you could have done the very same thing with Hillary supporters. So don't act so smug.
Hypocrisy is overwhelming
- Thread starter Blue2010
- Start date
I follow you?? LMFAO So , you consider Chickie following you an insult? I agree.
I ain't voting for her either... but they actually are the smarter of the bunch by FAR.
This is a good example of what was alluded to in the Mike Rowe article in a different thread. This kind of thing makes me question the concept of democracy. When you have people who clearly have no idea what they actually believe, and they're given the task of selecting those who will be in charge? Then, don't be surprised when things get out-of-hand.
You could interchange this with Hillary supporters, too. You could switch this with just about any politician's supporters who are just blindly following.
No... earlier, Doctor. You called me a flip-flopper. Politics is ideal for forcing people to remain rigid in their understanding. That's one reason why politics holds us back as a society and species. But, it's here, so...
That's so true. It's embarrassing. I mean, if you're gonna ride someone's jock, at least pick a jock worth riding. Amirite?
You saying it doesn't make it so. I guarantee you Republican and Trump voters have a much higher average IQ because all of the dems on public assistance pulls their average waaaaay down.
oh so you are saying only dems are on public assistance???? hahahahaha you are dumb as hell! you have no idea what you are talking about!
I get it now, dick keeps the chick OFF of his ignore list so he can keep up the appearance of ignoring me, while not ignoring me by responding to her. One of the many ways he's "ignoring" me. The cowardice to just engage me grows more and more.
Yes... by all means- ride dick's jock. He certainly has a jock worth riding. I guess that's supposed to make you feel good? "Hey! Everyone's riding my jock! All is right with the world." Sweeter than Yoo-hoo!
be careful who you call dumb there.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...cs-and-demographics-of-food-stamp-recipients/
This is why we need some sort of test that you have to pass before voting in each election. I see videos all of the time where people can't name the current VP or speaker of the house. Hell, I've seen interviews where people don't even know who we fought in the revolutionary war. If you don't know simple things like that, then you shouldn't be allowed to vote. I know that will never happen because it's racist to ask people to know a little bit about their country (at least that's how it will be spun). Voting should be more of a privilege and less of a right.
Yes, you could have. Those are followers right there. Dangerous people, every one of them. Followers are just waiting for instructions. Are you a follower?
I never said all dems are on PA. I said all othe dems who are pulls the avergae IQ for dems down.
more for you
http://tino.us/2012/02/are-welfare-recipients-mostly-republican/
If you're trying to get me to throw up, it's working!!! Gross. Yuck on that visual
I have no doubt it would knock out a huge chunk of republican voters too. The ignorance of the general public when it comes to basic history and current events knows no bounds.
I think you spend hours searching the internet for Trump nuggets. I also think that you touch yourself inappropriately while doing it.
credit that to common core. They skim right through U.S. History and leave out the parts they don't like,
It's more likely that most people on PA don't even vote, goof ball! I know the dems support those programs more and give more support to them. I am all for having programs to help others. I just think we need to grow some balls and put effort into creating mooch proof programs something neither cult will do.
I'm sure a nice guy like yourself would do away with food stamps and let people starve. The actual percentage of people who take advantage of that program is only around 5%, so until we get smarter than those people I'm fine with keeping the program so those who do need it can be fed.
I'm not sure it's racist to expect people to be aware of their surroundings and know how they're being governed.
I also don't know that historical facts like "What year was the American Revolution?" qualifies as a valid test for voting right now. I get what you're saying, however. It's pretty scary when you see how little people are actually aware of what's going on, and they cast a vote based on... who knows what? I believe that is why the Founders made the provisions they did as to who can vote. But, we've come a long way from that and we know now that owning land and being a white male isn't the correct standard either. But, I think the concept was: Prove you have some skin in the game.
However, this is also where the corruption of politics thrives. You can have the appearance of people ruling themselves, when in reality, they don't rule themselves at all.
I don't think it's racist either, but that's what it would be called. People who disagree with voter id laws almost always say they disagree with it because it's racist.
I'm not saying they need to know the year, but they should at least know who we fought to gain independence. I've seen interviews where people are asked that question and you would hear answers like Mexico, France, Japan, etc. That's just pathetic.
Sooo, everything that is wrong is because of actions, policies and philosophies that you don't ascribe to?
That's a follower!
While I'm not a fan of common core, you can't just blame it on that. It is relatively new and these issues started long before common core.
