The left and the right can't get along, so what if we just split up?

[NYcarbineer]

Just thought I would throw this out there to break away from the hundreds of posts about the election and candidates:

As time progresses, it seems the left and right drift more and more apart. So my question is, if we just decided to divide the country in half (conservative on one side, liberals on the other, and anybody in between would have to choose a side) would you approve of it and if so, what would be the advantage to your side over the other?

As a conservative, on our side, I would like to see much less government regulation so as to attract more businesses. On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income. Our social programs would be only for those who could absolutely not work, and prison would be a hellhole where most of the time prisoners spent would be in solitary confinement as to deter crime. People who use deadly force would not be held liable to the subject or family, and illegal immigrants would be immediately deported or jailed. Our death penalty would be carried out within six months after conviction (all appeals exhausted) and would be made public for all of society to witness.

So to the liberals, what would your side be like with huge taxation against the rich, an unarmed society, drugs run freely, and so many environmental regulations that nobody could possibly open up a business for profit?

Are there any conservatives left who don't want to break up the United States of America?

 

[eddiew]

On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income.

What would the tax be on zero income?

guys like romney and trump would be paying no taxes

 

[Eaglewings]

The problem is that the left divides this country into groups, and then decides which side they want to favor and which side they wish to chastise.

Ray... you are accusing left for what the right has been doing for years...chastising the gays, the poor, women.

Nope, that's only MSM and liberal blogs telling you that. If you disagree with one policy the left has on any of those subjects, they call you the stereotypical racist, sexist, homophobe....

This is how the left believes they can get their way all the time; try to make Republicans feel guilty about having a different opinion than theirs. They've been doing it for decades.

But as we both know, when it comes to liberalism, nobody is allowed to have a different opinion. You either agree with everything they say or you are the enemy. This is why they are trying like hell to shut down Trump rallies. They don't want him to speak. It doesn't fit their version of what America should be like. In the liberal version of America, only those who march in lockstep are allowed to have their message heard.

Don't you recall in the last election why Romney lost...? Because of him and Ryan trying to control women's birth control and such. Why isn't that considered over government.? Especially when they themselves get drugs without questions to keep their own libido going at a old age.

Also perhaps its just the tea party but they are still affiliated with the republicans...how they make it ugly about gays, and people different like that.. its all over the place news, here..not blogs.

.

.

Romney and Ryan tried to control women's birth control? How could Romney have anything to do with something like that when he wasn't even in the federal government?

So do tell: what were these two people out of the hundreds of Republican legislatures going to do about controlling women's birth control and how?

Ok I get it about abortion, unless if there is a illness and rape...

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The growing division is healthy for the country. It ensures survival. If a country is run by only one political spectrum, it is guaranteed to fail. So to counter your premise, since the left side would be a mess imagine
1) water and air that compare to linfen China. And you know that companies would be eager to pollute as much as possible because it saves them a mrasely Buck. I don't trust them to follow rules.
2). Everyone is working...for $2 an hour and no benefits.
3). Nobody can afford houses or apartments or a place to live....so a new ghetto is created.
4). Businesses can't find an educated worker. They have to recruit northerners.


See. This is fat right utopia. Great.

Actually just the opposite.

On our side, welfare would be scarce so most people would have to work in order to eat. They would have to work to afford housing and utilities. They would be ever so cautious not to have children they couldn't afford because the government wouldn't help them and if the parents couldn't afford to feed them, they would have to be sent to adoption.

We would have plenty of educated workers because on our side, there would be no teachers union. Teachers would get hired and fired like everybody else based on their performance, so they would make sure those kids learned and learned a lot. Many of those children would be well prepared for college, and there wouldn't be any affirmative action for them to cut in front of the line.

For those who work lower wage jobs, they would work more hours, learn a trade, or maybe eventually open up their own business. The horse won't move if you don't dangle a carrot in front of him. If you feed him carrots, he will just lay down and get fat.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just thought I would throw this out there to break away from the hundreds of posts about the election and candidates:

As time progresses, it seems the left and right drift more and more apart. So my question is, if we just decided to divide the country in half (conservative on one side, liberals on the other, and anybody in between would have to choose a side) would you approve of it and if so, what would be the advantage to your side over the other?

