Sound off

Sound off

There are 40 comments on the Las Cruces Sun-News story from Sep 7, 2011, titled Sound off. In it, Las Cruces Sun-News reports that:

Stop taking dogs to the Farmers Market. People will enjoy it better without having any dog hair on their food.

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

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Wrong

Los Alamos, NM

#22 Sep 8, 2011
Fed Up in NM wrote:
<quoted text>Ok, so now not 'anyone receiving benefits' needs to be tested, only those that look like they are drug users or have been on welfare for their entire life. I still don't like the idea of accusing them of being druggies, but I guess that's better than wasting money testing everyone. BTW, not everyone who uses drugs fits that stereotype and not everyone who fits that stereotype uses drugs. But, maybe we do need to change the rules for new applicants. Set limits for how long a person can receive benefits or set a cap on how much they can receive.
And, no, I do not look like the 'druggie' image you presented.
Do you feel that the TSA is accusing you of being a terrorist when they run you through the scanner? Having to take a drug test is NOT accusing you of being a druggie. Having to be fingerprinted for work involving confidential material is not accusing you of being a crook. These requirements are just more [email protected] that honest, non-drug using people have to go through because of the crooked people. Grow up and learn to live in the real world!

“Get over yourself...”

Since: Jan 08

You're not that important

#23 Sep 8, 2011
Wrong wrote:
<quoted text>Do you feel that the TSA is accusing you of being a terrorist when they run you through the scanner? Having to take a drug test is NOT accusing you of being a druggie. Having to be fingerprinted for work involving confidential material is not accusing you of being a crook. These requirements are just more [email protected] that honest, non-drug using people have to go through because of the crooked people. Grow up and learn to live in the real world!
Having to prove you do not use drugs in order to receive benefits, based only on the fact that you do receive benefits, is accusing you of being a drug user. There are much cheaper and easier ways to go about welfare reform. If I have to take a drug test to get my food stamps, I will test clean. But, who pays for it? Me? If I could afford a test I would need the food stamps. The government? They do not need to spend more money on frivolous issues. You? Sure, I'll spend $30 or so of your hard earned money every month just to get my food stamps.

“Get over yourself...”

Since: Jan 08

You're not that important

#24 Sep 8, 2011
typo-should say 'wouldn't need food stamps'
Wrong

Los Alamos, NM

#25 Sep 8, 2011
Fed Up in NM wrote:
<quoted text>Having to prove you do not use drugs in order to receive benefits, based only on the fact that you do receive benefits, is accusing you of being a drug user. There are much cheaper and easier ways to go about welfare reform. If I have to take a drug test to get my food stamps, I will test clean. But, who pays for it? Me? If I could afford a test I would need the food stamps. The government? They do not need to spend more money on frivolous issues. You? Sure, I'll spend $30 or so of your hard earned money every month just to get my food stamps.
Being a highschool, professional or college athlete means being subjected to drug tests. Why do you think you are special? If you don't want to be tested, give up the benefits and wing it on your own. Better yet, get off of Topix because it's unlikely you will find a job there.

“Get over yourself...”

Since: Jan 08

You're not that important

#26 Sep 8, 2011
Wrong wrote:
<quoted text>Being a highschool, professional or college athlete means being subjected to drug tests. Why do you think you are special? If you don't want to be tested, give up the benefits and wing it on your own. Better yet, get off of Topix because it's unlikely you will find a job there.
I am employed and have never failed a drug test. I agreed to that when I was offered a job. Whether I receive benefits or not, I do not agree with assuming an entire population is on drugs just because they need help.
Speaking of the testing for athletes, how do you feel about testing the teachers and professors of those athletes? How about testing doctors? Or are they 'above' suspicion, since they are professionals? I hope you are not stereotyping, as I know of some doctors and educators who would not pass the test.

“ keep the loonies on the path.”

Since: Aug 10

Detroit

#27 Sep 9, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah and they drove there in their new Escalade.
++++++++++
You are always wrong! It was a 2009 white Cadillac with gold trim and 22" wire spoke wheels blasting some kind of noise that included vulgar rants that would make even you cringe.

