Be president of Clubs

[Abrupt]

Sounds like the new socialist/liberal way.  "I am part of something and expect the rewards of it, just don't you dare expect me to have to actually contribute something to it though...". 

You don't know squat about socialism, huh?

Why do you want to know, seeing as your question has absolutely nothing at all to do with my statement?  You really do possess poor comprehension skills, or probably more precisely you actively look for confrontation of a sort you think you can manage wherever you imagine you find it.

I really dont care whether I know or not, and my question has every thing to do with your statement, Gumby.....it illustrates once again, how you come running your head in here acting as if you are some expert, when in fact you don't have a clue WTH you are talking about.

But please, go ahead and continue showing your ignorance and I will continue to point and LMAO. 

I don't care what you do in front of your mirror so laugh all you want to.  If your question has anything at all to do with my statement I cannot discern it.  You asked me if I knew squat about socialism (why that interests you I don't know, but I would entertain you if you could clarify your reasons for needing my knowledge on the subject) and you then accuse me of making statements from authority, and then you accuse me of being ignorant.  You leave an odd narrative there that is disjoined from anything presented.

Someone started a thread and I participated and gave my reasoning as to why people are like this.  You have contributed in no way and instead you go on a warpath against me, again, for no reason other than your own admitted insecurities.  Well if I am Gumby, dammit, then you can suck on the green!

**Stands, raises hand and clears throat** Mr. Abrupt, Sir......would you be so generous as to describe to us exactly what socialism is, please Sir? **Sits back down and politely awaits Mr. Abrupts answer**

no.

That's just rude.....

Well, in all fairness you did that to me before, and also I already told you that I would tell you if you told me why you wanted to know.  I will give you a brief answer then.  There is more than one version of socialism and it can vary depending upon the application (economics, government, philosophy, etc).  The most common connection, though, is some type of central planning.  Is that enough or do you require more?  I am not going to post definitions because you can readily find them.

[walksalone11]

Sounds like the new socialist/liberal way.  "I am part of something and expect the rewards of it, just don't you dare expect me to have to actually contribute something to it though...".  

You don't know squat about socialism, huh?

Why do you want to know, seeing as your question has absolutely nothing at all to do with my statement?  You really do possess poor comprehension skills, or probably more precisely you actively look for confrontation of a sort you think you can manage wherever you imagine you find it.

I really dont care whether I know or not, and my question has every thing to do with your statement, Gumby.....it illustrates once again, how you come running your head in here acting as if you are some expert, when in fact you don't have a clue WTH you are talking about.

But please, go ahead and continue showing your ignorance and I will continue to point and LMAO.  

I don't care what you do in front of your mirror so laugh all you want to.  If your question has anything at all to do with my statement I cannot discern it.  You asked me if I knew squat about socialism (why that interests you I don't know, but I would entertain you if you could clarify your reasons for needing my knowledge on the subject) and you then accuse me of making statements from authority, and then you accuse me of being ignorant.  You leave an odd narrative there that is disjoined from anything presented.

Someone started a thread and I participated and gave my reasoning as to why people are like this.  You have contributed in no way and instead you go on a warpath against me, again, for no reason other than your own admitted insecurities.  Well if I am Gumby, dammit, then you can suck on the green!

**Stands, raises hand and clears throat** Mr. Abrupt, Sir......would you be so generous as to describe to us exactly what socialism is, please Sir? **Sits back down and politely awaits Mr. Abrupts answer**

no.

That's just rude.....

Well, in all fairness you did that to me before, and also I already told you that I would tell you if you told me why you wanted to know.  I will give you a brief answer then.  There is more than one version of socialism and it can vary depending upon the application (economics, government, philosophy, etc).  The most common connection, though, is some type of central planning.  Is that enough or do you require more?  I am not going to post definitions because you can readily find them.

Well....I'm rude.
So in all of this central planning that goes on, what is the plan for the "people" to do? Above you suggested that in a socialist system one would "expect me(not) to have to actually contribute something to it". Is that your final answer?

[falcon9]

There is more than one version of socialism and it can vary depending upon the application (economics, government, philosophy, etc).  The most common connection, though, is some type of central planning.  Is that enough or do you require more?  I am not going to post definitions because you can readily find them.

Another variation is unplanned results of central planning.

[Abrupt]

Well, in all fairness you did that to me before, and also I already told you that I would tell you if you told me why you wanted to know.  I will give you a brief answer then.  There is more than one version of socialism and it can vary depending upon the application (economics, government, philosophy, etc).  The most common connection, though, is some type of central planning.  Is that enough or do you require more?  I am not going to post definitions because you can readily find them.

Well....I'm rude.
So in all of this central planning that goes on, what is the plan for the "people" to do? Above you suggested that in a socialist system one would "expect me(not) to have to actually contribute something to it". Is that your final answer?

