Sound off! (May 13)

Sound off! (May 13)

There are 52 comments on the Las Cruces Sun-News story from May 13, 2011, titled Sound off! (May 13). In it, Las Cruces Sun-News reports that:

Forty-one percent of mothers in Las Cruces have children out of wedlock. Probably all 41 percent are drawing taxpayer dollars in the form of food stamps.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Las Cruces Sun-News.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last
Casca

Brighton, MI

#42 May 13, 2011
Megan wrote:
"Forty-one percent of mothers in Las Cruces have children out of wedlock. Probably all 41 percent are drawing taxpayer dollars in the form of food stamps. Twenty-two million Americans are on food stamp welfare. No wonder our country is flirting with bankruptcy."
Excuse me but I have a child out of wedlock and I have not received one dime from the government. I am college educated and take care of my child!! I take great offense to this comment, I have worked my @$$ off to get where I am at and for someone to make such a blanket statement is just plain ignorant.
It was probably called in by some guy who watches Fox News to find out what his opinions are.

Since: Sep 08

Albuquerque, NM

#43 May 13, 2011
Facts v Fiction wrote:
<quoted text>Let's think about this: Iraq, authorized by congress; Afghanistan, authorized by Congress; Libya, no authorization sought. Who's war is illegal?
Dubya simply screwed up the invasion of Afghanistan. It was legal but horrible ill advised. He sent an elephant after a mouse when a cat would have done nicely.

Dubya was forced to LIE to the congress to implement the illegal and immoral Iraqi invasion.

The Authorization to Use Force Against Iraq REQUIRED Bush to certify a link between Saddam and 9/11:
–"I have also determined that the use of armed force against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001." -George Bush, certification to Congress to authorize the use of force in Iraq, March 23, 2003

"Armed force against Iraq is consistent with"...actions against...nations...who...aide d the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11," is what that sentence reads, with the lawyerly gobbledygook stripped out. In other words, Saddam "aided" 9/11.

Did he lie? Forgery or no forgery, on Sept. 18, 2003, on Meet the Press, Bush said:
–"No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Did-Bush-Lie...

The bombing of Libya was in direct requests by the U.N. Security Council, European allies, the Arab League, and the Libyan opposition after the right wing Chickenhawks had been bustin' his chops for not supporting the rebels. Libya has about as much in common with Dubya's LYING the country into Iraq as a high school kid coping a feel and a back alley serial rapist.
Roys Lie

Albuquerque, NM

#44 May 13, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Dubya simply screwed up the invasion of Afghanistan. It was legal but horrible ill advised. He sent an elephant after a mouse when a cat would have done nicely.
Dubya was forced to LIE to the congress to implement the illegal and immoral Iraqi invasion.
The Authorization to Use Force Against Iraq REQUIRED Bush to certify a link between Saddam and 9/11:
–"I have also determined that the use of armed force against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001." -George Bush, certification to Congress to authorize the use of force in Iraq, March 23, 2003
"Armed force against Iraq is consistent with"...actions against...nations...who...aide d the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11," is what that sentence reads, with the lawyerly gobbledygook stripped out. In other words, Saddam "aided" 9/11.
Did he lie? Forgery or no forgery, on Sept. 18, 2003, on Meet the Press, Bush said:
–"No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Did-Bush-Lie...
The bombing of Libya was in direct requests by the U.N. Security Council, European allies, the Arab League, and the Libyan opposition after the right wing Chickenhawks had been bustin' his chops for not supporting the rebels. Libya has about as much in common with Dubya's LYING the country into Iraq as a high school kid coping a feel and a back alley serial rapist.
just got repeated for the 10,000th time. Is there a Nobel Prize for lying?
watchdog1

Albuquerque, NM

#45 May 13, 2011
Quit yer bitchin wrote:
<quoted text>
The U.S. Constitution states that you have a right to face your accuser in a CRIMINAL prosecution. A traffic citation for speeding or running a red light is NOT a criminal offense. So it is not unconstitutional to issue a ticket by mail.
This is the point you moron. They had to change the whole law to make it work. You have been had and you are not even aware of the consequences of this. It means anyone can for any reason change laws to their benefit and profit if you let this crap continue.
Get this straight in your head! If a cop stops you it is criminal,not the way these crooks set it up. The way they have it cannot stand up in a court of law.
Pablo

Los Alamos, NM

#47 May 13, 2011
WelcometotheParty wrote:
I am a bleeding-heart liberal. And, I am against giving drivers licenses to illegals. I am also for my gun rights, because I shot guns my whole life. So, just labeling somebody a liberal, you really need to know the ins and outs of what they think. Not all liberals believe that way.
Hmmmmmmmmmm....You, my friend, just became a Conservative. Congratulations & welcome to the Republican Party!
Sounds like he belongs to the redneck party.
Suggestion

Huntsville, AL

#49 May 13, 2011
FamilyFirstLC wrote:
Sound off! caller said, "Forty-one percent of mothers in Las Cruces have children out of wedlock. Probably all 41 percent are drawing taxpayer dollars in the form of food stamps. Twenty-two million Americans are on food stamp welfare. No wonder our country is flirting with bankruptcy."
Really??
I am a single mom with two kids who is not on any type of assistance. I provide all insurance and support for my kids with no child support. Not a good idea to assume that all people follow the same path and do not own up to their responsibilities. I have gotten that look many times when people find out I am a single mom, but I support my kids better than some married couples. Honestly it's just kind of rude to make dumb comments like that!
You might ask Radical Teacher to tutor you in your reading and comprehension skills. The Sound Off Caller stated "41% of women had children OUT OF WEDLOCK" & are "PROBABLY" on the dole.

