Should Welfare be a Disqualification for Voting?

[tinydancer]

No one ever should be denied the right to vote. And I have debated that some should but that is in a debate only. Talking academic.

 

[tinydancer]

I've been rich and I've been poor. Which status allows me to vote or not?

 

[Faun]

Should welfare be a disqualification for voting?

Should corporations that receive government contracts, tax breaks, subsidies, bailouts, and favorable loans be barred from donating to political action committees?

Should public employee unions be allowed to donate to political action committees?

Do all of these amount to a conflict of interest with the American taxpayer?

No, but I wouldn't mind seeing Republicans banned from voting.

If this was to happen then who would pay for all you food?

I pay for my own food now and would continue to do so even if Republicans were banned from voting.

What a silly question .

 

[rightwinger]

I'm not oversimplifying

I am offering Republicans a way to pick up votes in impoverished areas.......bring in jobs

That is supposed to be the key for being Republican. They create jobs

But Republucans do not even have offices in poor areas. Their candidates do not show their faces in poor communities. Get the poor used to the idea that if they want jobs.....Republicans will deliver

Instead , Republucans just bitch about free stuff

Which is annoying and idiotic.

And leads to democratic victories at the polls.

But what is reprehensible and un-Constitutional is the hateful, ignorant notion maintained by many on the right that those receiving public assistance, or those who are not property owners, should have their fundamental right to vote denied.

It isn't hateful to suggest that it is scary to see people on welfare voting for people who promise more welfare. Even if you do blatantly rob the rich to pay for it you can't keep growing the gravy train forever. There have to be limits.

What people on here are suggesting is in their opinion one method for limiting that cycle. They see a problem and are suggesting a solution. Is it the right solution? Maybe not. It definitely isn't a popular solution though which means it will never get off the ground in anything but hypothetical discussions. At least not anytime soon.

Or scary to suggest that the rich will vote for those who promise lower taxes
Or the farmers will vote for those who promise more subsidies
Or the elderly will vote for those who promise to increase social security
Or the young will vote for those who promise scholarships

Who will be left to vote?

 

[Lumpy 1]

When I pointed out that Republicans failed to pass oversight while they controlled Congress whereas Democrats did pass oversight when they took over, you claimed I was wrong....

.... so why am I still waiting for you to prove it???

Believe me it's not all that hard when public testimony speaks for itself.

September 2008

Rep. Arthur Davis, whose testimony is found above in October 2004, now admits Democrats were in error: "Like a lot of my Democratic colleagues I was too slow to appreciate the recklessness of Fannie and Freddie. I defended their efforts to encourage affordable homeownership when in retrospect I should have heeded the concerns raised by their regulator in 2004. Frankly, I wish my Democratic colleagues would admit when it comes to Fannie and Freddie, we were wrong."

Archived-Articles: Why the Mortgage Crisis Happened

You didn't answer the first time, but who knows, maybe you'll answer this time ... ?

Remind me again ... which party was in control of Congress in 2004?

Damn ... you're ignorant

How long have Democrats been protecting Fannie & Freddie while this problem developed and denied the obvious crisis when it became pathetically evident that the American homeowner/taxpayer was about to get screwed over?

Don't bother answering, you're an idiot...

 

[Faun]

Believe me it's not all that hard when public testimony speaks for itself.

September 2008

Rep. Arthur Davis, whose testimony is found above in October 2004, now admits Democrats were in error: "Like a lot of my Democratic colleagues I was too slow to appreciate the recklessness of Fannie and Freddie. I defended their efforts to encourage affordable homeownership when in retrospect I should have heeded the concerns raised by their regulator in 2004. Frankly, I wish my Democratic colleagues would admit when it comes to Fannie and Freddie, we were wrong."

Archived-Articles: Why the Mortgage Crisis Happened

You didn't answer the first time, but who knows, maybe you'll answer this time ... ?

Remind me again ... which party was in control of Congress in 2004?

Damn ... you're ignorant

How long have Democrats been protecting Fannie & Freddie while this problem developed and denied the obvious crisis when it became pathetically evident that the American homeowner/taxpayer was about to get screwed over?

Don't bother answering, you're an idiot...

You poor, retarded, rightie. When did I ever deny Democrats were speaking out in favor of Favor of Fannie & Freddie? Where did I ever say Democrats were on the right side of the issue prior to taking over Congress?

I point out you're retarded because you're inferring I believed either of those are true simply because I highlight the fact that it was Republicans, and not Democrats, who were in control of the Congress back then; and it was Republicans who failed to pass oversight of the GSE's.

 

[DiamondDave]

Which is annoying and idiotic.

And leads to democratic victories at the polls.