As a conservative, on our side, I would like to see much less government regulation so as to attract more businesses. On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income. Our social programs would be only for those who could absolutely not work, and prison would be a hellhole where most of the time prisoners spent would be in solitary confinement as to deter crime. People who use deadly force would not be held liable to the subject or family, and illegal immigrants would be immediately deported or jailed. Our death penalty would be carried out within six months after conviction (all appeals exhausted) and would be made public for all of society to witness.

So to the liberals, what would your side be like with huge taxation against the rich, an unarmed society, drugs run freely, and so many environmental regulations that nobody could possibly open up a business for profit?

Are there any conservatives left who don't want to break up the United States of America?

It's not so much breaking up the United States of America, we are just sick of living with liberal nonsense that we can't tolerate. Oh! And did you hear? DumBama now wants to spend ten million of our tax dollars on diapers for the so-called poor, or as I call them, the irresponsible and lazy.

 

[Eaglewings]

It's not so much breaking up the United States of America, we are just sick of living with liberal nonsense that we can't tolerate. Oh! And did you hear? DumBama now wants to spend ten million of our tax dollars on diapers for the so-called poor, or as I call them, the irresponsible and lazy.

I do agree with you on the free diapers... Many of the parents are pacified and suck off the government , hard habit to stop.
Geeeezzzzz use cotton diapers and wash them. Better for the baby anyway.


.

 

[initforme]

So sending kids up for adoption...hmmmm..that part is funny. So you want to tear kids away from the parents....so much for pro life and pro family.
Blaming teachers....simpleton logic. Blame someone else for your failures. What respectable person is going to work for teachers wages when they can make a lot more in the private sector? After all you think 40 grand per year for a good teacher is good pay correct?
Yes we want people working 70 to 80 hours per week for 8 bucks anhour and no benefits or access to healthcare...comical
That's the ticket to happiness.
I suspect your post as trolling.

 

[OnePercenter]

If the middle class right would develop a frontal lobe and vote for what effects/affects them the most (low middle class wages) all middle class folks would be financially better, so would the country.

 

[elektra]

A one sided set of conservative or one sided set of liberal policies ensures the failure of a country. That is my point. I hope to see the division grow exponentially. It is entertaining. We Americans think we are so exceptional. Time for some humble pie.

Time for some education, conservatives built this country, without conservatives, liberals or democrats never would of had a sent to steal, or people to enslave. Conservatives slave for the Democrats.

Exceptional, of course we are, as individuals, no, but as a country, beyond a doubt. But hey, some follow Howard Zinn (unwittingly?), some love Socialism it allows them to fail, safely. Others are simply egotistical elitists who know best for everyone.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's not so much breaking up the United States of America, we are just sick of living with liberal nonsense that we can't tolerate. Oh! And did you hear? DumBama now wants to spend ten million of our tax dollars on diapers for the so-called poor, or as I call them, the irresponsible and lazy.

I do agree with you on the free diapers... Many of the parents are pacified and suck off the government , hard habit to stop.
Geeeezzzzz use cotton diapers and wash them. Better for the baby anyway.


.

This is the progressive path of Cradle-to-Grave.

You don't have a job but get pregnant. No problem, the taxpayer will foot the bill for your care and delivery.

So you have the kid and now have a legitimate reason not to work, but since you don't work, how are you going to feed this kid? No problem, we have WIC for that.

You can't feed a kid unless he has someplace to eat; someplace where you can have a bed for him and food in a refrigerator. No problem, you qualify for HUD.

Now you have a HUD home in the suburbs with this growing kid, but like most kids, he gets sick all the time and you need medical care for that. No problem, you qualify for Medicaid.

Wait a minute, how are you going to educate this kid? You don't have much education yourself since you had to drop out of school because you became pregnant. No problem, public schools are free.

But now the kid will be hungry if he goes to school because it's too much effort for you to make him a lunch. How will he eat? No problem, your school has free breakfast and lunch for your child.

Okay, I have free school for my kid, free food for my kid, a home in the suburbs, but what if this kid is smarter than me and needs to go to college? No problem, your kid was born when Hillary became President, so now, taxpayers will pay for his college too!

