OT: Election/Politics thread, Part 6

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 2:51 pm

bdunn13 wrote:
Feanor wrote: Retired people shouldn't be able to vote? Stay at home moms shouldn't be able to vote?
No, they shouldn't... the moms would be represented by their husbands. The retired people would have been represented when they were contributing to the system.

Only exception would be retired military with 10+ years of service, as well as those that retired from public service (teachers, fireman, police). Elected officials would not count.

Hmm, there are two possible outcomes to this...

1. I'm embarrassed, because contrary to my previous beliefs, Yanks DO do irony....

2. You'll have to make some serious decisions....like when you change your national anthem to the Horst Wessel Lied, do you leave the lyrics in German, or do you update them ?

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 3:14 pm

davet010 wrote:
bdunn13 wrote:
Feanor wrote: Retired people shouldn't be able to vote? Stay at home moms shouldn't be able to vote?
No, they shouldn't... the moms would be represented by their husbands. The retired people would have been represented when they were contributing to the system.

Only exception would be retired military with 10+ years of service, as well as those that retired from public service (teachers, fireman, police). Elected officials would not count.
Hmm, there are two possible outcomes to this...

1. I'm embarrassed, because contrary to my previous beliefs, Yanks DO do irony....

2. You'll have to make some serious decisions....like when you change your national anthem to the Horst Wessel Lied, do you leave the lyrics in German, or do you update them ?

Oh Yanks definitely do irony. Hell we refer to people who want to infringe upon free speech an confiscate private property "liberal."

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:10 pm

RobVarak wrote:
davet010 wrote:
bdunn13 wrote: No, they shouldn't... the moms would be represented by their husbands. The retired people would have been represented when they were contributing to the system.

Only exception would be retired military with 10+ years of service, as well as those that retired from public service (teachers, fireman, police). Elected officials would not count.
Hmm, there are two possible outcomes to this...

1. I'm embarrassed, because contrary to my previous beliefs, Yanks DO do irony....

2. You'll have to make some serious decisions....like when you change your national anthem to the Horst Wessel Lied, do you leave the lyrics in German, or do you update them ?
Oh Yanks definitely do irony. Hell we refer to people who want to infringe upon free speech an confiscate private property "liberal."

...Well played...

davet010 · Post by **davet010** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:19 pm

RobVarak wrote:
davet010 wrote:
bdunn13 wrote: No, they shouldn't... the moms would be represented by their husbands. The retired people would have been represented when they were contributing to the system.

Only exception would be retired military with 10+ years of service, as well as those that retired from public service (teachers, fireman, police). Elected officials would not count.
Hmm, there are two possible outcomes to this...

1. I'm embarrassed, because contrary to my previous beliefs, Yanks DO do irony....

2. You'll have to make some serious decisions....like when you change your national anthem to the Horst Wessel Lied, do you leave the lyrics in German, or do you update them ?
Oh Yanks definitely do irony. Hell we refer to people who want to infringe upon free speech an confiscate private property "liberal."

Well you don't do it very well then, that comment is lost on me.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:24 pm

Feanor wrote:
bdunn13 wrote:If you don't pay taxes, you should not be allowed to vote. Parasites should not have a say in our system. If you are 16, have a job and pay taxes, then you should get to vote. If you are 30, are on welfare, pay no taxes, then you have no business having any say in our system. Representation without taxation has to stop.
Retired people shouldn't be able to vote? Stay at home moms shouldn't be able to vote?

Agree with Feanor on this one, Brad. Your position is much too harsh.

My wife works her tight little buns off every day as a "household engineer" for our three kids and surrendered a good job in the finance business to do that 10 years ago. If anything, she should be allowed to vote twice!

At-work moms who think stay-at-home moms with multiple kids sit around and eat bon-bons and watch Oprah all day clearly never have been a stay-at-home mom any longer than their maternity leave. It's MUCH harder work than any office job if it's done with the proper care, concern and attention to detail that most stay-at-home moms display.

Take care,
PK

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:30 pm

bdunn13 wrote:
Feanor wrote: Retired people shouldn't be able to vote? Stay at home moms shouldn't be able to vote?
No, they shouldn't... the moms would be represented by their husbands. The retired people would have been represented when they were contributing to the system.