But what is reprehensible and un-Constitutional is the hateful, ignorant notion maintained by many on the right that those receiving public assistance, or those who are not property owners, should have their fundamental right to vote denied.

It isn't hateful to suggest that it is scary to see people on welfare voting for people who promise more welfare. Even if you do blatantly rob the rich to pay for it you can't keep growing the gravy train forever. There have to be limits.

What people on here are suggesting is in their opinion one method for limiting that cycle. They see a problem and are suggesting a solution. Is it the right solution? Maybe not. It definitely isn't a popular solution though which means it will never get off the ground in anything but hypothetical discussions. At least not anytime soon.

Or scary to suggest that the rich will vote for those who promise lower taxes
Or the farmers will vote for those who promise more subsidies
Or the elderly will vote for those who promise to increase social security
Or the young will vote for those who promise scholarships

Who will be left to vote?

And yet conservatives support equal flat tax rates that would have no difference between anyone, and a balanced budget to plan for tax rates that are indeed lower.. and for cutting all subsidies.. and for phasing out social security for younger persons so that they may invest on their own and not reply on government and have that expenditure... and there is no charge of the government to provide scholarships or any payment for education of any adult...

Go fuck yourself, again

 

[Foxfyre]

Which is annoying and idiotic.

And leads to democratic victories at the polls.

But what is reprehensible and un-Constitutional is the hateful, ignorant notion maintained by many on the right that those receiving public assistance, or those who are not property owners, should have their fundamental right to vote denied.

It isn't hateful to suggest that it is scary to see people on welfare voting for people who promise more welfare. Even if you do blatantly rob the rich to pay for it you can't keep growing the gravy train forever. There have to be limits.

What people on here are suggesting is in their opinion one method for limiting that cycle. They see a problem and are suggesting a solution. Is it the right solution? Maybe not. It definitely isn't a popular solution though which means it will never get off the ground in anything but hypothetical discussions. At least not anytime soon.

Or scary to suggest that the rich will vote for those who promise lower taxes
Or the farmers will vote for those who promise more subsidies
Or the elderly will vote for those who promise to increase social security
Or the young will vote for those who promise scholarships

Who will be left to vote?

Everybody if we make it unconstitutional for Congress, the President, or the bureaucrats to pass out any freebies to anybody. . , .

or

Everybody but the welfare recipients if we require everybody else to pay a flat tax on their earnings so that everybody feels the consequences of all those freebies.

 

[rightwinger]

It isn't hateful to suggest that it is scary to see people on welfare voting for people who promise more welfare. Even if you do blatantly rob the rich to pay for it you can't keep growing the gravy train forever. There have to be limits.

What people on here are suggesting is in their opinion one method for limiting that cycle. They see a problem and are suggesting a solution. Is it the right solution? Maybe not. It definitely isn't a popular solution though which means it will never get off the ground in anything but hypothetical discussions. At least not anytime soon.

Or scary to suggest that the rich will vote for those who promise lower taxes
Or the farmers will vote for those who promise more subsidies
Or the elderly will vote for those who promise to increase social security
Or the young will vote for those who promise scholarships

Who will be left to vote?

And yet conservatives support equal flat tax rates that would have no difference between anyone, and a balanced budget to plan for tax rates that are indeed lower.. and for cutting all subsidies.. and for phasing out social security for younger persons so that they may invest on their own and not reply on government and have that expenditure... and there is no charge of the government to provide scholarships or any payment for education of any adult...

Go fuck yourself, again

Way to go.....you just hit for the cycle

0 for 5

No wonder you guys can't get elected

 

[Contumacious]

A Conservative plan dreamed up by the Heritage Foundation.

And enacted by the Socialist Caucus led by Harry Reid (D-USSR)

.

I had no idea the Heritage Foundation was socialist. Who knew?

Their concept was a socialist one.

But last time I checked the heritage foundation does not enact laws.

.

 

[Contumacious]

. There is a concept of the spirit of the law, and prohibiting the poor and needy from voting is not in line with the spirit of the law.

Is forcing the taxpayers and producers to feed and insure the parasites not in line with the spirit of the law?

Is the welfare/warfare police state policy of enslaving the taxpayers and producers in line with the spirit of the law?

.

 

[Faun]

And enacted by the Socialist Caucus led by Harry Reid (D-USSR)

.

I had no idea the Heritage Foundation was socialist. Who knew?

Their concept was a socialist one.

But last time I checked the heritage foundation does not enact laws.

.

So the Heritage Foundation is socialist then. Thanks for that pearl of wisdom. It highlights my belief that nutty righties think everyone left of Joseph McCarthy is a Socialist.

 

[Kosh]

I had no idea the Heritage Foundation was socialist. Who knew?

