Comments
61,981 - 62,000 of 140,849 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68747
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Honestly wrote:
<quoted text>
YOU SAID: You cannot blame the average Israeli Citizen for what their Gov't. does any more than you can blame the average American Citizen for what our Gov't. does.
I beg to differ: The gov is a reflection of the people (they voted). Since Our gov. in infiltrated with a large quantity of Dem/LIBS, it in essence is transferring the ideology of the left into its agenda. The only problem you, a dem/lib, did not see, is that when the gov. get 'so big' it then becomes the ideology of ONE person and cares nothing about the people who put him/her there. I know nothing about Israel but by the ideology of their gov. I think the people recognize they could all be wiped-out tomorrow if their gov. did not take a preemptive stand. Much like your so-called 'Property rights' What happens when someone tries to take over your home or property. Oh--Call the law. What if there was no law, judge,or anything to stop them. Now--what do you do? throw sticks. Israel is in the same pot. There is not a law, sheriff, judge, etc. that will stop another country, people, etc. from invading them. The U.S. is really the only friend they have in the world. Now---would it not be nice if one or two of your neighbors come over to help you defend your property (in the first scenario)when no one else would. When the current administration guts the military, we will have foreign company on our shores. Guess we can then throw sticks because our guns will be long gone?
Thank you dem/libs for a good life expectancy!!!!!!!!!!
Why do you blame the "Dem/Libs" for this? Where were you when George W. Bush and the Republican-Controlled Congress voted in a change to the "Emminent Domain" Law, so they could take your Property for any Corporation or Company that would pay more Taxes on it, than you do and there's not a thing you can do about it? Where were you then? Where were you in 2011, when Boehner bragged about getting the Sequestration Option from Obama in exchange for agreeing not to send the Country into Default? Where were you then? Where are you now, that the Teapublicans are willing to let the Country go back into a major Economic downfall, again, just to protect the Wealthiest from paying more than a 14% Tax Rate and/or close the Tax Loopholes that enable them to pay zero taxes, instead of paying the 28 to 32% that you pay, or are willing to let THEIR Sequestration that Boehner bragged about getting agreed to, that will surely almost destroy YOU and just about everybody else , as well as this economy? WHERE WERE YOU THEN AND WHERE ARE YOU NOW???
I can PROVE what I'm accusing Boehner/Teapublicans of, can you prove what you're blaming the Dems/Libs of???
Nuh

South Pittsburg, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68748
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Only in America could two people with the responsibility of overseaing the federal tax code... Timothy Geithner (D), the head of the Treasury Department and Charles Rangel (D) who once ran the Ways and Means Committe... BOTH turn out to be tax cheats and who are in favor of higher taxes.

Since: Jul 10

Cumberland City, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68749
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Honestly wrote:
<quoted text>
OK, By your explaining yourself, I believe you were a Repub. I myself have voted over the years for many Democrats. They were once know as the peoples party. They got farm subsidies started to help the farmer, they got welfare to help the dustbowl-depression era people and many more bills that actually helped people.(medicare, medicaid, etc.) They killed 50,000 soldier in Vietnam. Since the early 60's they have gradually changed to becoming more liberal to what they are no-days. There are a few (very few) democrat conservatives left. Yes, in years I have voted for democrats, republicans, independents, libertarians,etc. You might say I have changed my party (not quite as dramatic as you)to being an independent. We can debate the different topics (including the gray areas) that both parties have or don't have. Hopefully without the talking points and just the truth. I will say this: Yes, there were radicals telling everyone that would listen that Clinton and Bush would get a third term. In those situations, there was no way they could get a third term. They did not have the votes to overturn an amendment. By the end of the third year, Obama will have those votes. We are rapidly becoming a nation of takers and by the next election (two years), we will have another majority in congress thus setting the stage. Like Roosevelt, Obama will be so popular that the necessary paper work to overturn this amendment will pass both houses and begin their trek through the states. Now - one thing you need to rem. the ratification process takes years, however, once the process is started, he would be able to obtain a third term legally. Take a look at the Emancipation/Proclamation that was in force long before it was radified. In fact the last state to ratify it was Mississippi, this year.
If over 50% of the people are takers, they are not going to give up a good living but in fact want more. No, I am not talking about SSN or Medicare. Welfare, food stamps, disability, child care: One women recently on the news this week gets approx.$80,000 per year while sitting at home with two kids. Need I say more. We can drive each other to the polls together, and vote differently in any election. I do respect yours or anybody else's vote as long as it is an informed vote. I fought for, believe in and live with the idea that the vote is our most valuable right.
One women recently on the news this week gets approx.$80,000 per year while sitting at home with two kids.