Gee, this suburban HUD home is nice, and me and my child eat very well, but we could always use more. How can I get more from the government? No problem, just get pregnant all over again, and this time, government will send you free diapers to boot!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So sending kids up for adoption...hmmmm..that part is funny. So you want to tear kids away from the parents....so much for pro life and pro family.
Blaming teachers....simpleton logic. Blame someone else for your failures. What respectable person is going to work for teachers wages when they can make a lot more in the private sector? After all you think 40 grand per year for a good teacher is good pay correct?
Yes we want people working 70 to 80 hours per week for 8 bucks anhour and no benefits or access to healthcare...comical
That's the ticket to happiness.
I suspect your post as trolling.

Nobody knows trolling better than you.

Don't blame the teachers? Okay, it's not the teachers fault, it's the single-parents fault. No man in the house to straighten out that kid once he hits teen years and starts hanging out with the other single-parent lowlifes. But what the hell, liberal have been pushing for single-parent households for years, and now they got what they want.

When you get sick of working for $8.00 an hour and the long days, you'll find a way to make more. Either do better at the company you're with or learn a skill or trade.

If we ever wanted to wipe out liberalism, all we would have to do is wipe out victimhood, and then there would be no use for the Democrat party.

 

[Centinel]

Just thought I would throw this out there to break away from the hundreds of posts about the election and candidates:

As time progresses, it seems the left and right drift more and more apart. So my question is, if we just decided to divide the country in half (conservative on one side, liberals on the other, and anybody in between would have to choose a side) would you approve of it and if so, what would be the advantage to your side over the other?

As a conservative, on our side, I would like to see much less government regulation so as to attract more businesses. On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income. Our social programs would be only for those who could absolutely not work, and prison would be a hellhole where most of the time prisoners spent would be in solitary confinement as to deter crime. People who use deadly force would not be held liable to the subject or family, and illegal immigrants would be immediately deported or jailed. Our death penalty would be carried out within six months after conviction (all appeals exhausted) and would be made public for all of society to witness.

So to the liberals, what would your side be like with huge taxation against the rich, an unarmed society, drugs run freely, and so many environmental regulations that nobody could possibly open up a business for profit?

Rather than splitting up, we should simply rein in the union government back to it's constitutionally permitted activities. That would allow each of the member countries of the union to enact any particular policies their people prefer.

No need for a one-size-all solution being applied to fifty individual sovereign countries.

 

[Eaglewings]

It's not so much breaking up the United States of America, we are just sick of living with liberal nonsense that we can't tolerate. Oh! And did you hear? DumBama now wants to spend ten million of our tax dollars on diapers for the so-called poor, or as I call them, the irresponsible and lazy.

I do agree with you on the free diapers... Many of the parents are pacified and suck off the government , hard habit to stop.
Geeeezzzzz use cotton diapers and wash them. Better for the baby anyway.


.

This is the progressive path of Cradle-to-Grave.

You don't have a job but get pregnant. No problem, the taxpayer will foot the bill for your care and delivery.

So you have the kid and now have a legitimate reason not to work, but since you don't work, how are you going to feed this kid? No problem, we have WIC for that.

You can't feed a kid unless he has someplace to eat; someplace where you can have a bed for him and food in a refrigerator. No problem, you qualify for HUD.

Now you have a HUD home in the suburbs with this growing kid, but like most kids, he gets sick all the time and you need medical care for that. No problem, you qualify for Medicaid.

Wait a minute, how are you going to educate this kid? You don't have much education yourself since you had to drop out of school because you became pregnant. No problem, public schools are free.

But now the kid will be hungry if he goes to school because it's too much effort for you to make him a lunch. How will he eat? No problem, your school has free breakfast and lunch for your child.

Okay, I have free school for my kid, free food for my kid, a home in the suburbs, but what if this kid is smarter than me and needs to go to college? No problem, your kid was born when Hillary became President, so now, taxpayers will pay for his college too!

Gee, this suburban HUD home is nice, and me and my child eat very well, but we could always use more. How can I get more from the government? No problem, just get pregnant all over again, and this time, government will send you free diapers to boot!