I get what you mean. I agree. I also don't think it's asking too much to show an ID to vote. I'm not 100% sure that acquiring that ID is going to make them any more aware of what's going on, however. I'll bet that every person in that recent video that chick posted, and those you're referring to, have an ID.
Maybe one of us can come up with a universal, on-the-spot "quiz" that will irrefutably prove that a person is competent to vote. It will be fool-proof. And, any legislator, or person in power, who resists it is merely showing that they are afraid of losing their meal ticket.
So this is the argument I hate the most when it comes to food stamps and health care programs. You always hear about people starving and dying, but that makes absolutely no sense. These programs haven't existed forever. I didn't go to a private high school or ivy league college, but it's my understanding that before these programs existed people were not starving or dying in the streets. When someone was in need of help they could get it from their church or community. You can still get help from your church, but having a community come together to help your neighbor doesn't happen much anymore. I think that is due, at least in part, to these types of programs but that's a discussion worthy of it's own thread.
Yeah... I think, in some ways, the methods that were chosen, or maybe the way they were implemented, has done 2 things:
1) it has fed many that would have starved
2) it has created (and creates) many more who have no incentive to provide for themselves
So, the trick is to be sympathetic and empathetic to those in group A, while discouraging the growth of group B.
I need to share more.
I'd think you'd look that up yourself and not rely on MY links but I will give them to you anyway and IF you decide to not believe these links, fine, but you better come back with your own to disprove them.
The overwhelming majority of food stamp recipients are seniors, people with disabilities, and working families.
http://www.justharvest.org/advocacy/the-truth-about-snapfood-stamps/
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...amp-program-has-a-strong-record-of-efficienty
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/28/food-stamp-demographics_n_6771938.html
http://www.hungercoalition.org/food-stamp-myths
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/19/us/food-stamp-fraud-in-the-underground-economy.html?_r=0
One fact is this, South Carolina recently was able to track down the people who were illegally obtaining food stamps when they did not qualify and they took them to court and they are having to pay back what they stole from the state. http://www.postandcourier.com/artic...-recover-33739247-from-food-stamp-fraud-cases
This article is from the government and it is about trafficking the SNAP program, which is where most of the fraud tends to occur and even that is low!
http://www.fns.usda.gov/pressrelease/2013/fns-001213
show me yours now?
Dear, I agree with most of that. In the past it is true they did help but the churches cannot handle what this economy has done to us since the 1980s. We NEED these programs. The food bank at my church runs out quickly and we live in a pretty decent area where poverty is not just in your face, you see more prosperity around here but the poverty is great, nonetheless. People don't give like they use to either. They give when something happens or when holidays come along. We need to do more but relying solely on churches and community banks is not enough. Plus, with those you DO run the risk of fraud being greater. At our church we had a lady coming in EVERY week to get canned meats and only canned meats. One day someone noticed she had a really nice car and thought it odd but assumed she had just fallen on hard times, but then overheard her telling someone she just came in there to get food for her dog to eat because he liked the canned meat better than the dog food she bought him. I know that is an isolated case but this crap happens a lot or stuff like it.
I'm not saying we should completely scrap the programs. At this point I don't think it is possible for the reasons you stated. My point was that when these programs began they started society down a path of not caring as much and/or being in the frame of mind that someone else will do it so I don't need to. That's not the only reason society acts that way now, but I do think it has played a role in how we treat each other today.
I know you were being serious, but I'm not sure a thread on OOTB has every stayed serious and/or on track. I could start a thread on the questions to ask and by the third page we'll be talking about our favorite restaurants in North Dakota.
I agree that a test would be a great idea. Like Strum alluded to, I dunno if knowing much about the revolutionary war, or who the VP or Speaker of the House are, is all that relevant. You should have to be able to answer some question about policies or something. People who walk in there and say "I'm voting for Hillary" and when asked why say "because Trump will destroy the country" and when pressed further on why they feel that way have no answer other than that's what they heard people say on late night comedy talk shows - should be shown the fuggin door.
I think I've brought this idea up before - but what would be better than the current system, is if you didn't actually vote for a candidate. If you voted yes/no to questions that were related to their agendas. That way people would vote for who they actually wanted - not who they thought they wanted. For example, say Hillary wanted to raise taxes 5% in order to better fund programs such as unemployment and welfare. The question would be asked, and if you're in support of that initiative you vote yes, and if not you vote no. There would be maybe 20 or so questions, and whichever candidates agenda you voted more for would get your vote. Or each vote to each agenda would count, or you'd rank them by importance, or something that would actually make sense.