I also saw this report and it stated the woman was studying to be a nurse and one child was in daycare and the other in pre-school with that be the bulk of the assistance but the total wasn`t 80 k but it could be as high as 80 k with other programs available to her. I agree with helping people esp those who are trying to help themselves but the problem is we don`t have the money and 80 k is alot when you consider the amount of people who can get it. I wish I had enough money to help everybody out of poverty but I don`t and if tried I would soon be with em. I see us all in the ditch and my question is who will help America when that time comes and it`s coming.

Other then that the rest of your post is pretty spot on.
Teapublican

New York, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68750
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

TJohn wrote:
<quoted text>
One women recently on the news this week gets approx.$80,000 per year while sitting at home with two kids.
I also saw this report and it stated the woman was studying to be a nurse and one child was in daycare and the other in pre-school with that be the bulk of the assistance but the total wasn`t 80 k but it could be as high as 80 k with other programs available to her. I agree with helping people esp those who are trying to help themselves but the problem is we don`t have the money and 80 k is alot when you consider the amount of people who can get it. I wish I had enough money to help everybody out of poverty but I don`t and if tried I would soon be with em. I see us all in the ditch and my question is who will help America when that time comes and it`s coming.
Other then that the rest of your post is pretty spot on.
How can I get an Obama phone?

Since: Jul 10

Cumberland City, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68751
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

1

SexySassySenior wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you blame the "Dem/Libs" for this? Where were you when George W. Bush and the Republican-Controlled Congress voted in a change to the "Emminent Domain" Law, so they could take your Property for any Corporation or Company that would pay more Taxes on it, than you do and there's not a thing you can do about it? Where were you then? Where were you in 2011, when Boehner bragged about getting the Sequestration Option from Obama in exchange for agreeing not to send the Country into Default? Where were you then? Where are you now, that the Teapublicans are willing to let the Country go back into a major Economic downfall, again, just to protect the Wealthiest from paying more than a 14% Tax Rate and/or close the Tax Loopholes that enable them to pay zero taxes, instead of paying the 28 to 32% that you pay, or are willing to let THEIR Sequestration that Boehner bragged about getting agreed to, that will surely almost destroy YOU and just about everybody else , as well as this economy? WHERE WERE YOU THEN AND WHERE ARE YOU NOW???
I can PROVE what I'm accusing Boehner/Teapublicans of, can you prove what you're blaming the Dems/Libs of???
I can see it now. Obamo standing on a street corner with one of those sighs saying " THE END IS NEAR " with a date on it March 1st 2013

I promise you the world isn`t coming to an end in the next week because of these cuts. Fear tactics by the demoncrats.

By the way, I haven`t seen where Boehner " brag " about it. I`d like to see that because i`ve not seen any video of him doing it.

You already posted a farce earlier on this thread that was proven wrong. These cuts were obamos idea and he sighed it into law. His name is on the damn thing and now he wants to blame the GOP. If they cave and don`t let the cuts take effect then there will be no hope for getting our spending or the budget under control.

Since: Jul 10

Cumberland City, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68752
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Teapublican wrote:
<quoted text>How can I get an Obama phone?
The next time you have to re-certify for your food stamps ask your case worker and you can apply for a cell phone and a voucher for a land line for your home. You take the voucher to your local phone company and then you will get service based on the amount of the voucher.
Dunlapian

Dunlap, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68753
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

TJohn wrote:
<quoted text>The next time you have to re-certify for your food stamps ask your case worker and you can apply for a cell phone and a voucher for a land line for your home. You take the voucher to your local phone company and then you will get service based on the amount of the voucher.
So why is it called an Obama phone?