I did my internship in a home to get drug addicted pregnant women off the street, get them clean and sober to have a healthy baby..They were put on government asst. I feel at times it may be necessary, but not for a long period of time ,,, except for those who are truly sick and can not work..

But your right on about the timetable , I have seen it in action..
I was without parents at 19 years old, I worked my ass off and never went on gov. asst.

I do think that the type of people who are lifetime welfare or in prison feel that they are victims and the world owes everything to them..

.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just thought I would throw this out there to break away from the hundreds of posts about the election and candidates:

As time progresses, it seems the left and right drift more and more apart. So my question is, if we just decided to divide the country in half (conservative on one side, liberals on the other, and anybody in between would have to choose a side) would you approve of it and if so, what would be the advantage to your side over the other?

As a conservative, on our side, I would like to see much less government regulation so as to attract more businesses. On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income. Our social programs would be only for those who could absolutely not work, and prison would be a hellhole where most of the time prisoners spent would be in solitary confinement as to deter crime. People who use deadly force would not be held liable to the subject or family, and illegal immigrants would be immediately deported or jailed. Our death penalty would be carried out within six months after conviction (all appeals exhausted) and would be made public for all of society to witness.

So to the liberals, what would your side be like with huge taxation against the rich, an unarmed society, drugs run freely, and so many environmental regulations that nobody could possibly open up a business for profit?

Rather than splitting up, we should simply rein in the union government back to it's constitutionally permitted activities. That would allow each of the member countries of the union to enact any particular policies their people prefer.

No need for a one-size-all solution being applied to fifty individual sovereign countries.

That would be nice, but that's the other problem with the left: they don't want to let go of control.

There should be no federal free cell phones, no federal Medicare or Medicaid, no federal Social Security, no federal food stamp programs......

If states want such programs, then that's fine, let them start those programs, but it shouldn't be operated or funded through Washington DC. What the federal government should be providing for it's citizens is listed in the US Constitution.

But that would be the nice thing about our country separating. Republicans can do it their way, and the Democrats could keep their federal overlord on their side of the wall.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It's not so much breaking up the United States of America, we are just sick of living with liberal nonsense that we can't tolerate. Oh! And did you hear? DumBama now wants to spend ten million of our tax dollars on diapers for the so-called poor, or as I call them, the irresponsible and lazy.

I do agree with you on the free diapers... Many of the parents are pacified and suck off the government , hard habit to stop.
Geeeezzzzz use cotton diapers and wash them. Better for the baby anyway.


.

This is the progressive path of Cradle-to-Grave.

You don't have a job but get pregnant. No problem, the taxpayer will foot the bill for your care and delivery.

So you have the kid and now have a legitimate reason not to work, but since you don't work, how are you going to feed this kid? No problem, we have WIC for that.

You can't feed a kid unless he has someplace to eat; someplace where you can have a bed for him and food in a refrigerator. No problem, you qualify for HUD.

Now you have a HUD home in the suburbs with this growing kid, but like most kids, he gets sick all the time and you need medical care for that. No problem, you qualify for Medicaid.

Wait a minute, how are you going to educate this kid? You don't have much education yourself since you had to drop out of school because you became pregnant. No problem, public schools are free.

But now the kid will be hungry if he goes to school because it's too much effort for you to make him a lunch. How will he eat? No problem, your school has free breakfast and lunch for your child.

Okay, I have free school for my kid, free food for my kid, a home in the suburbs, but what if this kid is smarter than me and needs to go to college? No problem, your kid was born when Hillary became President, so now, taxpayers will pay for his college too!

Gee, this suburban HUD home is nice, and me and my child eat very well, but we could always use more. How can I get more from the government? No problem, just get pregnant all over again, and this time, government will send you free diapers to boot!

I did my internship in a home to get drug addicted pregnant women off the street, get them clean and sober to have a healthy baby..They were put on government asst. I feel at times it may be necessary, but not for a long period of time ,,, except for those who are truly sick and can not work..

But your right on about the timetable , I have seen it in action..
I was without parents at 19 years old, I worked my ass off and never went on gov. asst.