Dude, that's absolutely preposterous.

My wife runs our household, and I'm not ashamed to admit it. She organizes all the kids' activities, cooks and cleans daily and handles ALL of our financial transactions. Every last one of them. I get my $20 per week of play money, and she pays all the bills and banks the rest based on the detailed household budget she draws up every month. And she makes sure we nail that budget EVERY month.

Any time we have general contracting or household repair work done, she is the contact. She sets everything up. She enjoys it. I do nothing other than hand off confused contractors, wondering why a broad is doing everything, to her on the phone.

She cuts the grass and helps shovel the driveway. She's the one on the top rung of the ladder hanging off the gutters painting and cleaning gutters because I'm not big on heights. She's the one up at 2 a.m., giving medicine to a sick kid. She's the one cleaning puke off a kid's bed spread at 5 a.m.

She is the engine of this household, full stop. So even though she does WAY more to keep this household on track every day than me, she should be denied a vote?

That's nuts. F*cking nuts.

Take care,
PK

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:46 pm

Something does need to be done to combat the fact that Welfare is now a voting sect.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:58 pm

Next you will want to take the vote away from illegal aliens.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:58 pm

Even legal aliens like me can't vote.

fsquid wrote:Something does need to be done to combat the fact that Welfare is now a voting sect.

Get more people in jobs and off welfare.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 6:59 pm

Feanor wrote:Get more people in jobs and off welfare.

You have my vote.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:41 pm

Why would they get a job when they have welfare to rely on?

2 of my inlaws have 3 kids... they both went to college(Georgia Southern)... She does not work and he can't keep a job... They are on welfare and neither of them have any get up and go... the system is taking care of them so there is no reward for them to get off of their sorry asses and do something for themselves and their family.

Welfare does not help the poor, it makes people poor.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:45 pm

What welfare is he on exactly? Unemployment insurance doesn't last very long.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:49 pm

Washington Post admits to pro-Obama bias.

Shocking.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02895.html

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:50 pm

I have no idea. Myand his father in law was telling me about it last weekend... I did not ask too many questions as it just stresses me out.

But I don't consider unemployment welfare...

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 7:53 pm

RobVarak wrote:Washington Post admits to pro-Obama bias.

Shocking.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 02895.html

It is only in their minds.

fletcher21 · Post by **fletcher21** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:38 pm

pk500 wrote:
bdunn13 wrote:
Feanor wrote: Retired people shouldn't be able to vote? Stay at home moms shouldn't be able to vote?
No, they shouldn't... the moms would be represented by their husbands. The retired people would have been represented when they were contributing to the system.
Dude, that's absolutely preposterous.

My wife runs our household, and I'm not ashamed to admit it. She organizes all the kids' activities, cooks and cleans daily and handles ALL of our financial transactions. Every last one of them. I get my $20 per week of play money, and she pays all the bills and banks the rest based on the detailed household budget she draws up every month. And she makes sure we nail that budget EVERY month.

Any time we have general contracting or household repair work done, she is the contact. She sets everything up. She enjoys it. I do nothing other than hand off confused contractors, wondering why a broad is doing everything, to her on the phone.

She cuts the grass and helps shovel the driveway. She's the one on the top rung of the ladder hanging off the gutters painting and cleaning gutters because I'm not big on heights. She's the one up at 2 a.m., giving medicine to a sick kid. She's the one cleaning puke off a kid's bed spread at 5 a.m.

She is the engine of this household, full stop. So even though she does WAY more to keep this household on track every day than me, she should be denied a vote?

That's nuts. F*cking nuts.

Take care,
PK

As vinny-b would say "Daaaamn, Paul.. Is on, another level"

You are a lucky guy, Paul. I wish I trusted my gf with the bills like that.. Somehow I think I'd see her with new clothes and 700 dollar purses every day, and have angry collection agencies calling me daily if she ran the ship

I LOVE this quote, from Sam Cassel: "Some guys run their house, some guys run around their house. I run my house!"

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:45 pm

Welfare does not help the poor, it makes people poor.

Amen, amen

fsquid · Post by **fsquid** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:45 pm

XXXIV wrote:
Feanor wrote:Get more people in jobs and off welfare.
You have my vote.

