It's a bullshit poll and a bullshit post.
The Turd Reich is grasping at straws, tilting at windmills and soon will be fleeing this fast sinking ship.
They've got a saying in Russian that translates to -- Hey boy, go fetch me a drink!
Come on!!! George W. Bush ignored vital info pertaining to 9/11, started 2 wars (one of them by lying to the country), declared one of them "mission accomplished " yet we were still there fighting for years afterward. And oh yeah there was that little thing about bankrupting the country when he inherited the best economy since WW2 from his predecessor. The lack of oversite that led to the savings and loan crisis. Just to name a few things.You're a lying SOB. W didn't ignore a damn thing. One contemporary CIA analyst described the pre-9/11 scenario as trying to connect the dots on a page that was literally black with dots. Your lying ass can't produce a single instance where intel was ignored by Bush that wasn't previously available to Slick Willie. And the "Mission Accomplished" sign was more for the sailors aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln referring "specifically to the aircraft carrier's 10-month deployment." And the economy was on the slide from the dot-com bust that occurred on Slick Willie the Perjuring Sexual Predator's watch, you dumb-ass liar.
Also the only reason we didn't have casualties on such a mass scale as we did in Vietnam is because our medical technology is light yeas more advanced than it was back in th 60's/70's. Originally Posted by Hank3fan
Absolutely nothing wrong with food stamps when monitored correctly. Have you ever been penniless and hungry? Recently a family member lost her job and had no income. House payment. Car payment. Obviously other monthly bills. Single parent. No savings. She did some jobs at minimum wage or slightly higher but nowhere near enough income to meet her bills. She had no choice but to apply for food stamps in order to put food on the table. A little compassion please. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXXHow about a trade off? No voting privileges for two years after you receive more than 10,000 in cumulative benefits?
There you go, you just invalidated your own post. Since what Trump did was perfectly legal and constitutional it doesn't matter what people think of it. The very fact that they think it was an abuse of power totally disqualifies their other opinions about the subject matter. In other words, fake news about a fake poll. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn
How about a trade off? No voting privileges for two years after you receive more than 10,000 in cumulative benefits?
Otherwise, if she needs some quick money and she is pretty, she knows what to do, if her own relatives won't help her out first.
Unpleasant consequences for failure tend to make for more productive, self supporting citizens. Originally Posted by DSK
No need to trade off anything. It's already been settled.I know, and it is sad. That is another reason I say the liberals are responsible for the demise of a once great nation.
None of your ideas will be implemented.
Originally Posted by Munchmasterman
If you're just a taker then you shouldn't be deciding on who is doling out the money. The democrat base would dry up overnight and the democrats would get into the business of finding people jobs rather than handouts. Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn
The founders had "taxation without representation is tyranny" but i'm for "representation without taxation is unfair". It doesn't have the same kick but to be allowed to vote, you should be paying taxes. By paying taxes I mean putting something in the kitty to be doled out to the masses. If you're just a taker then you shouldn't be deciding on who is doling out the money. The democrat base would dry up overnight and the democrats would get into the business of finding people jobs rather than handouts. Originally Posted by the_real_BarleycornIf people are taking handouts from the govt, they shouldn't be voting.
If people are taking handouts from the govt, they shouldn't be voting.Tell that to someone who has had their job outsourced.
this also applies to people (CEOs & business owners) bidding & accepting contracts from the govt. too.
On the former, I've been accused not caring about mothers "who are the backbone of the family". the partial quote was made by a republican in the early 1900s. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm
I know, and it is sad. That is another reason I say the liberals are responsible for the demise of a once great nation.
You can't even man up enough to demand someone put forth a better effort to support themselves, or make failure unpleasant enough to provide enough motivation for someone to improve themselves. While you and I may have sufficient internal motivation to take care of ourselves and our families, some people need a strong push.
Would any army in the world be worth a shit if people didn't have to earn their stripes? Wouldn't any half ass lazy loser be happy to not work and drink all day if you enabled him?
People need to repent and pay the price for their sins, or suffer the flames of poverty and disgrace.
If people who I am forced to support by the government get to continue to vote in the same government that enslaves me to give the unproductive a living, it violates my rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Originally Posted by DSK
Your relative is why the program was passed into law but you have to admit that far too many people have turned it into a lifestyle choice. In the old days charity was closer to home and the charity giver could decide on merit who deserved help, what kind, and how much. With government in charge everyone who meets minimum standards reaps the benefits and the money of the taxpayers. Show some gratitude people and exercise some responsibility. Originally Posted by the_real_BarleycornI certainly do not disagree with you. I have always believed in a helping hand, not a handout.