See here is where you are mistaken.  I didn't suggest that at all, although history tends to prove that to be the case.  I stipulated "new socialist/liberal" and I apply that to the common sort you see walking about OWS rallies and such these days voicing their desire to be waited on by the government after it enslaves those that are actually productive.  The type of people that claim anything and everything to be a 'right' and one that should be 'free' to all -- again at the expense of the productive since nothing is free and it all has to be paid for.  The type of people like the 'Julia' in the whitehose.org cartoon about the Obama health care plan that want to have their entire lives planned out and managed by the government, instead of actually contributing to the planning and actions of their own lives.  I could go on but I think that is enough as what I really wanted to do was make you obvious of the word 'new' as I used it.  Ask yourself, would there be a reason to use that word if I was speaking simply of socialism?

[walksalone11]

Well, in all fairness you did that to me before, and also I already told you that I would tell you if you told me why you wanted to know.  I will give you a brief answer then.  There is more than one version of socialism and it can vary depending upon the application (economics, government, philosophy, etc).  The most common connection, though, is some type of central planning.  Is that enough or do you require more?  I am not going to post definitions because you can readily find them.

Well....I'm rude.
So in all of this central planning that goes on, what is the plan for the "people" to do? Above you suggested that in a socialist system one would "expect me(not) to have to actually contribute something to it". Is that your final answer?

See here is where you are mistaken.  I didn't suggest that at all, although history tends to prove that to be the case.  I stipulated "new socialist/liberal" and I apply that to the common sort you see walking about OWS rallies and such these days voicing their desire to be waited on by the government after it enslaves those that are actually productive.  The type of people that claim anything and everything to be a 'right' and one that should be 'free' to all -- again at the expense of the productive since nothing is free and it all has to be paid for.  The type of people like the 'Julia' in the whitehose.org cartoon about the Obama health care plan that want to have their entire lives planned out and managed by the government, instead of actually contributing to the planning and actions of their own lives.  I could go on but I think that is enough as what I really wanted to do was make you obvious of the word 'new' as I used it.  Ask yourself, would there be a reason to use that word if I was speaking simply of socialism?

So, there is "twinky" socialist too, huh? Fair enough.

Socialism is traditionally basically a system where if you dont contribute, you don't receive, and you probably wont be within the system tomorrow.

[falcon9]

So in all of this central planning that goes on, what is the plan for the "people" to do? Above you suggested that in a socialist system one would "expect me(not) to have to actually contribute something to it". Is that your final answer?

See here is where you are mistaken.  I didn't suggest that at all, although history tends to prove that to be the case.  I stipulated "new socialist/liberal" and I apply that to the common sort you see walking about OWS rallies and such these days voicing their desire to be waited on by the government after it enslaves those that are actually productive.  The type of people that claim anything and everything to be a 'right' and one that should be 'free' to all -- again at the expense of the productive since nothing is free and it all has to be paid for.  The type of people like the 'Julia' in the whitehose.org cartoon about the Obama health care plan that want to have their entire lives planned out and managed by the government, instead of actually contributing to the planning and actions of their own lives.  I could go on but I think that is enough as what I really wanted to do was make you obvious of the word 'new' as I used it.  Ask yourself, would there be a reason to use that word if I was speaking simply of socialism?

So, there is "twinky" socialist too, huh? Fair enough.

Socialism is traditionally basically a system where if you dont contribute, you don't receive, and you probably wont be within the system tomorrow.

Just to clarify a point, you guys; "twinkie" = 'new' or, 'neosocialism' in this instance.  Since there aren't many 'old-style' socialists around these days, most references to "socialism" might be considered to be neosocialism, ("Since "neosocialism" refers simply to the forms of socialism that have emerged most recently, its meaning changes as new kinds of socialism are developed. At the present time, the political movements and ideologies considered "neosocialist" are those forms of socialism that have arisen since the 1980s."-- http://wikibin.org/articles/neosocialism.html)

[Abrupt]

Well, in all fairness you did that to me before, and also I already told you that I would tell you if you told me why you wanted to know.  I will give you a brief answer then.  There is more than one version of socialism and it can vary depending upon the application (economics, government, philosophy, etc).  The most common connection, though, is some type of central planning.  Is that enough or do you require more?  I am not going to post definitions because you can readily find them.

Well....I'm rude.
So in all of this central planning that goes on, what is the plan for the "people" to do? Above you suggested that in a socialist system one would "expect me(not) to have to actually contribute something to it". Is that your final answer?

