Romney's 0 percent black support

[Anne]

John from Texas wrote:

<quoted text>
These government "entitlement" program are not the problem. they are necessary for those that truly need them. The problem is those able bodied people that lie and cheat their way into getting them. It's a damn shame. I have met a few of these freeloaders. More oversight is needed to ensure these scumbags don't get undeserved handouts. Sounds expensive, but will be cheaper and more efficient in the long run. There is nothing wrong with helping out our fellow human beings. I think your Jesus Christ would agree.

The problem is not these programs, but the fact that some folks try to use public assistance in order to support a lifestyle. But that doesn't serve as an excuse to eliminate them, as people's lives can turn on a dime. I believe in a carrot-and-stick approach, which means insisting on things like job training and/or education to prepare for jobs with pay and benefits that outweigh any benefit welfare offers in return for continuing assistance. The stick would be reducing or denying additional monies to support irresponsible behavior, such as continuing to have babies while on welfare. So, better oversight is infinitely preferable to eliminating them.

[senior citizen]

Anne wrote:

<quoted text>
The problem is not these programs, but the fact that some folks try to use public assistance in order to support a lifestyle. But that doesn't serve as an excuse to eliminate them, as people's lives can turn on a dime. I believe in a carrot-and-stick approach, which means insisting on things like job training and/or education to prepare for jobs with pay and benefits that outweigh any benefit welfare offers in return for continuing assistance. The stick would be reducing or denying additional monies to support irresponsible behavior, such as continuing to have babies while on welfare. So, better oversight is infinitely preferable to eliminating them.

When you go to apply for a job you have to take a drug test and I believe a drug test should be required before you receive assistance of any type from the government.

[Anne]

senior citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
When you go to apply for a job you have to take a drug test and I believe a drug test should be required before you receive assistance of any type from the government.

Would that apply to folks who use food stamps in order to supplement low-paying jobs or folks who lost jobs through no fault of theirs? What about young teenage first-time mothers? It seems doubtful that honest folks who are struggling against great odds or young women still in puberty would be indulging in drugs. It's not to say that that doesn't everhappen, but I believe that Governor Rick Scott of Florida has implemented this measure, and that it is one of many factors in why people want to vote him out of office at the first opportunity. I have a problem with kicking folks who are already down, although if someone shows some indation of using drugs they should be tested.

[Hill Billion]

senior citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree with you 100%- you hit the nail right on the head with your comment. Those of us that have worked all of our lives do not like to support those that will not get off the couch or the ones that think you owe them something and are not willing help themselves. I am willing to help anyone who will try to help themselves. There is a man that works 9 hours a day at a convenient store and still can not make ends meet and we get him gift cards from the grocery store to help keep him going. With gas going up and electric there is not much left when you make minimum wages. Yes, my Jesus would agree.

Stop your uneducated bullshyt rants! You do know that 1/2 of the families in this country that receive food stamps, HAVE A JOB!!! You knew that right? You dumbazz!

[WasteWater]

senior citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
When you go to apply for a job you have to take a drug test and I believe a drug test should be required before you receive assistance of any type from the government.

So in other words, you want more government intrusion into people's lives. You want a bigger government.

Does this make sense?

[senior citizen]

Anne wrote:

<quoted text>
Would that apply to folks who use food stamps in order to supplement low-paying jobs or folks who lost jobs through no fault of theirs? What about young teenage first-time mothers? It seems doubtful that honest folks who are struggling against great odds or young women still in puberty would be indulging in drugs. It's not to say that that doesn't everhappen, but I believe that Governor Rick Scott of Florida has implemented this measure, and that it is one of many factors in why people want to vote him out of office at the first opportunity. I have a problem with kicking folks who are already down, although if someone shows some indation of using drugs they should be tested.

If people have jobs the drug test would not apply since it already had been applied when they got their job. I am willing to help anyone who will help themselves and if they got a job with minimun wages then yes they need help. The money that some have gotten on their debit card from the gov have been used at Disney World and in casinos. This has been all over the news here in the middle west and the people are not happy to see their tax payer dollars being spent foolishly when it is needed for food.

[senior citizen]

Hill Billion wrote:

<quoted text>
Stop your uneducated bullshyt rants! You do know that 1/2 of the families in this country that receive food stamps, HAVE A JOB!!! You knew that right? You dumbazz!