Since: Jul 10

Cumberland City, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68754
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Dunlapian wrote:
<quoted text>So why is it called an Obama phone?
Not sure but thats what many call the free cell and home phone service you can get from welfare. Again , not sure when it started but my guess with the name implyed it started with obamo.
WILLARD

Pikeville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68755
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

TJohn wrote:
<quoted text>The next time you have to re-certify for your food stamps ask your case worker and you can apply for a cell phone and a voucher for a land line for your home. You take the voucher to your local phone company and then you will get service based on the amount of the voucher.
You need to watch this video, it explains the Obama-phone giveaway!

CLICK TO WATCH VIDEO: http://bit.ly/P2EwQO
crazya55whiteboy

Rock Island, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68756
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

1

Its crazy how people turn against each other just cuz one has more money than the other, gives them a sense of feeling more higher up than the rest of people,and how greed can create such chaos when those people start wanting to make even more, (ceos and politicians and corps) while paying workers less, the republican party is trying to kill the middle class especially when single parents are living below poverty line while working full time jobs and wanting to strip social security and food stamps and any other benefit that helps those less fortunate instead of raising taxes on the extremely wealthy. i find that greed the kinda thing that creates most most of our problems here in the United States. we need a new increase in the minimum wage and it does not effect the jobs numbers in doing so it actually helps because people dont want to work all day and only bring home $280 a week and thats not enough to raise kids on and save money back its impossible. i voted democrat Mike Mcwherter and every other democrat that will run because republicans are racist and corrupt inside and out.
Guadalupe

Matawan, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68757
Feb 22, 2013
 
Dunlapian wrote:
<quoted text>So why is it called an Obama phone?
How did you get your obama phone?
Cornbread

Scottsville, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68758
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

So why is it called an Obama phone?

All because one Black woman was caught on video at a rally, saying something like "I Love my Obama phone."

There is one problem with the Obama Phone: It doesn’t exist. Obama didn't start the program .

Since 2009 there has been an urban myth that Obama created a program to provide free phones to low-income Americans at taxpayer expense.

There is, in fact, a government program that will provide low-income people with a free or low cost cell phone. This policy started with land line phones first, since cell phones weren't around. It began in the 1980's.

The idea of providing low-income individuals with subsidized phone service was originated in the Reagan administration following the break-up of AT&T in 1984.(It was expanded and formalized by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.) The program is paid for by telecommunications companies through an independent non-profit, not through tax revenue.
Truth Detector

Jamestown, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68759
Feb 22, 2013
 
Teapublican wrote:
<quoted text>How can I get an Obama phone?
http://obamaphone.net/
Unreal

Dandridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68760
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

The Obama Phone?

Posted on October 29, 2009 , Updated on Nov. 5, 2009



Q: Has the Obama administration started a program to use "taxpayer money" to give free cell phones to welfare recipients?

A: No. Low-income households have been eligible for discounted telephone service for more than a decade. But the program is funded by telecom companies, not by taxes, and the president has nothing to do with it.

FULL QUESTION

Is this e-mail true?


I had a former employee call me earlier today inquiring about a job, and at the end of the conversation he gave me his phone number. I asked the former employee if this was a new cell phone number and he told me yes this was his "Obama phone."

&#11024; Click to expand/collapse the full text &#11023;

FULL ANSWER

Welfare recipients, and others, can receive a free cell phone, but the program is not funded by the government or taxpayer money, as the e-mail alleges. And it’s hardly new.

How It Works

SafeLink Wireless, the program mentioned in the e-mail, does indeed offer a cell phone, about one hour’s worth of calling time per month, and other wireless services like voice mail to eligible low-income households. Applicants have to apply and prove that they are either receiving certain types of government benefits, such as Medicaid, or have household incomes at or below 135 percent of the poverty line. Using 2009 poverty guidelines, that’s $14,620 for an individual and a little under $30,000 for a family of four, with slightly higher amounts for Alaska and Hawaii.