Their concept was a socialist one.

But last time I checked the heritage foundation does not enact laws.

.

So the Heritage Foundation is socialist then. Thanks for that pearl of wisdom. It highlights my belief that nutty righties think everyone left of Joseph McCarthy is a Socialist.

So what links/proof do have to back up that far left assertion?

Come on now you demand this from others, why not practice what you preach.

 

[Faun]

Their concept was a socialist one.

But last time I checked the heritage foundation does not enact laws.

.

So the Heritage Foundation is socialist then. Thanks for that pearl of wisdom. It highlights my belief that nutty righties think everyone left of Joseph McCarthy is a Socialist.

So what links/proof do have to back up that far left assertion?

Come on now you demand this from others, why not practice what you preach.

Just how nuts are you? Last time you challenged me for a link to prove myself, I gave you one and you ran away rather than respond to it. Why on Earth would I give you another one until you respond to the last one I provided?

Since you refused to respond to the last one, the only logical conclusion I can reach is that you either didn't look at it or you read it and saw that I was right.

 

[The T]

So the Heritage Foundation is socialist then. Thanks for that pearl of wisdom. It highlights my belief that nutty righties think everyone left of Joseph McCarthy is a Socialist.

So what links/proof do have to back up that far left assertion?

Come on now you demand this from others, why not practice what you preach.

Just how nuts are you? Last time you challenged me for a link to prove myself, I gave you one and you ran away rather than respond to it. Why on Earth would I give you another one until you respond to the last one I provided?

Since you refused to respond to the last one, the only logical conclusion I can reach is that you either didn't look at it or you read it and saw that I was right.

Just like YOUR assertion that Obama NEVER said employment would be kept below 8% with his stimulus? Correct? YOU are a DRONE...a DITZ.

 

[The T]

And enacted by the Socialist Caucus led by Harry Reid (D-USSR)

.

I had no idea the Heritage Foundation was socialist. Who knew?

Their concept was a socialist one.

But last time I checked the heritage foundation does not enact laws.

.

Isn't it amazing how the LEFT in order to prove their point will assign legislative or other POWERS to those that don't posses it?

 

[Faun]

So what links/proof do have to back up that far left assertion?

Come on now you demand this from others, why not practice what you preach.

Just how nuts are you? Last time you challenged me for a link to prove myself, I gave you one and you ran away rather than respond to it. Why on Earth would I give you another one until you respond to the last one I provided?

Since you refused to respond to the last one, the only logical conclusion I can reach is that you either didn't look at it or you read it and saw that I was right.

Just like YOUR assertion that Obama NEVER said employment would be kept below 8% with his stimulus? Correct? YOU are a DRONE...a DITZ.

Now you're lying about what I said. I didn't say he didn't "say" it. I said he didn't "promise" it.

Really ... is it my fault you rightards are too fucking stupid to understand that providing an "estimate" is not making a "promise?"

That would be like Auburn's quarterback saying yesterday ... in my estimation, Auburn will win ... and then today, you call him a liar, saying he broke a promise.

 

[The T]

Their concept was a socialist one.

But last time I checked the heritage foundation does not enact laws.

.

Isn't it amazing how the LEFT in order to prove their point will assign legislative or other POWERS to those that don't posses it?

More nuttiness from the loony right ... Democrats pass the Heritage Foundation's individual mandated healthcare plan and the loony right calls the Democrats' "Socialists" for passing it but not the Heritage Foundation for providing the concept.

Truth is nuttiness? Really? Seems YOU are a stranger to the truth, and a drone protecting yer Gubmint check. Tell us? Are YOU on welfare? Are YOU a moocher defending it?

 

[Faun]

I had no idea the Heritage Foundation was socialist. Who knew?

Their concept was a socialist one.

But last time I checked the heritage foundation does not enact laws.

.

Isn't it amazing how the LEFT in order to prove their point will assign legislative or other POWERS to those that don't posses it?

Now you're lying again -- a clear sign that you've lost both your mind and the debate.

I never said the Heritage Foundation had legislative powers.

 

[Faun]

Isn't it amazing how the LEFT in order to prove their point will assign legislative or other POWERS to those that don't posses it?

More nuttiness from the loony right ... Democrats pass the Heritage Foundation's individual mandated healthcare plan and the loony right calls the Democrats' "Socialists" for passing it but not the Heritage Foundation for providing the concept.

Truth is nuttiness? Really? Seems YOU are a stranger to the truth, and a drone protecting yer Gubmint check. Tell us? Are YOU on welfare? Are YOU a moocher defending it?

Spits the rightard who just got through telling back-to-back lies about me.

And not only do I not take anything from the government -- there's a good chance I make more than you.