Since: Sep 08

Huntsville, AL

#28 Sep 9, 2011
"Having to prove you do not use drugs in order to receive benefits, based only on the fact that you do receive benefits, is accusing you of being a drug user." Gotta disagree. It just proves the effectiveness of the Republican's racist 30 year propaganda war that really kicked off with Reagan's bu!!sh!t claim about the Welfare queen. Regan just ramped up Nixon's Southern Strategy, to appeal to the red-neck racist crackers.

"Over a period of about five years, Reagan told the story of the "Chicago welfare queen" who had 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards, and collected benefits for "four nonexisting deceased husbands," bilking the government out of "over $150,000." The closest welfare recipient anyone could find was actually convicted for using two different aliases to collect $8,000. Reagan continued to use his version of the story even after the press pointed out the actual facts of the case to him. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/200...

"Being a highschool, professional or college athlete means being subjected to drug tests." Why do you feel this is justified, fair, or even needed?
Wrong

Los Alamos, NM

#29 Sep 9, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
"Having to prove you do not use drugs in order to receive benefits, based only on the fact that you do receive benefits, is accusing you of being a drug user." Gotta disagree. It just proves the effectiveness of the Republican's racist 30 year propaganda war that really kicked off with Reagan's bu!!sh!t claim about the Welfare queen. Regan just ramped up Nixon's Southern Strategy, to appeal to the red-neck racist crackers.
"Over a period of about five years, Reagan told the story of the "Chicago welfare queen" who had 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards, and collected benefits for "four nonexisting deceased husbands," bilking the government out of "over $150,000." The closest welfare recipient anyone could find was actually convicted for using two different aliases to collect $8,000. Reagan continued to use his version of the story even after the press pointed out the actual facts of the case to him. http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/200...
"Being a highschool, professional or college athlete means being subjected to drug tests." Why do you feel this is justified, fair, or even needed?
""Being a highschool, professional or college athlete means being subjected to drug tests." Why do you feel this is justified, fair, or even needed? "

Ask Roger Clemens and Tour De France riders if drug testing is needed for athletes?

As for your other BS, keep your head buried in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist.
Wrong

Los Alamos, NM

#30 Sep 9, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
"Having to prove you do not use drugs in order to receive benefits, based only on the fact that you do receive benefits, is accusing you of being a drug user." Gotta disagree. It just proves the effectiveness of the Republican's racist 30 year propaganda war that really kicked off with Reagan's bu!!sh!t claim about the Welfare queen. Regan just ramped up Nixon's Southern Strategy, to appeal to the red-neck racist crackers.
"Being a highschool, professional or college athlete means being subjected to drug tests." Why do you feel this is justified, fair, or even needed?
"• Earlier this month, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel revealed that Wisconsin food-stamp recipients routinely sell their benefit cards on Facebook. The investigation also found that "nearly 2,000 recipients claimed they lost their card six or more times in 2010 and requested replacements." USDA rules require that lost cards be speedily replaced. The Wisconsin Policy Research Institute concluded: "Prosecutors have simply stopped prosecuting the vast majority of [food-stamp] fraud cases in virtually all counties, including the one with the most recipients, Milwaukee."

• Troy Hutson, the chief of Washington state's food-stamp program, resigned in April after a Seattle television station revealed that some food-stamp recipients were selling their cards on Craigslist or brazenly cashing them out on street corners (for 50 cents on the dollar) and using the proceeds for illegal drugs and prostitution. Washington state Sen. Mike Carrell complained: "Dozens of workers at DSHS [the Department of Social and Health Services] have reported numerous unpunished cases of fraud to me. They have told me that DSHS management has allowed these things to happen, and in some cases actively restricted fraud investigations."

• Earlier this month, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel revealed that Wisconsin food-stamp recipients routinely sell their benefit cards on Facebook. The investigation also found that "nearly 2,000 recipients claimed they lost their card six or more times in 2010 and requested replacements." USDA rules require that lost cards be speedily replaced. The Wisconsin Policy Research Institute concluded: "Prosecutors have simply stopped prosecuting the vast majority of [food-stamp] fraud cases in virtually all counties, including the one with the most recipients, Milwaukee."

• Troy Hutson, the chief of Washington state's food-stamp program, resigned in April after a Seattle television station revealed that some food-stamp recipients were selling their cards on Craigslist or brazenly cashing them out on street corners (for 50 cents on the dollar) and using the proceeds for illegal drugs and prostitution. Washington state Sen. Mike Carrell complained: "Dozens of workers at DSHS [the Department of Social and Health Services] have reported numerous unpunished cases of fraud to me. They have told me that DSHS management has allowed these things to happen, and in some cases actively restricted fraud investigations."