See here is where you are mistaken.  I didn't suggest that at all, although history tends to prove that to be the case.  I stipulated "new socialist/liberal" and I apply that to the common sort you see walking about OWS rallies and such these days voicing their desire to be waited on by the government after it enslaves those that are actually productive.  The type of people that claim anything and everything to be a 'right' and one that should be 'free' to all -- again at the expense of the productive since nothing is free and it all has to be paid for.  The type of people like the 'Julia' in the whitehose.org cartoon about the Obama health care plan that want to have their entire lives planned out and managed by the government, instead of actually contributing to the planning and actions of their own lives.  I could go on but I think that is enough as what I really wanted to do was make you obvious of the word 'new' as I used it.  Ask yourself, would there be a reason to use that word if I was speaking simply of socialism?

So, there is "twinky" socialist too, huh? Fair enough.

Socialism is traditionally basically a system where if you dont contribute, you don't receive, and you probably wont be within the system tomorrow.

In large communities or nations when it comes to that point (realizing that some don't contribute) it is too late and the government is soon to topple.  The reason is because they will never be aware of the shortage of contribution until it is evident as a shortage of resources, and since it is centrally planned that makes it catastrophically too late and you end up with central holdings looting by the planners, evacuation by the significant contributors, and riots and general looting by all the rest.

Even in smaller communities it becomes messy as verification of who contributes or not is often hearsay and much abuse can result from both familiarity and contempt.  Also the really industrious never have any reason to exert their capabilities to the fullest as they will witness the genuinely lazy 'just' get by each day.  You end up in a situation that cannot withstand any hardship or troubled times without failing, or a system where certain people will begin hoarding in anticipation of such. 

[anotherlaujgirl]

It gets crazy.

I'm president of 1 club, vp one, and secretary of another. I'm fine with it.

BUt sometimes i just find it really unfair how many of the students in the clubs, will go to the
events that the club holds, but won't help. -_____-

I have been in your shoes on many occasions. You are volunteering your time to do good things and you ARE making them happen. The rest of them, unless they prefer to lie to themselves, are following you, but never reaching that destination of feeling good about doing for others. Be who YOU are because you sound like a wonderful young woman.

"Being good is commendable, but only when it is combined with doing good is it useful."   (author unknown)

That quote above hangs in my office at the hospital and is one I include in packets for my volunteers in the neo-natal/pediatric oncology program. Many people give large donations of $$$, which is fantastic in itself, but it is the people who are willing to come in and comfort, rock the babies, read to 'my' kids, etc. that make an impact far larger than they could ever imagine.


Thank you I should keep that quote up too

[walksalone11]

So in all of this central planning that goes on, what is the plan for the "people" to do? Above you suggested that in a socialist system one would "expect me(not) to have to actually contribute something to it". Is that your final answer?

See here is where you are mistaken.  I didn't suggest that at all, although history tends to prove that to be the case.  I stipulated "new socialist/liberal" and I apply that to the common sort you see walking about OWS rallies and such these days voicing their desire to be waited on by the government after it enslaves those that are actually productive.  The type of people that claim anything and everything to be a 'right' and one that should be 'free' to all -- again at the expense of the productive since nothing is free and it all has to be paid for.  The type of people like the 'Julia' in the whitehose.org cartoon about the Obama health care plan that want to have their entire lives planned out and managed by the government, instead of actually contributing to the planning and actions of their own lives.  I could go on but I think that is enough as what I really wanted to do was make you obvious of the word 'new' as I used it.  Ask yourself, would there be a reason to use that word if I was speaking simply of socialism?

So, there is "twinky" socialist too, huh? Fair enough.

Socialism is traditionally basically a system where if you dont contribute, you don't receive, and you probably wont be within the system tomorrow.

Just to clarify a point, you guys; "twinkie" = 'new' or, 'neosocialism' in this instance.  Since there aren't many 'old-style' socialists around these days, most references to "socialism" might be considered to be neosocialism, ("Since "neosocialism" refers simply to the forms of socialism that have emerged most recently, its meaning changes as new kinds of socialism are developed. At the present time, the political movements and ideologies considered "neosocialist" are those forms of socialism that have arisen since the 1980s."-- http://wikibin.org/articles/neosocialism.html)

My definition of a Twinky AKA wanna-be AKA Culture Vulture is one who mis-appropriates the culture/traditions of another, by claiming fraudulent ownership, mixing in traditions other then that of the originally stolen Culture, blending made up (so called) traditions or other wise bastardizing in anyway, all the while claiming authenticity of themselves and the bogus ways that are truthfully only figments of their own egos and delusional imaginations. Many times, such Twinkys will also fraudulently claim to be an authority figure demanding others to be blind subordinates, or will, promote themselves as a teacher/guru of their fantasy Culture, as a way to further stroke their hugely inflated egos, or in attempts of receiving some form of reward in return for "enlightening" others. These rewards may be monetary, sexual favors or simply a sense of prestige. Such a sense of entitlement is, I think, the attempt by said Twinky, to mask their inferiority complex and represent it as something quite contrary to reality or to knowingly and without remorse, mislead others into agreeing to their demands for the fraudulent rewards they wish to receive.