I do think that the type of people who are lifetime welfare or in prison feel that they are victims and the world owes everything to them..

.

As long as we continue this kind of society where government does everything except tuck the kid in bed at night, what point is it to have parents anymore? Government is already taking care of 80% of the responsibilities for that child, so why not just take that other 20% leap and let government raise our children?

 

[Centinel]

Just thought I would throw this out there to break away from the hundreds of posts about the election and candidates:

As time progresses, it seems the left and right drift more and more apart. So my question is, if we just decided to divide the country in half (conservative on one side, liberals on the other, and anybody in between would have to choose a side) would you approve of it and if so, what would be the advantage to your side over the other?

As a conservative, on our side, I would like to see much less government regulation so as to attract more businesses. On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income. Our social programs would be only for those who could absolutely not work, and prison would be a hellhole where most of the time prisoners spent would be in solitary confinement as to deter crime. People who use deadly force would not be held liable to the subject or family, and illegal immigrants would be immediately deported or jailed. Our death penalty would be carried out within six months after conviction (all appeals exhausted) and would be made public for all of society to witness.

So to the liberals, what would your side be like with huge taxation against the rich, an unarmed society, drugs run freely, and so many environmental regulations that nobody could possibly open up a business for profit?

Rather than splitting up, we should simply rein in the union government back to it's constitutionally permitted activities. That would allow each of the member countries of the union to enact any particular policies their people prefer.

No need for a one-size-all solution being applied to fifty individual sovereign countries.

That would be nice, but that's the other problem with the left: they don't want to let go of control.

There should be no federal free cell phones, no federal Medicare or Medicaid, no federal Social Security, no federal food stamp programs......

If states want such programs, then that's fine, let them start those programs, but it shouldn't be operated or funded through Washington DC. What the federal government should be providing for it's citizens is listed in the US Constitution.

But that would be the nice thing about our country separating. Republicans can do it their way, and the Democrats could keep their federal overlord on their side of the wall.

I agree that ultimately if a particular state is run over roughshod by the other states in the union that its best final option would be to exit the union. I think that would probably be a last resort, but it certainly isn't prohibited in the constitution.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just thought I would throw this out there to break away from the hundreds of posts about the election and candidates:

As time progresses, it seems the left and right drift more and more apart. So my question is, if we just decided to divide the country in half (conservative on one side, liberals on the other, and anybody in between would have to choose a side) would you approve of it and if so, what would be the advantage to your side over the other?

As a conservative, on our side, I would like to see much less government regulation so as to attract more businesses. On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income. Our social programs would be only for those who could absolutely not work, and prison would be a hellhole where most of the time prisoners spent would be in solitary confinement as to deter crime. People who use deadly force would not be held liable to the subject or family, and illegal immigrants would be immediately deported or jailed. Our death penalty would be carried out within six months after conviction (all appeals exhausted) and would be made public for all of society to witness.

So to the liberals, what would your side be like with huge taxation against the rich, an unarmed society, drugs run freely, and so many environmental regulations that nobody could possibly open up a business for profit?

Rather than splitting up, we should simply rein in the union government back to it's constitutionally permitted activities. That would allow each of the member countries of the union to enact any particular policies their people prefer.

No need for a one-size-all solution being applied to fifty individual sovereign countries.

That would be nice, but that's the other problem with the left: they don't want to let go of control.

There should be no federal free cell phones, no federal Medicare or Medicaid, no federal Social Security, no federal food stamp programs......

If states want such programs, then that's fine, let them start those programs, but it shouldn't be operated or funded through Washington DC. What the federal government should be providing for it's citizens is listed in the US Constitution.

But that would be the nice thing about our country separating. Republicans can do it their way, and the Democrats could keep their federal overlord on their side of the wall.

I agree that ultimately if a particular state is run over roughshod by the other states in the union that its best final option would be to exit the union. I think that would probably be a last resort, but it certainly isn't prohibited in the constitution.

We could still be a union with separate governments. I didn't say divide the country entirely or one start their very own country, just divide the people and segregate them to one side of the country or the other.

Rush Limbaugh said it repeatedly: you can't convince somebody they are wrong. They have to realize that themselves. All you can do is give them the ammunition for them to make that decision.