SafeLink is run by a subsidiary of América Móvil, the world’s fourth largest wireless company in terms of subscribers, but it is not paid for directly by the company. Nor is it paid for with "tax payer money," as the e-mail claims. Rather, it is funded through the Universal Service Fund, which is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company, an independent, not-for-profit corporation set up by the Federal Communications Commission. The USF is sustained by contributions from telecommunications companies such as "long distance companies, local telephone companies, wireless telephone companies, paging companies, and payphone providers." The companies often charge customers to fund their contributions in the form of a universal service fee you might see on your monthly phone bill. The fund is then parceled out to companies, such as América Móvil, that create programs, such as SafeLink, to provide telecommunications service to rural areas and low-income households.

...
The president has no direct impact on the program, and one could hardly call these devices "Obama Phones," as the e-mail author does. This specific program, SafeLink, started under President George Bush, with grants from an independent company created under President Bill Clinton, which was a legacy of an act passed under President Franklin Roosevelt, which was influenced by an agreement reached between telecommunications companies and the administration of President Woodrow Wilson.

Wilson Phones, anyone?

Read more:
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-ph...
Dunlapian

Dunlap, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68761
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

TJohn wrote:
<quoted text>Not sure but thats what many call the free cell and home phone service you can get from welfare. Again , not sure when it started but my guess with the name implyed it started with obamo.
Well allow me to set you straight!

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/10/the-obama-ph...

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68762
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

WILLARD wrote:
<quoted text>How are you today?
I'm doing well. And you?

Since: Jul 10

Cumberland City, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68763
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Cornbread wrote:
So why is it called an Obama phone?
All because one Black woman was caught on video at a rally, saying something like "I Love my Obama phone."
There is one problem with the Obama Phone: It doesn’t exist. Obama didn't start the program .
Since 2009 there has been an urban myth that Obama created a program to provide free phones to low-income Americans at taxpayer expense.
There is, in fact, a government program that will provide low-income people with a free or low cost cell phone. This policy started with land line phones first, since cell phones weren't around. It began in the 1980's.
The idea of providing low-income individuals with subsidized phone service was originated in the Reagan administration following the break-up of AT&T in 1984.(It was expanded and formalized by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.) The program is paid for by telecommunications companies through an independent non-profit, not through tax revenue.
If true then you blew two urban myths out of the water. One the " obamo phone " myth and the other the " republicans only wanna help rich people " urban myth.

Just for the record the phones are not " free " because someone down the road has to pay for them. Somehow I believe taxpayers flip the bill for some if not most of the bill. I`m funny that way.
Truth Detector

Jamestown, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68764
Feb 22, 2013
 
TJohn wrote:
<quoted text>I can see it now. Obamo standing on a street corner with one of those sighs saying " THE END IS NEAR " with a date on it March 1st 2013. I promise you the world isn`t coming to an end in the next week because of these cuts.
Yes it IS! ABC News said so. Right here:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/57-terrib...

57 Terrible Consequences of the Sequester

“Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., they warned of terrible things: Greater risk of wildfires, fewer OSHA inspections and a risk of more workplace deaths, 125,000 people risking homelessness with cuts to shelters and housing vouchers, neglect for mentally ill and homeless Americans who would lose services, Native Americans getting turned away from hospitals, cuts to schools on reservations and prison lockdowns. There's also a higher risk of terrorism with surveillance limited and the FBI potentially unable to disrupt plots, closed housing projects, and 600,000 women and children thrown off WIC.”

OH The HORROR of it all. Look:

1. Air Travel Disruption
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood: "A vast majority of the FAA's nearly 47,000 employees will be furloughed for approximately one day per pay period until the end of the fiscal year in September, with a maximum of two days per pay period....

