The Real Mitt Romney

[ZenGum]

I'd thought of that, but Adak seems somewhat more mild-mannered than Merc. I'm pretty sure they're different.
And I'm pretty sure there is more than one devoted Republican supporter willing to relay Party talking points onto the internet.

[Adak]

Originally Posted by Griff

I think the assumption of evil intent by each side in the voter ID argument is interesting. It is most likely true on both sides. Republicans do want to disenfranchise the poor who won't have photo ID. They think they can absorb the collateral damage of old timers whose drivers licenses are expired, because they will be known at their polling station and not challenged. My Dad, a GOP voter, was in that position, it took an entire Saturday and a trip to Dunmore to get him an ID because my county in PA does picture ID's for limited hours once a week on Thursdays. Not exactly helpful to someone who needs a ride. Two evil parties, we have them. This time Obama is closer to the center and less evil so I may vote for him. The big issue coming is attacking Iran, unfortunately Obama has been seduced by power so either way we're bombing.

Jump up into the Iran nuclear thread I started, please.

You're quite wrong about the Republicans not wanting everyone to vote, though. Voting is the right of every citizen, and the more who exercise that right, the more that right is likely to produce a better democracy. It would be a great shame if somehow, our voting percentage fell way off. Terrible precedent for a democracy, imo.

I don't know where Bruce lives, but in So CA, you need a photo ID for just about anything that involves a monetary transaction, without cash. You want to buy something with a DEBIT card (no less) at Fry's Electronics - you show your driver's license. You want a Blockbuster card, you show your driver's license, etc. You want to cash a check at a store, you show your driver's license. If the purchase amount is small, it may be waived, but most times, it's required.

Bought some tools awhile back in Sears. They wanted to see my driver's license, of course. Then they requested my SS number! I told them they could get it, but only if they were going to contribute to my SS account. The clerk had to call over her supervisor.

As far as welfare goes, I've seen both sides of it. No doubt it's useful and a good thing, but it's also massively abused. Free school lunch programs are just one example. In CA, it started out with just the needy getting free lunches. Over the years, the people running it have let it be known that they aren't going to check your income requirements. I don't know if they ever did that check, but if so, they have stopped doing it.

Now the percentage of kids getting a free lunch every day has soared to over 90% of the kids, in some schools. These aren't all poor kids - these are mostly kids who were encouraged to get enrolled with their parents, in the free school lunch program. And I've never seen a single student who was ON the free school lunch program, who was EVER taken off - for any reason.

My favorite however, was a spinster we worked with for many years. Our business made her a millionaire, (and then some), over a period of about 18 years.

After she reached "senior" age, she would ask me to drive her down to the community center, every two weeks or so, to pick up her bags of free food, for low income seniors. By then, she was a millionaire a few times over, with substantial income every month. How do I know? We did her tax returns.

Which is one of the big problems with most welfare programs. They have (typically, in the past), had *NO* incentive for progress to get the person back into the work force, and off the public dole. Quite the contrary. Welfare recipients are viewed as "job security", by those working for the program itself. It's a lot of "nod nod, wink wink, and once a worker, now a welfare recipient, by the power of my pen".

They're getting a bit better about the incentive to get them off welfare, but that's only for some programs - not most. Once you're on it, you stay on it.

That's why we can't get a national healthcare system that works, and that we can afford. WAY too much fraud and abuse from both doctors (medical workers), and patients abusing ("working") the system, to make it affordable.

I haven't seen Bruce's welfare links yet, but I look forward to seeing them. Thank you Bruce.

I have only one handle, for the forum, btw.

[infinite monkey]

Adak is much more reasonable and eloquent than merc.

But he also shares that trait: you just said a lot so I'm going to repeat everything I said before but leave out my gaffes that were pointed out to me.

Really have a hard time believing he was asked for his ssn at a hardware store.
Everything I do at work ties into a person's ssn, and we are still very discreet about asking for it. Its a big no-no in the era of identity theft.

I think adak lives in 1957. But he has a time machine.

[DanaC]

I was somewhat taken aback by the use of the word 'spinster'... but posting from 1957 would probaby explain this.

[Stormieweather]

I have a few problems with Adak's statements.

First, a community food program does not usually ask for financial information to prove you "need" their services. If you are there, you usually need it. Often, they require that you help them or the community in some way as "payment" for the food package. Been there, done that, in my poverty days. I'd much rather do something to earn that food than be given it, outright.

Secondly, asking for a SS# in order to make a purchase these days is a BIG no-no. If anyone (other than insurance or creditors) ask me that, they don't get my business.

Thirdly, as a parent with two children attending public schools, I can testify that it is absolutely not true that 90% of the kids get free lunch. In order to get reduced or free lunch, you have to fill out and sign a financial need application form. According to the FDOE data report, the actual number is 41%.( FLDOE free lunch). That actually ties right in with the number of children living in low-income families - 44% (Child Poverty). In my poverty days, my kids got free lunch. Now that I'm no longer unemployed and poor, they do not.