I didn't start this thread to suggest we actually act on my idea, only for liberals to think for a minute what they would do if we had all liberal polices running the entire country. It would be a total mess and our country would never survive after that point.

It will soon be election time and people need to think before they vote. I mean, come on! Free diapers from your federal government?

Deep down inside, liberals know their ideas are failures, but they will never admit to it. My idea of dividing the country may just make some of these liberals think about what it would be like to live totally without Republicans and conservatives in their society.

 

[Centinel]

Just thought I would throw this out there to break away from the hundreds of posts about the election and candidates:

As time progresses, it seems the left and right drift more and more apart. So my question is, if we just decided to divide the country in half (conservative on one side, liberals on the other, and anybody in between would have to choose a side) would you approve of it and if so, what would be the advantage to your side over the other?

As a conservative, on our side, I would like to see much less government regulation so as to attract more businesses. On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income. Our social programs would be only for those who could absolutely not work, and prison would be a hellhole where most of the time prisoners spent would be in solitary confinement as to deter crime. People who use deadly force would not be held liable to the subject or family, and illegal immigrants would be immediately deported or jailed. Our death penalty would be carried out within six months after conviction (all appeals exhausted) and would be made public for all of society to witness.

So to the liberals, what would your side be like with huge taxation against the rich, an unarmed society, drugs run freely, and so many environmental regulations that nobody could possibly open up a business for profit?

Rather than splitting up, we should simply rein in the union government back to it's constitutionally permitted activities. That would allow each of the member countries of the union to enact any particular policies their people prefer.

No need for a one-size-all solution being applied to fifty individual sovereign countries.

That would be nice, but that's the other problem with the left: they don't want to let go of control.

There should be no federal free cell phones, no federal Medicare or Medicaid, no federal Social Security, no federal food stamp programs......

If states want such programs, then that's fine, let them start those programs, but it shouldn't be operated or funded through Washington DC. What the federal government should be providing for it's citizens is listed in the US Constitution.

But that would be the nice thing about our country separating. Republicans can do it their way, and the Democrats could keep their federal overlord on their side of the wall.

I agree that ultimately if a particular state is run over roughshod by the other states in the union that its best final option would be to exit the union. I think that would probably be a last resort, but it certainly isn't prohibited in the constitution.

We could still be a union with separate governments. I didn't say divide the country entirely or one start their very own country, just divide the people and segregate them to one side of the country or the other.

Rush Limbaugh said it repeatedly: you can't convince somebody they are wrong. They have to realize that themselves. All you can do is give them the ammunition for them to make that decision.

I didn't start this thread to suggest we actually act on my idea, only for liberals to think for a minute what they would do if we had all liberal polices running the entire country. It would be a total mess and our country would never survive after that point.

It will soon be election time and people need to think before they vote. I mean, come on! Free diapers from your federal government?

Deep down inside, liberals know their ideas are failures, but they will never admit to it. My idea of dividing the country may just make some of these liberals think about what it would be like to live totally without Republicans and conservatives in their society.

Actually, if a state (or states) chose to exit the union, they would not still be in the union.

 

[eddiew]

Just thought I would throw this out there to break away from the hundreds of posts about the election and candidates:

As time progresses, it seems the left and right drift more and more apart. So my question is, if we just decided to divide the country in half (conservative on one side, liberals on the other, and anybody in between would have to choose a side) would you approve of it and if so, what would be the advantage to your side over the other?

As a conservative, on our side, I would like to see much less government regulation so as to attract more businesses. On our side, everybody would pay income tax regardless of income. Our social programs would be only for those who could absolutely not work, and prison would be a hellhole where most of the time prisoners spent would be in solitary confinement as to deter crime. People who use deadly force would not be held liable to the subject or family, and illegal immigrants would be immediately deported or jailed. Our death penalty would be carried out within six months after conviction (all appeals exhausted) and would be made public for all of society to witness.

So to the liberals, what would your side be like with huge taxation against the rich, an unarmed society, drugs run freely, and so many environmental regulations that nobody could possibly open up a business for profit?

