Untangling the citizen’s mind from the “conservative party malady”:

I met one of the most ruthless and cold blooded people on earth; one sad part of it is, it was the best thing she had going for her; and yet another is that the Reagan Revolution made her seem “legitimate”.

Do we need more of these?

So do you pity such individual or the society that would make her ruthlessness seem an acceptable or even salient feature of the citizenry?

Should society unleash her, employ her, so that she may ruthlessly pursue her happiness? Lay her, at the mercy of other individuals “charity”? Or, collectively, care for her and provide subsistence? She will prey on the former, two, under color of “the conservative cause” to shun the latter.

But alas, only employment, makes her, by definition, less of a mooch

This is a paradox

If a person can afford to gift money, property or usufruct to another, then there is no need for government to subsidize such charity by making it a tax write off. For what then is such charitable action? Is it selfless sacrifice and giving; or a psychopathic way to avoid paying taxes?

The fact of the matter is, a mooch is a mooch; and what the uber hypocrite Mittney and his McSidekicks McConnell and Ryan are saying, is, leave her to us, private individuals, because we aren’t paying for no fucking mooches.

They employ her or else throw her away.

My position is, yes you are paying for the mooch, and even if you employ her, she’s still a mooch; because you have made her that way; and I shan’t be bothered, there is no justice in that; so your only choice is Nazi extermination, mine is to turn her over to government and let her finish her life. Doms in the welfare office will only result in her being sent back to you

We don’t want psychos in government, so we won’t employ her; and if you employ her then you merely nurture the mooch.

So why would “Liberals” feel compelled to maintain any tax credit whatsoever for charitable giving? It serves no other purpose than to willfully and intentionally deprive the Federal government of revenue, at a time when we need it the most. Placing this in a light most favorable to the advocates of charitable write offs, would be to consider them a bribe directed to people that can’t afford such giving in the 1st place. That is not charity, it is a bribe to give money you need for some other use and can’t otherwise afford or else a bribe to not give money to the Federal government and to feel good about giving and thus accepting it.

All the while the poor hapless psycho bitch stands bye, waiting.

Did society make her this way? Or are there, as psychiatrists claim, biological psychopaths? To me such idea is nothing more than the sort of Roman Catholic bullshit that brought us the Inquisition. You might as well say Caspar flew into her ear hole or her spermacist father had bad jizz. Of course society made her this way.

And yet Mittney’s sidekicks claim that government made her this way, by giving her money.

Now I ask you in all seriousness, what is the difference in causal effect between a private individual giving her money or the government? In otherwords how is it that if she takes money from ‘the Left hand of government’ she becomes a psychopathic mooch and yet if or when she takes the same money from the “Right” hand, she becomes, what?

Answer: forgotten, since it’s unlikely to happen, thereby augmenting her desperation; and thus she is no longer a good faith pretence for “conservatives” to deprive the Federal government of money that they themselves acquired through and from the Federal government, since that is where all money comes from; which is why they now want to “denationalize” money.

Their fetish is not merely dependency but specifically government dependency.

Does this mean that they want to employ psychopaths, in exchange for a tax write off or they want to give them money for a tax writeoff. Make up your mind Mittney - although I seriously doubt he has one.

So alas we arrive at the threshold of monetary “distribution”:

(1) The Fed issues monetary credit to banks that make it available in the form of loans to business; and then (2) the Federal government taxes the income and profits of business and makes that revenue available for other things which is left for Congress to decide. The 1st process is known as “The Will of God” and the other, give it to non business individuals or let’s start some wars on the other side of the globe and send spy cameras to Mars.

The failure to make the disinction between monetary and fiscal policy is the “conservative party malady”, which the MSM’s collective brain is still imprisoned by and thus all political actions are thereby judged - i.e., by wrongfully imprisoned minds

Which brings us to another paradox, this one regarding “fiscal” redistribution to non business people - which Mittney, McConnell and Ryan have suggested is irresponsible and evil; and yet fiscal redistribution to business, which Mittney has pledged to do more of in terms of war spending - viz., depriving his private sector Masters of profits on money loaned to them through Federal distribution and redistributing it to war contractors - must be a corollary to “The Will of God”.

So the fact of the matter is, they are not opposed to redistribution they just don’t want any of it to go to non business people. The foregoing is the totality of the Mittney, McConnell and Ryan scam regarding charity, mooching and the redistribution of money. They are, in short, psychopathic liars particularly in regard to redistribution. In reality they don’t like how the majority is doing redistribution, they want it going to business and war; and look what they resort to in order to roughshod over the alleged 47% they have abandoned as the miscreant part of the population. In essence they claim there is only one right religion, which is the one that says work for the private sector or you don’t eat; and that you must be bound by this or else you shall be ‘rightfully’ abandoned, in essence, excommunicated; and I guess they figure people are so bad off they’re willing to say fuck humanity, fuck community just give me the fucking money, bitch; and that you’ll vote for the one that promises you that opportunity. So on the one hand, it’s a matter of trust as in who needs collateral? According to them, banks don’t; and on the other, of course you can trust, that they will provide you with the opportunity to say fuck humanity, fuck community and then go get the money from someone else and this is essentially what they are asking you permission to do - viz., the entire distribution of money goes to business and war. If you want any, serve business or join a war; give us this opportunity to give you this opportunity.

So how could I have ever trusted this ruthless woman? Consequently, I lost my life’s savings to her. And how could you ever trust Mittney, McConnell and Ryan? Since the MSM and the opposition “legitimizes” them as the “republican/conservative alternative”

The key is in realizing that they’re the mooches, they’re the ones taking and not giving - e.g., give us all you have and then do it yourself. Just like she did to me. And the thing they have in common, is that they’re Americans? Or ruthless psychopaths? Paradoxically, they’re both. But most importantly, you don’t have to give them anything, you’re not getting anything in return, except some transitory feel good as a function of their scam. But most of all? They don’t have to be elected.

So adding to my list of improvements for the USA, here in terms of taxation, I hereby include abolition of any tax write offs for charitable contributions. This wouldn’t affect Mittney’s givings, would it?