POTTY MOUTH that is NOT A TRUE STATEMENT. Do you have any idea how many people are out of a job???? What country are you living in?????

[senior citizen]

WasteWater wrote:

<quoted text>
So in other words, you want more government intrusion into people's lives. You want a bigger government.
Does this make sense?

How do you figure that would make the government bigger??? The system currently is in place for the aid and to add one more step to test for drugs could be done at the time of getting the help. Those that have a job would not have to take the test since they already had one when they started work. Most places check for drugs at random in todays world. This would be saving tax dollars and giving HELP to people who use it as it should be for food, gas, lights, water, home, and NOT FOR DRUGS.

[WasteWater]

senior citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
How do you figure that would make the government bigger??? The system currently is in place for the aid and to add one more step to test for drugs could be done at the time of getting the help. Those that have a job would not have to take the test since they already had one when they started work. Most places check for drugs at random in todays world. This would be saving tax dollars and giving HELP to people who use it as it should be for food, gas, lights, water, home, and NOT FOR DRUGS.

Drug testing requires more bureaucrats. Drug tests are expensive and accomplish very little.

[Jess Bendova]

barak obama is george bush jr. with a deep suntan. the biggest difference between obama & romney is skin color. when will people learn the donkeys & the elephants have the exact same agenda. if anything meaningful could be acheived through voting it would`ve been made illegal long ago. 52 people telling 48 people what to do IS NOT FREEDOM. Democracy is a scam.

[senior citizen]

Hill Billion wrote:

<quoted text>
Actually it is TRUE….you’re just too uneducated to know that. Let me help you.
Findings: General Characteristics
Most SNAP participants were children or
elderly. Nearly half (47 percent) were under age
18 and another 8 percent were age 60 or older.
Working-age women represented 28 percent of the
caseload, while working-age men represented 17
percent.
Many SNAP participants had jobs. Nearly 30
percent of SNAP households had earnings in 2010,
and 41 percent of all SNAP participants lived in a
household with earnings. For most of these
households, earnings were the primary source of
income.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/ora/MENU/Published/sn...
Educate yourself!
(or just shut up)

Look at the total PICTURE:

http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2012/08/10/wel...
Guess how many people are now on welfare?
The numbers keep going up. With a dismal economy and Barack Obama's encouragement of people to keep on programs like food stamps, the increase in welfare recipients has been dramatic. According to the Census Bureau, there are over 100 million people on welfare.

As shown in the chart presented by the Republican staff of the Senate Budget Committee, about 10 million new people were added to the welfare rolls in just the two years from 2009 to 2011. AND... the total number of 108,000,000 does NOT include those receiving Social Security or Medicare.

Food stamps and Medicaid make up a large--and growing--chunk of the more than 100 million recipients. "Among the major means tested welfare programs, since 2000 Medicaid has increased from 34 million people to 54 million in 2011 and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or food stamps) from 17 million to 45 million in 2011," says the Senate Budget Committee. "Spending on food stamps alone is projected to reach $800 billion over the next decade."

What a mess America is in.

Read more at the Weekly Standard

[WasteWater]

senior citizen wrote:

<quoted text>
Look at the total PICTURE:
http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2012/08/10/wel...
Guess how many people are now on welfare?
The numbers keep going up. With a dismal economy and Barack Obama's encouragement of people to keep on programs like food stamps, the increase in welfare recipients has been dramatic. According to the Census Bureau, there are over 100 million people on welfare.
As shown in the chart presented by the Republican staff of the Senate Budget Committee, about 10 million new people were added to the welfare rolls in just the two years from 2009 to 2011. AND... the total number of 108,000,000 does NOT include those receiving Social Security or Medicare.
Food stamps and Medicaid make up a large--and growing--chunk of the more than 100 million recipients. "Among the major means tested welfare programs, since 2000 Medicaid has increased from 34 million people to 54 million in 2011 and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or food stamps) from 17 million to 45 million in 2011," says the Senate Budget Committee. "Spending on food stamps alone is projected to reach $800 billion over the next decade."
What a mess America is in.
Read more at the Weekly Standard

Weekly Standard?

You must be kidding.

Who reads that tripe?