2. Longer Security Lines at Airports
3. Slower Extreme-Weather Forecasts
4. Greater Risk of Wildfires
5. Pest-Infested Crops
6. Nationwide Meat and Poultry Shortage
7. Prison Lockdowns
8. Slower Gun Background Checks
9. Fewer FBI Agents
10. Immigration Backlog
11. Longer Waits for Passports and Foreign Visas
12. Neglect for Mentally Ill, Homeless, and Substance Addicted
13. 125,000 Would Be at Risk of Homelessness
14. 600,000 Women and Children Thrown Off WIC
15. 424,000 Fewer AIDS Tests, 7,400 Fewer Patients Could Get HIV Medications
16. No Rent Assistance for 7,300 AIDS Patients
17. 807,000 Fewer Hospital Visits for Native Americans, Hospital Closures
18. Dilapidated Low-Income Housing, Closed Projects
19. No Child Care for 30,000 Kids, No Head Start for 70,000
20. Longer Waits for Disability Payments
21.$725 Million in Cuts for Low-Income and Special-Needs Students
22. Cuts to Schools on Indian Reservations
23. Native American Tribes Would Lose Almost $130 Million
24. Higher Risk of Terrorism
25. Untranslated Wiretaps
26. Less Surveillance
27. Classified Information Vulnerable to Foreign Spies
28. An Even More Porous Border
29. Untended Nukes
30. U.S. Less Prepared for a 'WMD Incident'
31. FBI Will Eventually Be Using Broken Equipment, Could Have Trouble Tracking Fingerprints
32. 1/3 Cutback in Pacific Naval Presence
33. Reduced Army Readiness
34. No Maintenance for Some Ships and Planes
35. 46,000 Defense Jobs Could Be Lost
36. Some Air Force Planes Can't Fly
37. Less Cybersecurity
38.$1 Billion Cut from Disaster Relief
39. First-Responder Layoffs
40. Coast Guard Operations Cut by 1/4, Drugs Coming In on Boats
41.$500 Million Cut from Foreign Economic and Military Aid
42.$380 Million Cut from Global AIDS Funding
43. Less Security at U.S. Facilities Abroad, Less Protection for Americans Abroad
44. Freed Up Terror Money
45. U.S. Attorneys Will Take 2,600 Fewer Cases
46. Smaller Unemployment Checks
47. 1,200 Fewer OSHA Inspections, Potential for More Workplace Deaths
48. Fewer Mine Inspections
49. No Job Training for Hundreds of Thousands of People, Less Training for Veterans
50. 1,928 Fewer Small Business Loans
51. Slower Reporting on Economic Data, Less Analysis of It
52. Parks? Can't Use 'Em.
53. 128 Refuges Could Close
54. Less Drilling and Exploration, Offshore and Onshore
55. Fewer Air-Quality Forecasts
56. 1,000 Fewer Environmental Compliance Inspections
57. Less Nuclear Cleanup

Whew! If they do all that on $44 Billion, What do they spend the other $3.6 TRILLION on?

I didn’t notice any cuts for fuel for Air Force One.

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68765
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

SexySassySenior wrote:
<quoted text>Why do you blame the "Dem/Libs" for this? Where were you when George W. Bush and the Republican-Controlled Congress voted in a change to the "Emminent Domain" Law, so they could take your Property for any Corporation or Company that would pay more Taxes on it, than you do and there's not a thing you can do about it? Where were you then? Where were you in 2011, when Boehner bragged about getting the Sequestration Option from Obama in exchange for agreeing not to send the Country into Default? Where were you then? Where are you now, that the Teapublicans are willing to let the Country go back into a major Economic downfall, again, just to protect the Wealthiest from paying more than a 14% Tax Rate and/or close the Tax Loopholes that enable them to pay zero taxes, instead of paying the 28 to 32% that you pay, or are willing to let THEIR Sequestration that Boehner bragged about getting agreed to, that will surely almost destroy YOU and just about everybody else , as well as this economy? WHERE WERE YOU THEN AND WHERE ARE YOU NOW???
I can PROVE what I'm accusing Boehner/Teapublicans of, can you prove what you're blaming the Dems/Libs of???
You can object but your objection is lost underneath the name calling. I was prepared to read your rebuttal up to the name calling of the other party. So close yet so far sweet lady. Is it just not in your character to object to someone's opinion without attempting to belittle them? There are better ways I promise you. Why don't you make a point today of avoiding any response filled with sarcastic remarks?
Unreal

Dandridge, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68766
Feb 22, 2013
 

Judged:

1

TJohn wrote:
<quoted text>If true then you blew two urban myths out of the water. One the " obamo phone " myth and the other the " republicans only wanna help rich people " urban myth.
Just for the record the phones are not " free " because someone down the road has to pay for them. Somehow I believe taxpayers flip the bill for some if not most of the bill. I`m funny that way.
Yes, it is called the "universal service fee" that is on all our bills for each phone we have.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
Greeneville Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Greeneville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Greeneville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Greeneville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Greeneville
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••