So did you have your children out of WEDLOCK to have gotten so worked up about this?

Plenty of single moms that are divorcees read the Sound Off Callers comment and didn't scold the person for stating a sentiment held by many: TOO MANY ARE ON THE DOLE (woman having kids like rabbits having bunnies).
Notsofast

United States

#50 May 13, 2011
We have a great national power grid. Why do we not have a national fresh water grid? We could be shipping tens of millions of fresh, clean water from the flood-ravaged Midwest to the West Coast and to the drought-infected area.
*********

Good idea, let's do it.
Ruu

Las Cruces, NM

#51 May 13, 2011
How do this mothers who have kids out of wedlock, how do
they qualify to get food stamps and get money at the same
time, this mothers should not have kids if they can't afford them, it is a shame if they are really getting away
with coming out making kid after kid and just sitting down
and waiting to go and collect thier monthly amount of stamps for every time they have another baby amd who's
paying the bill every time they are in the hospital making
more and more kids.
STX

Kingshill, Virgin Islands, U.S.

#52 May 14, 2011
The United States cannot go bankrupt nor will its checks bounce. Our grandkids will not be saddled with our generation's federal debt. China is not going to ever own us. These are political fictions promoted by the pundit class without a basis in reality in order to promote conflict among political constituencies and create media buzz. The US does not pay its bills with tax revenues or cash, it pays them with electronic transfers at the Federal Reserve Bank. Take a deep breath, relax, and realize that the real reason for the "deficit" is so the federal government can sop up the supply of goods and services produced in the US economy that the private sector and cities and states can't afford. The real reason for taxes is to regulate demand and inflation by controlling how much money we have to spend for goods and services produced by the US economy. In order to lower the annual "deficit", policy makers should lower taxes for consumers so they can buy more stuff and the federal government won't have to by so much to keep supply and demand in balance.
Rick O Shea

Farmington, NM

#53 May 14, 2011
LC Resident wrote:
<quoted text>
I think the examples you use in comparison are WAY off base. If you have noticed here in LC we have some habitual and dangerous red light runners!! I have witnessed several t-bone accidents because most people don't expect some **** to come hauling A$$ through the intersection so they go without looking both ways first. I don't feel the cameras are unconstitutional nor do I feel my rights as a citizen are being infringed upon. I believe it is a public safety issue, just like driving while texting.
Since the camera's have been in existance, I have NEVER ONCE received a citation. Maybe because I look ahead while driving and in most cases you can predict when the light will change. Leave plenty of time to get where you need to go, riding someones A$$ and flipping them off to get out of the way is more often the case in this city.
It is the owner of the vehicles problem, yes it is. You allowed the person to drive the car, the owner of the vehicle should be responsible. In turn, you go to the person responsible for the ticket and collect!
The owner of the vehicle is not required to pay a camera ticket if they were not the person driving. All they have to do is disclose who the driver was and mail in the response. By your logic, because a person "allowed" someone else to drive their vehicle then shouldn't all traffic citations be mailed to the registered owner regardless of who was driving, and the owner be responsible for reimbursment from the driver? Its not the owners problem, that's not how the law works in America.
Think about it

Albuquerque, NM

#54 May 14, 2011
Quark wrote:
"Forty-one percent of mothers in Las Cruces have children out of wedlock. Probably all 41 percent are drawing taxpayer dollars in the form of food stamps. Twenty-two million Americans are on food stamp welfare. No wonder our country is flirting with bankruptcy."
__________
How do you know some of these women aren't widows? How do you know some of them aren't divorced? It's wrong to assume anything regarding their character because of these statistics.
The same is true of those on food stamps or welfare! Are you aware that in many states military families are eligible for welfare and food stamps. You DO know the country is in the middle of a recession, don't you? You DO realize that many hard-working people have fallen on hard times, don't you?
Not everyone using government benefits is lazy or taking advantage of the system.
Because the article is about 41% of children born out of wedlock. Out of wed lock means the mothers were not married at the time the children were born.

It has nothing to do with mothers of children who are divorced or widowed.

Yes there are many individuals who are on public assistance through no fault of their own due to circumstances that they did not have control of.

This article is not about that.

This article is about mothers who chose to have a child without the benefit of a father. The wefare comments refer to those who's child will be on public assistance from the time the mother begins medical treatment for the pregnancy.

Pregnancy is not a circumstance that the individual has no control of. Pregnancy is a choice. 41% of mothers are choosing to be pregnant without the benefit of a father. Those children are more likely to be supported by the state.
Think about it

Albuquerque, NM

#55 May 14, 2011
I am opposed to the red light cameras based on the amount of money that is sent out of state by this program.

As I understand it, our city gets $25 dollars of the $100 dollar ticket. If that's true, then we are sending $75 dollars out of our community.

Let's keep that $75 here in Las Cruces. Hire enough traffic cops to patrol the intersections and pay them with the $75 dollars that our community would lose. At least the $75 dollars would be spent here in our community not sent somewhere else.

And the the councilman/woman who made the statement that you are changing behavior. It's not you job to change someone's behavior. You have no business as a government representative to change someone's behavior.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Hatch Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
billary for prison 2016 8 hr Bloodonhishands 1
News Martinez prefers to stick to issues (Jun '10) 9 hr Lofty 6,879
please come see me 13 hr Yes Baby 27
Review: RGM Realty (Mar '15) 15 hr lol 4
News NMSU plans to eliminate 126 jobs 16 hr Really 1
News Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) Sun TWP 72,037
News Felon pleads guilty to possessing firearm Jul 21 Gloria 1

Hatch Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Hatch Mortgages