Won't happen, they'd lose votes

Post by **Jared** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:09 pm

bdunn13 wrote:Welfare does not help the poor, it makes people poor.

Welfare gives people on the bottom a chance to work their way up. It's up to them to then do their best to get out of it, and with welfare reform, the money (I think) runs out if you stay on welfare for too long. For every story of people who choose to stay on welfare (which boggles my mind, considering how small the payouts are), there are other stories of people who used the assistance, got out of poverty, and moved up to the middle class.

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:04 pm

Jared wrote:
Welfare gives people on the bottom a chance to work their way up. It's up to them to then do their best to get out of it, and with welfare reform, the money (I think) runs out if you stay on welfare for too long. For every story of people who choose to stay on welfare (which boggles my mind, considering how small the payouts are), there are other stories of people who used the assistance, got out of poverty, and moved up to the middle class.

Not my cousins.

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:05 pm

Feanor wrote:All you were supposed to do in Minnesota was color in the circle black, right? If people are too stupid to follow a simple rule like that then they should have their votes shredded.

Yep,that's all they had to do.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sun Nov 09, 2008 12:19 am

No ID-no vote. I believe in a federal requirement that you show picture ID in order to be able to cast a vote. It's only naysayers realistically would be those who would be affected by it, and if you can't take 10 minutes to get a photo ID done for free, you shouldn't be allowed to vote, period.

And welfare rewards laziness. There are jobs-McDonald's hires at a higher rate than most welfare pays out on an annual basis-people just won't DO those jobs. Illegal immigrants wouldn't have so much work if the people on our welfare rolls weren't sitting on their ass drawing it. And welfare comes out of MY pocket-not interested in the government dipping into my wallet for something I don't approve of.

DivotMaker · Post by **DivotMaker** » Sun Nov 09, 2008 2:58 am

Teal wrote:And welfare rewards laziness. There are jobs-McDonald's hires at a higher rate than most welfare pays out on an annual basis-people just won't DO those jobs. Illegal immigrants wouldn't have so much work if the people on our welfare rolls weren't sitting on their ass drawing it. And welfare comes out of MY pocket-not interested in the government dipping into my wallet for something I don't approve of.

Bingo...we have a winner! I am all for welfare for those who do not have a CHOICE in working or not working. What I am sick of is paying taxes and supporting those who CHOOSE to stay home and collect a check, make babies, play video games because they have a CHOICE in whether to WORK to get paid or NOT WORK and get paid. Somehow, some way, that s*** has got to stop, but it won't until the Govt. quits giving out free money to those who CAN work and CHOOSE not to. I don't think the Obama administration will improve on this, in fact I believe it may get much worse.....

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Sun Nov 09, 2008 3:12 am

DivotMaker wrote:
Teal wrote:And welfare rewards laziness. There are jobs-McDonald's hires at a higher rate than most welfare pays out on an annual basis-people just won't DO those jobs. Illegal immigrants wouldn't have so much work if the people on our welfare rolls weren't sitting on their ass drawing it. And welfare comes out of MY pocket-not interested in the government dipping into my wallet for something I don't approve of.
Bingo...we have a winner! I am all for welfare for those who do not have a CHOICE in working or not working. What I am sick of is paying taxes and supporting those who CHOOSE to stay home and collect a check, make babies, play video games because they have a CHOICE in whether to WORK to get paid or NOT WORK and get paid. Somehow, some way, that s*** has got to stop, but it won't until the Govt. quits giving out free money to those who CAN work and CHOOSE not to. I don't think the Obama administration will improve on this, in fact I believe it may get much worse.....

We are back on attacking welfare. Next thing we need to do is talk about Clinton's impeachment. No wait, let's revisit Carter's domestic policies.

Current welfare programs, re-done under Clinton are based on work requirements and are mostly temporary.

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Sun Nov 09, 2008 9:47 am

JRod wrote:
We are back on attacking welfare. Next thing we need to do is talk about Clinton's impeachment. No wait, let's revisit Carter's domestic policies.

Current welfare programs, re-done under Clinton are based on work requirements and are mostly temporary.

I have people in my family that work the system and do exactly what Teal and DivotMaker are complaning about. If your cool with paying for people like that fine. But they have a right to b*tch about it as long as they pay the freight.