Additionally, as a former poor person, I can absolutely state that asking for and receiving "aid" is the most humiliating and degrading thing I've ever done. The very moment I could manage to make ends meet without it, I dropped it like a hot potato. There was absolutely none of that *wink wink nudge nudge* that you are referring to...more like, you lazy, stupid, dumb person who is getting a free ride while I, the person who signs off on your aid, is working hard and earning mere peanuts. Let me see how many ways I can make you feel subhuman to compensate for my disdain!!

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Adak

I don't know where Bruce lives, but in So CA, you need a photo ID for just about anything that involves a monetary transaction, without cash. You want to buy something with a DEBIT card (no less) at Fry's Electronics - you show your driver's license. You want a Blockbuster card, you show your driver's license, etc. You want to cash a check at a store, you show your driver's license. If the purchase amount is small, it may be waived, but most times, it's required.

PA, the civilized rednecks.
Perhaps they require a license (photo ID) in your neighborhood because you're hard on the Mexican border, and of course they would have to make it a uniform policy.

I haven't seen Bruce's welfare links yet, but I look forward to seeing them. Thank you Bruce.

Say what? Who was your lackey last year?
I, unlike you, provided plenty of links for my claims about Reagan's welfare myths. If you have more questions you can damn well do your own research... or just keep spouting Karl Rove's bullshit.
I have no delusions about trying to sway you, your soul is lost. I'm posting to protect our gentle readers from your misinformation campaign.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

I'm posting to protect our gentle readers from your misinformation campaign.

[Adak]

I, unlike you, provided plenty of links for my claims about Reagan's welfare myths.

I'm in California, and Reagan was our Governor before he ran for President, so I don't have to rely on hearsay, from others.

Also, I've worked with welfare housing and school policies, for many years. I've seen how it works, and how it frequently leads to co-dependency:

The recipient has welfare benefits suitable to live with:

*If they get a job, they lose those benefits.

*the job would probably be a labor intensive type of work, and they
would earn low wages.

*If they subsequently lost their job, they would get some welfare benefits quickly, but have to wait a long time to get back their full welfare benefits, again.

So why should they work? They're risking a lot, just to maybe work at low wages. Maybe not full time.

The people who administer and provide support for these programs, will lose their jobs if the program stops. So it's in their best interest to enroll more people in their welfare program.

If you have more questions you can damn well do your own research... or just keep spouting Karl Rove's bullshit.
I have no delusions about trying to sway you, your soul is lost. I'm posting to protect our gentle readers from your misinformation campaign.

Why all the anger?

If Obama had any reasonable successes with his policies, I'd support him. As the first black President, I'd love to see him succeed. I was living in the Deep South during segregation. Yes, it was UGLY.

Problem is, Obama hung out with radicals in college (according to him), studied their ideology, and he's picked up a lot of their socialist ideas.

Some socialist ideas I'd like to see (National health care), but his policy to implement it, is absolutely a complete mindless farce.

His other economic policies are likewise, a disaster. You do know that this is the worst economic recovery in our history?

You can choose to believe Obama's rhetoric, or you can look around, read the stats from the non-partisan budget office, and choose to believe you own "lying" eyes.

There IS a reason, why Obama's budget has never been voted for, by ANYONE, in EITHER PARTY. That's how far out his economic policies are.

You can have your emotional tirade any way you want it, but the above is a FACT, and it won't go away, because you don't like it.

We've had a LOT of political polarization going on in recent years. That's something we MUST get past.

A good plan, is a good plan, no matter who came up with it. And vice-versa, as well.

All of these ad hominem attacks against our leaders, are leading us down the wrong road, to an unhappy destination.

If Obama had good policies and plans during his time in office, I'd be supporting him, but he did not, and does not. He may look smart and cool, and charming - but the President doesn't need to be cool, or charming, or even appear particularly smart. I don't give a rat's patootie whether he appears on The Tonight Show, or not.

He needs to lead us into wise policies and practices, across a broad spectrum of economic, social, and as Commander in Chief, military, matters.

And I don't need the damn EPA telling me I can't use plywood to build with, thank you very much!

[Trilby]

"Spinster" ?

[said in best Kensington Jewelers Elocution]

Oh, Adak, you're simply a caution!

DO try to come to BridlepathWoods for Christmas this year, darling. It simply won't be the same without you!

[Adak]

Originally Posted by Trilby

"Spinster" ?

[said in best Kensington Jewelers Elocution]

Oh, Adak, you're simply a caution!

DO try to come to BridlepathWoods for Christmas this year, darling. It simply won't be the same without you!

Don't make me pull out my full collection of 1950's vocabulary on ya!

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Adak

I'm in California, and Reagan was our Governor before he ran for President, so I don't have to rely on hearsay, from others.

I'm well aware of Ronny Raygun's history.

