Go to THE LAST HOUSE ON THE RIGHT
- Add a comment
- Go to I BEG YOU ALL TO PLEASE READ THIS
Utah
Don't you just love it when people try and 'occupy' your blog? 
posted by
Nautikos
on September 20, 2012 at 1:28 PM
| link to this | reply
The Constitution is such a precious document...I would like to see it followed more.
posted by
FormerStudentIntern
on September 20, 2012 at 9:45 AM
| link to this | reply
Katray we all know facts. Here is one. If you want to show us how many facts you know why don't you post them on your own political blog instead of my comment page...Enough. I do this for a living, I don't get my facts from media matters.
posted by
UtahJay
on September 20, 2012 at 9:16 AM
| link to this | reply
Re:
I know facts. So it's different when you find out that even the Romney's had to depend on welfare? As far as the 47 percent misperceptions, a good portion of those are people who are receiving Social Security, either retirement or disability. A big portion of the rest do pay payroll taxes and state income plus sales tax and some of those rates are higher than the rates of their wealthier counterparts. So they are not unencumbered of tax burdens and for many their burden of taxation is heavier.
Yes, a tipping point indeed! We can hope and pray healthcare costs, such a huge drain on the national economy, thanks to the indecent greed of the for-profit medical industry will be reigned in with the reform.
May the best persons for the work ahead win!
posted by
Katray2
on September 20, 2012 at 6:47 AM
| link to this | reply
Oh yes, I forgot. We are at a tipping point. Everyone is going to touched by the weight of this dept. The best we can hope for is to slow the spending train. Mr Obama has no intentions of doing that and both of you know that.
posted by
UtahJay
on September 20, 2012 at 3:28 AM
| link to this | reply
I am not saying that there should not be a safety net, but I am saying that the Constitution does not mandate it. But on the other hand over two years of unemployment benefits, 27 million more people on food stamps in the last four years. 47 percent pay no income taxes at all and could care less where the largess comes from, and now Obama has stripped the work provision that was put in during the Clinton years. And believe me, Mr Clinton would have never of put in the changes that he signed from the Republican Congress on hie own. And Tapps, perhaps no man can work miracles but there is one that wants to slow down the train and one that does not. There is one that has the experience to do the job and one who obviously does not. I am shocked that you cannot see the difference. And there is only one who supported partial birth abortions.
posted by
UtahJay
on September 20, 2012 at 3:24 AM
| link to this | reply
Actually, there has been change in the welfare system
since Clinton's reforms. A reduction, pretty much across the board, hitting children, the elderly and disabled the hardest. And yet, still not enough cuts to please the Ayn Rand-ers...
In an ideal world, there would be enough family and charitable support to take care of the most vulnerable; a kind of "The Walton's" situation but the reality is: there is not. So the unlucky souls who have no-one and need help deserve to have literally nothing to eat, no place to live, no health care? I'm really just trying to understand your reasoning, Jay, not arguing for the sake of argument, because this line of thought and belief is so prevalent. So hoping you aren't becoming annoyed with my comments..:)
posted by
Katray2
on September 19, 2012 at 10:41 PM
| link to this | reply
Re:
Jay, nothing has been wiped out by Obama; the conditions I stated are in effect and unchanged. It is fact in my state! So I can't understand what you are saying? If you don't want debate on these issues then why didn't you say so in the title of this post instead of "I Beg.."..?
I thought George Romney was a Mormon? And this surely isn't the only Mormon family that has and currently does accept help from the government.
I commend you for your pride and determination but not everyone is able to get by as you do - because of old age, disabling health conditions, the very young, children...
I will vote pro-life, again in every sense of the term - as best I can figure out per candidate.
posted by
Katray2
on September 19, 2012 at 10:11 PM
| link to this | reply
Re:
God help us no matter who wins. It is an impossible job in this day and age to be President of the USA. Mitt Romney cannot work miracles no more than Obama can.
posted by
TAPS.
on September 19, 2012 at 10:05 PM
| link to this | reply
Yes, and everything that Clinton did was wiped out by a stroke of Obama's pen...Totally unconstitutional. You believe what you want. We are on the edge of cliff and we have been put there by Obama. He has never liked the US and thinks we should be put in our place...He will destroy the dream. I don't wish to argue with you. I do enough of that on the campaign trail helping Mia Love. You will vote for your European nanny state and I will not. God help us if Obama wins. All I can say at that time is buy food...Well you better food now that we are printing more money and buying our own debt...Its almost like we are fallowing a model. The one of 1930's Germany...Don't argue with me reed about that instead. As far as slavery goes we have paid for that with the civil war. The blacks never had a extermination order on their heads, never had to move to the desert just to survive, like the Mormons did. The difference, we educated ourselves and worked hard. Had we fallowed the democratic model we would be living in the projects. By the way...I am poor, right now, living on 1000 a month...but I have a dream.
posted by
UtahJay
on September 19, 2012 at 9:04 PM
| link to this | reply
Oh, almost forgot! Are you aware Mitt Romney's Father was on welfare?
Or "relief" as it was called then - when he came back to the U.S. from Mexico as a child and he had to be on it for several years...Kept him alive!
posted by
Katray2
on September 19, 2012 at 8:48 PM
| link to this | reply
Why the CAP lock?...:)
Jay, you need to check your facts - there is no easy gravy train for folks who receives government benefits, unlike for the wealthy with their endless tax havens and corporations with their endless, treasury draining subsidies.