"The Obama administration is far more enthusiastic about boosting food-stamp enrollment than about preventing fraud. Thanks in part to vigorous federally funded campaigns by nonprofit groups, the government's AmericaCorps service program, and other organizations urging people to accept government handouts, the number of food-stamp recipients has soared to 44 million from 26 million in 2007, and costs have more than doubled to $77 billion from $33 billion."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270...
Ex- El Paso resident

Las Cruces, NM

#31 Sep 9, 2011
u know im right wrote:
A couple with four screaming brats in line at Fiesta foods is paying for their basket full of unhealthy goodies with their state issued credit card. Both parents are covered in tattoos, including area codes, tear drops etc. He has his baggy shorts down around the crack of his azz, she has her "makeup" permanently installed. They have enough cash to purchase several 18 packs of Bud Light, but not apply any towards the insufficient balance in their "account". Items need to be re-scanned and deducted. The first to go is the meat and cheese. They need more so they take off the cereal. This leaves the basket full of mostly junk snack food.
This is why people on that kind of assistance need to be checked monthly. Profiling? You are darned right. It works.
And then because these "entitled" POSs choose to be irresponsible with their choices in life for them and their brats we as the taxpayers (thanks to dumbbama and dumbbama care) will get to pay for all their health care issues when they become sick from their poor choices for food, life style, excess consumption of alcohol, drug use and lazy sit on their AZZ and do nothing life style.

The problem with this country is no one wants to be responsible for themsleves (Government needs to provide everything for me with no contirbution on my part) but I still want all my freedoms and ability to make stupid and irresponsible decision with others paying for my mistakes.

This goes for the folks you saw at the store and for all the AHoles on Wall Street that acted irresponsible in making bad investiments for quick gains and then wanted the American taxpayer to bail them out.

Also goes for all the politicians and civil servants that were tasked with protecting America but allowed folks to break the rules on a continuous basis. The SEC (Wall street and banking), ATF (operation fast and furious) and the Department of the Interior minerals division (BP Deep Horizon) come to mind.

Since: Sep 11

Barberton, OH

#32 Sep 11, 2011
Fed Up in NM wrote:
<quoted text>Ok, so now not 'anyone receiving benefits' needs to be tested, only those that look like they are drug users or have been on welfare for their entire life. I still don't like the idea of accusing them of being druggies, but I guess that's better than wasting money testing everyone. BTW, not everyone who uses drugs fits that stereotype and not everyone who fits that stereotype uses drugs. But, maybe we do need to change the rules for new applicants. Set limits for how long a person can receive benefits or set a cap on how much they can receive.
And, no, I do not look like the 'druggie' image you presented.
I don't dress in the druggie image either. I'm white, wear jeans/ khakis(that fit) and polos. Not saying if you're not white you have no hope of never doing drugs(my fiance is black)its just a fact that I happen to be white. On to the point. I do think there should be limits on the duration of your benefits, but in this economy there's no way to predict anything. However, I live in Ohio where you must serve hours to keep your benefits. Whether it be community hours or spending hours at a super jobs center looking for a job and gaining assistance to get one. Like I said in my last post, there are people abusing the system. Until the system is gone, that will never happen. But people upset and complaining about the benefits system truly don't understand how hard it is to get them in the first place. My fiance is due with our 2nd child this month, but we haven't seen a Dr since the end of February. They cut off our Medicaid when I got a job(even though the company didn't have a health insurance plan) and now we have to play the waiting game since I was laid off in July. I can't even know the gender of my child because I got a low paying job? I'm 100% sure there's a druggie out there putting in no effort to better their life popping out a kid every year for a decade and benefits never went away. But thats life, my friend. S*** happens, but everyone needs to take care of their own issues and slowly things will return to how this country was meant to be. Users and abusers will never be gone, but we can sure as hell set the example and widen the gap between them and REAL people. Thank you for your time.