Also, I've worked with welfare housing and school policies, for many years. I've seen how it works, and how it frequently leads to co-dependency:
The recipient has welfare benefits suitable to live with:
*If they get a job, they lose those benefits.
*the job would probably be a labor intensive type of work, and they
would earn low wages.
*If they subsequently lost their job, they would get some welfare benefits quickly, but have to wait a long time to get back their full welfare benefits, again.
So why should they work? They're risking a lot, just to maybe work at low wages. Maybe not full time.
The people who administer and provide support for these programs, will lose their jobs if the program stops. So it's in their best interest to enroll more people in their welfare program.:

Yes this is a problem. In the beginning it was to help the destitute and to keep the ones that were deliberately made destitute by racism, from lashing out. As each subsequent generation passes, trapped in the welfare system, the greater the despair of escaping and less the stigma/embarrassment of being in the system. But I'd still bet most would rather have a job making a decent living wage. There's no quick way out of this mess, and the only slow way is education, as far as I can see.

Why all the anger?

Moi? I don't play well with others, and don't take orders from anyone. Yes, I will cut off my nose to spite my face.

If Obama had any reasonable successes with his policies, I'd support him. As the first black President, I'd love to see him succeed. I was living in the Deep South during segregation. Yes, it was UGLY.

Point of order... Mulatto.
Successes, we covered that.

Problem is, Obama hung out with radicals in college (according to him), studied their ideology, and he's picked up a lot of their socialist ideas.

I have it on good authority that he shit his diaper as a lad, I bet the White House staff has to do a lot of chair cleaning.

Some socialist ideas I'd like to see (National health care), but his policy to implement it, is absolutely a complete mindless farce.

Oh yes, he needed radical socialists to point out one of our biggest domestic problems is we are getting raped of health care. Not by doctors, but Drug, appliance, and insurance companies, along with for profit hospital conglomerates. No way he could have know that without those radicals.

His other economic policies are likewise, a disaster. You do know that this is the worst economic recovery in our history?

Not implemented policies are to blame. OK

You can choose to believe Obama's rhetoric, or you can look around, read the stats from the non-partisan budget office, and choose to believe you own "lying" eyes.

Civics 101, congress controls the money.

There IS a reason, why Obama's budget has never been voted for, by ANYONE, in EITHER PARTY. That's how far out his economic policies are.

Parties don't vote, the house votes or doesn't... Boehner's house.

You can have your emotional tirade any way you want it, but the above is a FACT, and it won't go away, because you don't like it.

Statements like that cause...

We've had a LOT of political polarization going on in recent years. That's something we MUST get past.

A good plan, is a good plan, no matter who came up with it. And vice-versa, as well.

Yes, I know, and the Romney/Ryan plan is outrageous.

All of these ad hominem attacks against our leaders, are leading us down the wrong road, to an unhappy destination.

Tell O’Reilly, Hannity, Cavuto, Beck, Limbaugh, FOX, ad infinitum.

If Obama had good policies and plans during his time in office, I'd be supporting him, but he did not, and does not. He may look smart and cool, and charming - but the President doesn't need to be cool, or charming, or even appear particularly smart. I don't give a rat's patootie whether he appears on The Tonight Show, or not.

He needs to lead us into wise policies and practices, across a broad spectrum of economic, social, and as Commander in Chief, military, matters.

You are entitled to your opinion, but the fact that you are willing to buy into the Romney/Ryan plan for the domination of America by the 1% tells me you're sadly misguided.

And I don't need the damn EPA telling me I can't use plywood to build with, thank you very much!

They have? Cite please.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

I'd thought of that, but Adak seems somewhat more mild-mannered than Merc. I'm pretty sure they're different.
And I'm pretty sure there is more than one devoted Republican supporter willing to relay Party talking points onto the internet.

Originally Posted by Adak

Don't make me pull out my full collection of 1950's vocabulary on ya!

... but come to think of it, where is UG these days?

[piercehawkeye45]

In southern California....

[Lamplighter]

Ahhh, southern California... that hot bed, birthplace of liberal radicals like Sam Yorty.

Back when the oil industry had starting to drill wells in LA harbor,
Mayor Yorty pushed through a zoning change over a weekend,
and the harbor was restricted to residential housing

... it stopped the drilling overnight !

[Adak]

Hang out with radicals In college? No. By the time you're in Columbia or Harvard law, you should know better.

The EPA had to back down on the plywood/oriented strand board issue, because they got a lot of flack about it, and there is no real substitute for these building materials.

Yes, they give off some volatile gases, but so do tires. We still need them both.

Tell O’Reilly, Hannity, Cavuto, Beck, Limbaugh, FOX, ad infinitum.

I guess ad hominem attacks have become the political scene mainstay, and general entertainment, as well. That stinks. I can't see one good thing coming out of that practice.

The House was controlled by the Democrats for the first two years of Obama's term. Nobody would vote for Obama's budget then, either.

Somehow, we have to learn to live within our means - or at least close to it. Obama's policies are so fixated on over-spending, it just boggles the mind. You may believe that a monetary crises could not hit this country, but it can, and it has happened before. If we keep spending a Trillion! dollars more than we earn, we will definitely experience a bigger crises than any we have known before.

Socialism works fine, until the money runs out. I doubt our chowder heads in Washington could make it work right, but it is possible, if you are well set up for it.

We are not well set up for it, however. Quite the contrary - and our politicians are nowhere near smart enough to lead us to that ephemeral goal.