Should we penalize the elderly because they got too old to work? Or the disabled? I am not the one asleep or in a bubble here.
Again, the maximum bennys for a single, healthy enough to work, no disabilities or dependents - person is $200.00 in food stamps and that is going to be on timetable very soon in my state, meaning after a certain period, the benefit expires, no exceptions.
Welfare was reformed under Clinton, remember? Before that, there was much more misuse and abuse of the system. So I don't doubt what you overheard but nowadays having another baby does not extend aid to dependent families. No extra check or extension in my state - there is a 2 year lifetime benefit for single parents. Their children can still qualify for health insurance and food stamps, but that doesn't feed the parents or give them health care. And for them to get into public housing, they must at least have a part time job.
So I don't see the free for all giveaways that you apparently believe still exist. Reformed and a continuing reformation to the point of placing our most vulnerable citizens in danger. I strongly dislike that my taxes go to further the wealth of greed, corporate abuses that ship jobs overseas with no penalties whatsoever and for military misuse, but I do not advocate myself living tax free or even at greatly reduced levels because it would be at the expense of the old, sick and disadvantaged. One of those situations where I have to hold my nose, pay up and accept the bad with the good until ways can be found to effect real change, real reform and balance the scales. Debate, honest discourse and the finding of political candidates who will serve the best interests of everyone are a start - my opinion.
Government exists to do what citizens cannot do on their own - do you really think charities, either organized or individual; no matter how well intentioned, can replace the government's role?
Btw, I have voted for candidates from both parties am not a registered Democrat. I am pro-life in every sense of the word.
posted by
Katray2
on September 19, 2012 at 8:41 PM
| link to this | reply
LIKE I SAID, IF YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO IT TO YOUR NEIGHBOR YOU CANNOT DELAGATE IT TO GOVERNMENT. IF IT IS WRONG FOR YOU IT IS WRONG FOR GOVERNMENT. FRANKLIN ALSO SAID THAT THE POOR SHOULD BE MADE UNCOMFORTABLE IN THEIR POORNESS. THAT WAY THEY ARE NOT SO TEMPTED TO STAY ON THE GOVERNMENTS MONEY...MY MONEY. LIKE A PAIR OF LADIES I LISTENED TO IN A NEW ORLIENS BUS STATION FOR 45 MINUTES TALKING ABOUT WAYS TO MAKE MONEY ON WELFARE...THEIR FINALL DISSESION...TO HAVE ANOTHER BABY OUT OF WEDLOCK...NOT FIND A JOB, NOT LOOK FOR WORK, NOT HOW TO MAKE MONEY UNDER THE TABLE, BUT TO HAVE ANOTHER BABY, ANOTHER WELFARE BABY. WAKE UP HERE. DEMOCRATES NEED TO KEEP THE POOR POOR BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THEIR VOTES COME FROM AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT. IT IS OUR RESPONSABILITY TO HELP THE POOR.
posted by
UtahJay
on September 19, 2012 at 3:36 PM
| link to this | reply
Sadly Jay the Constitution did not give full rights to anyone but white men
Are you forgetting slavery, the horrors of child labor, women who had few liberties and the lower working classes who were regularly cheated out of their hard earned pay by greedy, devious business owners, the Native American tribes who were and still are treated as less than deserving of liberty? Freedoms that had to be fought for, over and over again by common, suffering people - it took the Women's Suffrage movement, labor unions, a Civil War to win these so called guaranteed rights. People suffered and died in the cause of freedom; not the founding fathers themselves - yes, many of them fought in the Revolutionary War, but that was only the beginning of freedom's march. Just because it's on paper, didn't mean it was reality. It wasn't until the people made it happen!
I believe through fair and just taxation, safety nets should be in place for all Americans. Doesn't mean a safety net should be a license to kick back and do nothing if one is able to work and make it. It has been my experience that most, if not all folks who receive government aid want to able to provide for themselves. Even the elderly and disabled, who make up the biggest bulk of those on assistance strive to do something to help themselves. And do you think they - the elderly and disabled - should be told to stop expecting government help? The majority of elderly folks did work hard and pay their taxes. The disabled can hardly be penalized for being less than well enough to work or work enough to support themselves?
The healthy, younger folks I know of who don't work because they are laid off, between jobs, under-employed or just plain lazy (yes, there are a few who are exactly that, but they are the rare spoiled apples) hardly have an easy ride on our taxes. $200.00 a month in food stamps and not a penny more of anything else for a single person. And that will soon have time limits, just as Aid to Dependent Families already does - scary, hungry times ahead for the under employed (the working poor) and those laid off, but another slash of the safety net to keep the tax cuts for the rich, endless wars going and corporate welfare well funded and growing. Health care has become just another commodity that only the well heeled can afford to indulge in - further cuts to Medicaid and Medicare will cut out even more struggling seniors, disabled and poor people.
I doubt if people dying of starvation and/or treatable health conditions in the streets will change anything much...but Ayn Rand would be proud, I'm sure.
posted by
Katray2
on September 19, 2012 at 1:06 PM
| link to this | reply