Since: Sep 11

Barberton, OH

#33 Sep 11, 2011
Typo- until the system is gone, they'll never be gone either. My main point is that no matter how many stipulations you put on something, people will find loopholes. Try telling Barry Bonds cheaters never prosper. 5 counts of perjury, illegal use of steroids on a federal level, and how ever many counts of being a water headed prick as you deem necessary. 0 jail time. You do the math. Never adds up quite right.

Since: Sep 08

Huntsville, AL

#34 Sep 11, 2011
Wrong wrote:
<quoted text>""Being a highschool, professional or college athlete means being subjected to drug tests." Why do you feel this is justified, fair, or even needed? "
Ask Roger Clemens and Tour De France riders if drug testing is needed for athletes?
As for your other BS, keep your head buried in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist.
The question was:" Why do you feel this is justified, fair, or even needed?" not what some jocks think.
Wrong

Los Alamos, NM

#35 Sep 11, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
<quoted text>
The question was:" Why do you feel this is justified, fair, or even needed?" not what some jocks think.
If you knew a effing thing, you would know that these two athletes were using performance-enhancing drugs. Hence, the comment to ask them. Stick to politics where you know even less!

Since: Sep 08

Huntsville, AL

#36 Sep 11, 2011
Wisconsin's 'food stamp' program 'FoodShare' is administered by the state and counties! Bovard left a hell of a lot out of the articles he cited in his propaganda piece in Murdock's WJS.

Glad to see Troy Hutson, was canned for his incompetence &/or attitude.

"Law enforcement and state officials are also investigating allegations that nine Milwaukee County employees stole at least $290,000 from FoodShare over the last five years. And the state is getting attention from federal officials and state auditors for what they say is overuse of private contractors [Governor's cronies?]in violation of federal rules." http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogrepo...

“Prosecutors have simply stopped prosecuting the vast majority of [food-stamp] fraud cases in virtually all counties, including the one with the most recipients, Milwaukee.”" Why is the Gov Walker allowing the prosecutors to act this irresponsibly?

Effects of Walker's austerity budget cuts:
"State and federal funding to counties for detecting fraud in programs, including FoodShare, fell from $1.8 million a year in 2008 to less than $200,000 in 2010. Funding was increased back to $750,000 this year.

• As funding for fraud investigations dropped, detection of overpayments due to outright fraud or mistakes by recipients fell sharply. The number of fraud cases uncovered dropped to 36 last year from 95 in 2008. Cases of client error - considered mistakes, not fraud - dropped from $2.4 million to $1.4 million over the same period....
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogrepo...

"State officials, who run program enrollment in Milwaukee County, examine some lost card claims and say there are legitimate reasons for most of them, such as recipients who are homeless or have mental illnesses, said Ed Kamin, chief executive officer of the state-run Milwaukee Enrollment Services.' Ibid.

Since: Sep 08

Huntsville, AL

#37 Sep 11, 2011
Wrong wrote:
<quoted text>If you knew a effing thing, you would know that these two athletes were using performance-enhancing drugs. Hence, the comment to ask them. Stick to politics where you know even less!
So what?
Wrong

Los Alamos, NM

#38 Sep 11, 2011
PlacitasRoy wrote:
Wisconsin's 'food stamp' program 'FoodShare' is administered by the state and counties! Bovard left a hell of a lot out of the articles he cited in his propaganda piece in Murdock's WJS.
Glad to see Troy Hutson, was canned for his incompetence &/or attitude.
"Law enforcement and state officials are also investigating allegations that nine Milwaukee County employees stole at least $290,000 from FoodShare over the last five years. And the state is getting attention from federal officials and state auditors for what they say is overuse of private contractors [Governor's cronies?]in violation of federal rules." http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogrepo...
“Prosecutors have simply stopped prosecuting the vast majority of [food-stamp] fraud cases in virtually all counties, including the one with the most recipients, Milwaukee.”" Why is the Gov Walker allowing the prosecutors to act this irresponsibly?
Effects of Walker's austerity budget cuts:
"State and federal funding to counties for detecting fraud in programs, including FoodShare, fell from $1.8 million a year in 2008 to less than $200,000 in 2010. Funding was increased back to $750,000 this year.
• As funding for fraud investigations dropped, detection of overpayments due to outright fraud or mistakes by recipients fell sharply. The number of fraud cases uncovered dropped to 36 last year from 95 in 2008. Cases of client error - considered mistakes, not fraud - dropped from $2.4 million to $1.4 million over the same period....
http://www.jsonline.com/watchdog/watchdogrepo...
"State officials, who run program enrollment in Milwaukee County, examine some lost card claims and say there are legitimate reasons for most of them, such as recipients who are homeless or have mental illnesses, said Ed Kamin, chief executive officer of the state-run Milwaukee Enrollment Services.' Ibid.
And those nine Milwaukee County employees are all driving Escalades. You are so FOS it's running out of your ears.