[falcon9]

My definition of a Twinky AKA wanna-be AKA Culture Vulture is one who mis-appropriates the culture/traditions of another, by claiming fraudulent ownership, mixing in traditions other then that of the originally stolen Culture, blending made up (so called) traditions or other wise bastardizing in anyway, all the while claiming authenticity of themselves and the bogus ways that are truthfully only figments of their own egos and delusional imaginations.

That's a bit different than it applies to forms 'socialism' however, it sounds exactly like a 'certain' religious belief system which has been strongly contended.

Many times, such Twinkys will also fraudulently claim to be an authority figure demanding others to be blind subordinates, or will, promote themselves as a teacher/guru of their fantasy Culture, as a way to further stroke their hugely inflated egos, or in attempts of receiving some form of reward in return for "enlightening" others. These rewards may be monetary, sexual favors or simply a sense of prestige. Such a sense of entitlement is, I think, the attempt by said Twinky, to mask their inferiority complex and represent it as something quite contrary to reality or to knowingly and without remorse, mislead others into agreeing to their demands for the fraudulent rewards they wish to receive.

That part is a fairly good fit for James Ray, who was convicted of manslaughter in connection with the Sedona "sweatlodge" deaths three years ago.  There was no 'NDN ceremony' being conducted at that "lodge"; it was entirely "twinkie".

[walksalone11]

My definition of a Twinky AKA wanna-be AKA Culture Vulture is one who mis-appropriates the culture/traditions of another, by claiming fraudulent ownership, mixing in traditions other then that of the originally stolen Culture, blending made up (so called) traditions or other wise bastardizing in anyway, all the while claiming authenticity of themselves and the bogus ways that are truthfully only figments of their own egos and delusional imaginations.

That's a bit different than it applies to forms 'socialism' however, it sounds exactly like a 'certain' religious belief system which has been strongly contended.

Many times, such Twinkys will also fraudulently claim to be an authority figure demanding others to be blind subordinates, or will, promote themselves as a teacher/guru of their fantasy Culture, as a way to further stroke their hugely inflated egos, or in attempts of receiving some form of reward in return for "enlightening" others. These rewards may be monetary, sexual favors or simply a sense of prestige. Such a sense of entitlement is, I think, the attempt by said Twinky, to mask their inferiority complex and represent it as something quite contrary to reality or to knowingly and without remorse, mislead others into agreeing to their demands for the fraudulent rewards they wish to receive.

That part is a fairly good fit for James Ray, who was convicted of manslaughter in connection with the Sedona "sweatlodge" deaths three years ago.  There was no 'NDN ceremony' being conducted at that "lodge"; it was entirely "twinkie".

My point in mentioning Twinkys in terms of socialism is due to their habit of attaching them selves to a group and then begin attempts to morph the group into something entirely new. This is done so that they can parasitically ride the name of said group with what ever perks or benefits attached, while behaving totally contrary to the groups intent..........or something like that

Don't even get me started on Ray.

[falcon9]

My point in mentioning Twinkys in terms of socialism is due to their habit of attaching them selves to a group and then begin attempts to morph the group into something entirely new. This is done so that they can parasitically ride the name of said group with what ever perks or benefits attached, while behaving totally contrary to the groups intent..........or something like that

Aye, that's why neosocialism was previously mentioned as an example of that, (albeit there are several of forms of "socialism" as well).

Don't even get me started on Ray.

Okay. A form of justice was served so, that'll have to do.

[walksalone11]

My point in mentioning Twinkys in terms of socialism is due to their habit of attaching them selves to a group and then begin attempts to morph the group into something entirely new. This is done so that they can parasitically ride the name of said group with what ever perks or benefits attached, while behaving totally contrary to the groups intent..........or something like that

Aye, that's why neosocialism was previously mentioned as an example of that, (albeit there are several of forms of "socialism" as well).

Don't even get me started on Ray.

Okay. A form of justice was served so, that'll have to do.

First let me say to Anotherlaujgirl, my appologies for steering your thread off topic, you have been most gracious in putting up with it.

Yes a form of justice, and I would love to say lessons were to be had, which, I guess they were, however, considering the fact that I have a file with just case after case of sweat lodge deaths, due to ignorance on the part of the person "pouring" I would sadly have to say that I'm not sure many took heed.

[falcon9]

First let me say to Anotherlaujgirl, my appologies for steering your thread off topic, you have been most gracious in putting up with it.

Yes a form of justice, and I would love to say lessons were to be had, which, I guess they were, however, considering the fact that I have a file with just case after case of sweat lodge deaths, due to ignorance on the part of the person "pouring" I would sadly have to say that I'm not sure many took heed.

When there's potential profit to be had, why would cultural respect for traditions stop the greedy and disrespectful ones?