Mushy

That hits the nail on the head!

That fake Abraham Lincoln "quote" is posted at the Tennessee State Republican Party website.

You might want to ask yourself why you are so gullible and willing to believe complete fabrications like that and what the motives are of people who would pass along things like this as truth?

(link...)

The link says they are "pretty sure" Lincoln didn't say that. Pretty sure isn't the same as undeniable truth. He could have said it, or not. Whoever said it was very insightful. And while some may disagee with what is said in it, it does seem to reflect the current state of many peoples feelings.

This is petty bickering over nothing. Same old "Conservative" against "Liberal" B.S. that keeps this country in a stalemate. Looks to me like we all have outlawed the word "compromise". Until we find a middle ground, there will be no progress nationally, statewide, or even locally. Stop pointing fingers and saying "nany nany boo boo", and "I told you so", and get on with trying to find some answers. We are in serious trouble here folks. Maybe it's time to start with us and see if it can filter up instead of down.

The quote, attributed to A Lincoln, may have come from Elwood P Dowd, Mike Farmer, Steve Scarborough, or John Doe. It doesn't appear to have been sent in an attempt to deceive, whether correctly attributed or not. So forget about who said it.

The original poster didn't say anything about the quote other than it made sense to him/her. But all the ballyhoo about who said it or didn't, or what judgement Snopes passed on it or didn't is diversionary from the point of what the quote said. The original poster did not direct it at any individual. Any inference about where the point of the quote is being directed is an assumption that is diversionary from the issues raised by the quote.

You only get to call BS on it if what it says is BS.

"You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich." BS or not? Is this sentence true or false, and why?

"You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong." BS or not? Is this sentence true or false, and why?

"You cannot lift the wage earner up by pulling the wage payer down." BS or not? Is this sentence true or false, and why?

"You cannot help people permanently by doing for them, what they could and should do for themselves." BS or not? Is this sentence true or false, and why?

Whether these sentences were penned 150 years ago, 150 days ago, or 150 minutes ago affects not one whit of whether or not they are true. So if folks wish to exercise their intellectual superiority (or inferiority, as the case may be), why not deal with the message rather than the messenger?

Being diverted by such extraneous matters is one reason why many attempts at discussion fail. People here should be (and I believe ARE) smarter than to be diverted by such.

RB

I love this. No different then schools today that slow down fast learners so the slow learners can keep up. The day the students graduate all the cards are on the table, no one to slow things down, so what happens now? Work Hard, Play Hard, and Make the breaks go your way.

Other things are true, too.

You cannot help the poor by championing only the rich. You cannot strengthen the weak by only favoring the strong. You cannot lift the wage earner up by laws giving advantage to inhumane wage payers. You can help people by doing for them what they cannot do for themselves and by giving them a hand up so they can become self-sufficient.

-- OneTahiti

One T's post is right on.

Statements are often written for purposes of manipulation and attributed to famous people to give credibility to things that are simply do not stand examination. The fake quote in question is one of them. I can dissect each of the sentences but let's just take a look at one of them...

Since no one is proposing to "destroy the rich" that part is silly on the face of it and we can move on to:

"You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong."

Of course you can...That is actually the basis for our anti-trust legislation in this country. It is the basis for nuclear non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament negtioations. And on a more visceral level it is the rationale behind gun control legislation.

I take it as meaning that you can't raise up anyone or anything JUST by lowering the higher/stronger/richer segment.
Just because you weaken a stronger person, it doesn't automatically make the weaker person any stronger.

It's sort of like raising the weight chart to show that a person weighing 250 pounds today is not overweight.
Or "relaxing" the fit of clothes so that a person who would "normally wear a size 42 waist can get into a 34 inch waist and say they are no longer fat!

I guess if the original quote had been full of such vague sentiments like "hope" and "change" then it would have been acceptable propaganda. And we all KNOW who said that!!!!

I borrowed this from a "friend's" post on "another" site. It makes perfect sense....

For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.' Matthew 25:35-40

One of my favorites...

Okay, I don't want to start a political/biblical back and forth from this. Let's just simply see the beauty in the perfect passage, and meditate on it. "Amen?"

I'm just not reading all the harshness into the quote (?) that some of you all are.

Maybe the wording should be rephrased to this:

You CAN help the poor WITHOUT destroying the rich. You CAN strengthen the weak WITHOUT weakening the strong. You CAN lift the wage earner WITHOUT pulling the wage payer down. You CANNOT help people PERMANENTLY, by doing for them, what they COULD and SHOULD do for themselves.

We should help those who aren't able to help themselves. But where does the help stop when they are ABLE to help themselves, yet have been taught to expect others to do the job for them.

Sort of along these lines.... Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach the man to fish and he will keep himself/family fed.

Now we are in agreement, H, and the quote came from YOU!

and be way too long.

"Doing for others what they could, and should do for themselves" is a nicer reference to the losers who suck off the rest of us. So I'll just call them welfare abusers for simplicity.

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach the man to fish and he will keep himself/family fed.

I agree.

And for the most part, that's just what America's welfare system does. The majority of welfare recipients transfer in and out of the system in less than 24 months, using the system as a hand up and a hand stretched out during times of need.

Yes, there are abusers, there always will be abusers, on every part of the globe. Carrying that weight (albeit miniscule in perspective to the weight of corporate welfare and thousands of other wasteful programs) is what helps to separate our great nation from third world countries.

Even so, many of our seniors are undernourished. Over 80% of our homeless suffer from at least one form of mental illness. We care for the children of junkies because it's the right thing to do.

It's a delicate balance, and there is definitely room for additional welfare reform. But even successful reform wouldn't have a significant impact on the economy.

The income gap is growing. More families are falling from lower-middle class to below the poverty level. Wages aren't rising in proportion to the cost of living. Even readers of this blog right now are struggling financially. They don't have tax attorneys, tax shelters, off-shore accounts, deductions for housing, and often don't have adequate healthcare.

I hear far too much whining about the lady in line at the grocery store who uses food stamps and drives a cadillac. Just because we see it happening, doesn't make it a significant drag on the system as a whole.

Greed trumps the poor every time. No one proposes destroying the rich. It will never happen. They have far too many lobbyists. The banksters and the super-rich do not need us to fight their battles for them. Lord knows we have plenty of battles to fight for ourselves.

I too grow weary of seeing welfare abuse, but I have grown far more weary (and frustrated) by the frequent attention and blame welfare abusers and losers receive these days in proportion to their actual impact on our economy and wallets. Why, oh why, can’t we keep it in perspective?

Why do I have to open my favorite blog to see a thread started with a quote supporting the rights of the strong and wealthy, when I already see the same so often in other media?

Yes, the quote may be true, but so are a lot of things. Does the quote actually warrant that much attention and “bravos” and “amens” in a time when a lot folks are working two jobs with no hope of ever climbing even one rung of the ladder? Really???

Oh, and sorry RB. You're an easy target 'cause you're a good sport! :)