“Get over yourself...”

Since: Jan 08

You're not that important

#39 Sep 12, 2011
Wrong wrote:
<quoted text>"• Earlier this month, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel revealed that Wisconsin food-stamp recipients routinely sell their benefit cards on Facebook. The investigation also found that "nearly 2,000 recipients claimed they lost their card six or more times in 2010 and requested replacements." USDA rules require that lost cards be speedily replaced. The Wisconsin Policy Research Institute concluded: "Prosecutors have simply stopped prosecuting the vast majority of [food-stamp] fraud cases in virtually all counties, including the one with the most recipients, Milwaukee."
• Troy Hutson, the chief of Washington state's food-stamp program, resigned in April after a Seattle television station revealed that some food-stamp recipients were selling their cards on Craigslist or brazenly cashing them out on street corners (for 50 cents on the dollar) and using the proceeds for illegal drugs and prostitution. Washington state Sen. Mike Carrell complained: "Dozens of workers at DSHS [the Department of Social and Health Services] have reported numerous unpunished cases of fraud to me. They have told me that DSHS management has allowed these things to happen, and in some cases actively restricted fraud investigations."
• Earlier this month, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel revealed that Wisconsin food-stamp recipients routinely sell their benefit cards on Facebook. The investigation also found that "nearly 2,000 recipients claimed they lost their card six or more times in 2010 and requested replacements." USDA rules require that lost cards be speedily replaced. The Wisconsin Policy Research Institute concluded: "Prosecutors have simply stopped prosecuting the vast majority of [food-stamp] fraud cases in virtually all counties, including the one with the most recipients, Milwaukee."
• Troy Hutson, the chief of Washington state's food-stamp program, resigned in April after a Seattle television station revealed that some food-stamp recipients were selling their cards on Craigslist or brazenly cashing them out on street corners (for 50 cents on the dollar) and using the proceeds for illegal drugs and prostitution. Washington state Sen. Mike Carrell complained: "Dozens of workers at DSHS [the Department of Social and Health Services] have reported numerous unpunished cases of fraud to me. They have told me that DSHS management has allowed these things to happen, and in some cases actively restricted fraud investigations."
"The Obama administration is far more enthusiastic about boosting food-stamp enrollment than about preventing fraud. Thanks in part to vigorous federally funded campaigns by nonprofit groups, the government's AmericaCorps service program, and other organizations urging people to accept government handouts, the number of food-stamp recipients has soared to 44 million from 26 million in 2007, and costs have more than doubled to $77 billion from $33 billion."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270...
Asking for a photo ID will put a stop to selling food stamp cards much quicker than a drug test.
Aggie

Las Cruces, NM

#40 Sep 12, 2011
I'm computer illiterate. Does anybody know...if I have a router on my modem and someone else is logged in to my isp but on their own computer, and they're doing something illegal online, will it get traced to me???
Answer

Los Alamos, NM

#41 Sep 12, 2011
Aggie wrote:
I'm computer illiterate. Does anybody know...if I have a router on my modem and someone else is logged in to my isp but on their own computer, and they're doing something illegal online, will it get traced to me???
Make sure your Wifi router is secure.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/130330/how_to_...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
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.

Bill Richardson Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Hillary is best candidate for U.S. president (Feb '08) Jul 27 Responsibilty 938
News Once again, Hispanics were considered for VP. O... Jul '16 All For Show 1
News Republican Martinez claims NM governor's seat (Nov '10) Jul '16 Lorenzo 247
News 'Double dippers' fought legislation (May '09) Apr '16 concerned citizen 56
News Who still takes global warming seriously? (Jan '10) Jan '16 Brian_G 30,925
News Janway: Plutonium has already been disposed at ... (Sep '15) Sep '15 texinnewmex 2
News Charges against official fuel state's corruptio... (Sep '15) Sep '15 fatbacksx 1
More from around the web