have roughly the same chance to succeed in life as a rich child. a poor child should not be doomed by poverty simply because of where he was born
and so leadership of society should not be left to the selfish shortsighted assholes who have no problem letting society slide towards vast gaping inequalities. some people don't have a problem with such a society. because they are simply ignorant or don't care that that is what their ideology results in
why don't you to move to haiti, where your ideology is working wonders
i prefer to grow and protect the middle class, by endorsing policies that makes sure all citizens are on equal footing in terms of education and healthcare
you have a problem with that goal. because you are a selfish shortsighted asshole who doesn't recognize what it takes to maintain a fair and just society of equals
to you, it's not a problem if society is highly unequal. that's just normal and natural to you. and in fact, it is normal and natural. in parts of the world with vast swaths of poor and a few ultrarich. that's the society your ideology results in. it sounds like oyu are a product of such a society, and simply don't know any better, out of ignorance
a bridge falling down is caused by erosion. the problem is solved with money: prop up or build a new bridge
i don't know why the concept is so difficult for you to follow
the free market fairy does not solve healthcare or education problems. this is because healthcare and education are mandates. the free market will naturally create tiers of service based on pre-existing economic status. this is an injust society i will not be a part of
yes, government has efficiency problems. waste and ineffectiveness must be constantly fought. but it is not superior to just allow the poor to continue being poor, and stupid, and unhealthy. that is a classist society, not a meritocracy, not a society of equals
every other industrial country has figured this out. why not the usa? because of this moronic american cult: free market fundamentalism, the free market solves all problems. actually, it doesn't. it only solves some problems. on some issues, healthcare and education for instance, the government must run, or at least regulate stringently, how services function, because the free market will continue, and deepen, social inequalities
if you agree that the problem is waste, then you defund on the basis of a line item list of the wastes. you don't just defund, and expect someone who hasn't done their job to suddenly do it. fire them
and i agree that administrators are paid too well to do too piss poor of a job. so fore them or line item their salary: redefine their salary as merit based, based on how well they do they do their job: ie, get rid of waste
interesting
of course, those graduates of the wealthy private schools will cite hard work and meritocracy, rather than connections and nepotism, in their continued good life
they will look down their noses at the "lazy" undeserving poor who want to get their grubby hands on their "hard-earned" money. all the while proclaiming great love for america, as they willfully abandon their fellow americans
the link doesn't work