Obama Earmarks $10 Million for Free Diapers-Nanny State

That's the liberal logic. Give freebies to all poor and minorities and if you don't like that, you're just cruel and hate the poor.

 

They should allocate whatever it costs to buy a couple sets of cloth diapers and supplies for them (pins, rubber pants etc) and that's it. There is no reason govt should be funding costly disposable diapers.

 

LOTS of bleach, laundry detergent, etc. ...

 

Here's an idea: if you can't (*)(*)(*)(*)ing afford diapers maybe you shouldn't be having children.

 

Get mad at the program but not the individual utilizing it? I can understand that.

 

So those such inconvenient children should be -- what … ??? -- perhaps maybe taken down to the Mexican border and turned loose to fend for themselves … ???

 

Yeah it's called being responsible.

The people in this program aren't the one's that, after getting on birth control they had a miracle baby. The people in this program are the one's with a half dozen kids because they're so irresponsible they don't bother with birth control.

In their minds, the more kids they have, the more handouts they get.

Apparently, they're right.

Single mothers rejoice, you now have more money for clubbing.

 

I guess I must bow (deeply) to your God-like position and abilities, since you can read minds, and feel authorized to command others about the disposal of their innocent vulnerable children ...

 

So, what is the current cost of treating nappy rash (and I am not talking about just a red bottom but where you have the equivalent of a second degree burn?

 

Lol. Sure, see it that way. Id expect nothing more from a bitter, angry person worrying about why a person gets EIC.

WHICH PART OF MANY WORK DO YOU KEEP REFUSING TO SEE?

 

Then you have the pub logic: its mine mine mine! You moochers are icky!

Will you EVER admit that not ALL of them sit around and do nothing? I highly doubt it. Youre just too angry and bitter.

 

You keep referring to me as bitter and angry, but you seem to be the one who is most upset, LOL.

I've explained my side more than once, you just don't like the answer. I'm sure you can probably think of 20 other things we should be paying for, for the "poor" in this country.

 

Another nothing partisan post.

 

Im not the one upset. Youre the one watching other peoples tax refunds, not me.

Sounds bitter to me.

 

Granny says dey should collect alla used diapers...

... an' use `em to make stink-bombs...

... to lob at alla jihadis.

 

I don't have to read their minds, I hear them talking in line at the supermarket, in stores, to their friends.

There are a LOT of people who simply have more children to get more welfare.

 

I don't suppose you have actual evidence for that?

Yeah, didn't think so.

 

Nonsense … I'm our family cook and food buyer so I am in the check-out lane a LOT, and I have never overheard such things …
You're just making it up ...

 

I don't really care if you believe me, I'm not trying to convince anyone.

With as many as 72% of children being born to unmarried mothers, it's pretty obvious.

- - - Updated - - -

Move to southern california, you'll hear it a lot, if you understand spanish that is.

 

I see more clearly where you're coming from (and I don't mean, "California") ...

 

You'd be surprised what is said when they think the gringos can't understand them.

 

I would have no problem with a diaper allowance. Lord knows I have paid for enough of them for other people who ran out of money in the month before their kid ran out of poop. I also would not have a problem with medicare covering them for seniors. I would actually encourage it. Sores are very hard to get to heal with elderly people under the best of circumstances, let alone when they are in the naughty regions that get exposed to a lot of fluids.

 

There is no logical connection in your argument. The simple fact that there are more unwed mothers does not demonstrate people are having kids because of welfare benefits. It just demonstrates that people no longer consider marriage a necessary prerequisite to having kids.

 

What is the only way for single mothers to make more money?

 

Get a better job? Or a raise?

The main flaw in your argument is that the cost of raising a kid exceeds the value of the government benefits that are available to help raise that kid, even for the very poor. So your single mom will LOSE money on each kid.