Rather than splitting up, we should simply rein in the union government back to it's constitutionally permitted activities. That would allow each of the member countries of the union to enact any particular policies their people prefer.

No need for a one-size-all solution being applied to fifty individual sovereign countries.

That would be nice, but that's the other problem with the left: they don't want to let go of control.

There should be no federal free cell phones, no federal Medicare or Medicaid, no federal Social Security, no federal food stamp programs......

If states want such programs, then that's fine, let them start those programs, but it shouldn't be operated or funded through Washington DC. What the federal government should be providing for it's citizens is listed in the US Constitution.

But that would be the nice thing about our country separating. Republicans can do it their way, and the Democrats could keep their federal overlord on their side of the wall.

I agree that ultimately if a particular state is run over roughshod by the other states in the union that its best final option would be to exit the union. I think that would probably be a last resort, but it certainly isn't prohibited in the constitution.

We could still be a union with separate governments. I didn't say divide the country entirely or one start their very own country, just divide the people and segregate them to one side of the country or the other.

Rush Limbaugh said it repeatedly: you can't convince somebody they are wrong. They have to realize that themselves. All you can do is give them the ammunition for them to make that decision.

I didn't start this thread to suggest we actually act on my idea, only for liberals to think for a minute what they would do if we had all liberal polices running the entire country. It would be a total mess and our country would never survive after that point.

It will soon be election time and people need to think before they vote. I mean, come on! Free diapers from your federal government?

Deep down inside, liberals know their ideas are failures, but they will never admit to it. My idea of dividing the country may just make some of these liberals think about what it would be like to live totally without Republicans and conservatives in their society.

You do understand ray from cleveland that the welfare given to million and billionaires and huge companies far outstrips welfare given to the needy and not so needy?

 

[Eaglewings]

It's not so much breaking up the United States of America, we are just sick of living with liberal nonsense that we can't tolerate. Oh! And did you hear? DumBama now wants to spend ten million of our tax dollars on diapers for the so-called poor, or as I call them, the irresponsible and lazy.

I do agree with you on the free diapers... Many of the parents are pacified and suck off the government , hard habit to stop.
Geeeezzzzz use cotton diapers and wash them. Better for the baby anyway.


.

This is the progressive path of Cradle-to-Grave.

You don't have a job but get pregnant. No problem, the taxpayer will foot the bill for your care and delivery.

So you have the kid and now have a legitimate reason not to work, but since you don't work, how are you going to feed this kid? No problem, we have WIC for that.

You can't feed a kid unless he has someplace to eat; someplace where you can have a bed for him and food in a refrigerator. No problem, you qualify for HUD.

Now you have a HUD home in the suburbs with this growing kid, but like most kids, he gets sick all the time and you need medical care for that. No problem, you qualify for Medicaid.

Wait a minute, how are you going to educate this kid? You don't have much education yourself since you had to drop out of school because you became pregnant. No problem, public schools are free.

But now the kid will be hungry if he goes to school because it's too much effort for you to make him a lunch. How will he eat? No problem, your school has free breakfast and lunch for your child.

Okay, I have free school for my kid, free food for my kid, a home in the suburbs, but what if this kid is smarter than me and needs to go to college? No problem, your kid was born when Hillary became President, so now, taxpayers will pay for his college too!

Gee, this suburban HUD home is nice, and me and my child eat very well, but we could always use more. How can I get more from the government? No problem, just get pregnant all over again, and this time, government will send you free diapers to boot!

I did my internship in a home to get drug addicted pregnant women off the street, get them clean and sober to have a healthy baby..They were put on government asst. I feel at times it may be necessary, but not for a long period of time ,,, except for those who are truly sick and can not work..

But your right on about the timetable , I have seen it in action..
I was without parents at 19 years old, I worked my ass off and never went on gov. asst.

I do think that the type of people who are lifetime welfare or in prison feel that they are victims and the world owes everything to them..

.

As long as we continue this kind of society where government does everything except tuck the kid in bed at night, what point is it to have parents anymore? Government is already taking care of 80% of the responsibilities for that child, so why not just take that other 20% leap and let government raise our children?

I do feel that these mothers need childcare for a year and trade school and then they are on their own..

.