if you are on welfare should you have the right to vote?

Wrong again.....

Since his election. In the first 6 months, the Republican Govenor Rick Scott has done more for the good in Florida for the people especially seniors. Than what Obama has in 3 years for the American people......Nothing. ​

 

Oh really? Did Rick Scott do this...



Yes, Rick Scott is doing well, and he has the 31.8% approval rating to prove it. Rick Scott has a drug testing company and just signed into law a bill forcing people to get drug tests. Can you say conflict of interest? The people of Florida are getting @$$ raped by this crook.

Scott surprised state employees Tuesday by issuing his executive order for mandatory drug testing of all prospective hires, and random drug testing of current employees, in agencies whose directors he appoints.

During the election campaign, he had estimated the worth of his Solantic holdings at $62 million. Jacksonville-based Solantic has 32 clinics statewide, including two in Palm Beach County, and plans rapid growth and an eventual initial public offering, according to company documents.

What a crook!
So much for small government.

 

But it has no Star of David, nor a cross.

 

It's slapped on MY flag...... desecrating it.

 

I couldn't take the poll because you didn't have "If you're on welfare you should get to vote twice."

 

The founding principles of this nation dictate that all should have a voice regardless of social or economic condition. So yes, those on well-fare should have the right to vote.

 

>>>I have a problem singling out welfare queens as abusers when everybody from the top brass in the Pentagon to the corn farmers in Iowa to the oil drillers in Texas massively abuse the system.

 

Where exactly is "up?" People on welfare have been getting a 'helping hand up,' for decades. After decades of helping hands, there are more people on welfare, and scant few have gone anywhere "up!"
Welfare, IF there is to be any state sponsored welfare, should be very temporary to help someone OUT of a bad situation, not support people all their lives IN a dependent mode.

But since public workers unions can negotiate with elected officials, we should not be surprised that welfare recipients can vote for more welfare.

 

Yeah I hate those welfare queen oil companies too.

 

Yes that's true. Except under Clinton. Bush's irresponsible policies have put millions of formerly middle class people into the bread lines.

 

Booooring, terminally BORROING

Bush's horrific policies did not cause the economic downturn. Do some studying and find out that the bubble was created before Bush or obama were even in politics at all. Both incompetent to fix, but neither the cause. You might also note that the Bush tax cuts saved the middle class and the poor $2.1 trillion dollars in taxes between 2003 and 2010. But all liberals whine about is the $490 billion saved by the rich in that same period. Sure the nation could use that total of $2.59 trillion now, but you can't have savings for the middle class and the poor and SPEND IT TO!

If you really want to blame some people in recent times, look to Dodd and Barney Frank and to JA Johnson who paid himself $12 million dollars while running Fannie Mae into insolvency. He also ran Goldman-Sachs, and was picked by obama to find a vice president for obama. But even them, are just the latest perps, the problems started long before.

Try finding the real cause rather than a partisan ideological rant. Then you'll know that 40 years of bad politics by both Republicans and Democrats caused the recession that you mistakenly blame on Bush and will make obama a one termer. Neither to blame for cause, both to blame for trying to throw money at the problem, solving nothing.

 

So you don't think we could use the trillions Bush wasted in Iraq?

Well Bush shouldn't have cut ANYBODY'S taxes rich or middle class. He didn't save anyone money. We have to pay all the money back with INTEREST!!! Where are you living Bizaro World?

 

Once again as I've tried to inform you on other threads. There is no TRILLIONS wasted in IRAQ. That is a figment of your imagination. The IRAQ and AFGHAN wars together did not cost ONE TRILLION in Bush's time. About $800 billion total for both. If you want me to say that is a huge amount of money wasted, I'll say that. That's part of why I say Bush was bad. But over exaggerating is not a good thing, doesn't matter if liberals or conservatives are doing the over exaggerating, it destroys one's credibility.

And yes I know we have to pay the money back with interest. The BILLIONS Bush wasted will be hard to repay. The $4.3 TRILLION the Democrats wasted in the last 3 years will be all but impossible to repay. What's your point?

 

The Iraq War Will Cost Us $3 Trillion, and Much More

It always sucks when reality comes to pay a visit.

Suck it Republican!

 

And it's pitiful when a prediction from the Washington Post is considered reality, isn't it? Of course, liberals think Michael Moore is somehow connected to reality, too.

 

Appropriations:

FY2003 Supplemental: Operation Iraqi Freedom: Passed April 2003; Total $78.5 billion, $54.4 billion Iraq War
FY2004 Supplemental: Iraq and Afghanistan Ongoing Operations/Reconstruction: Passed November 2003; Total $87.5 billion, $70.6 billion Iraq War
FY2004 DoD Budget Amendment: $25 Emergency Reserve Fund (Iraq Freedom Fund): Passed July 2004, Total $25 billion, $21.5 billion Iraq War
FY2005 Emergency Supplemental: Operations in the War on Terror; Activities in Afghanistan; Tsunami Relief: Passed April 2005, Total $82 billion, $58 billion (estimated) Iraq War
FY2006 Department of Defense appropriations: Total $50 billion, $40 billion (estimated) Iraq War.
FY2006 Emergency Supplemental: Operations Global War on Terror; Activities in Iraq & Afghanistan: Passed February 2006, Total $72.4 billion, $60 billion (estimated) Iraq War
FY2007 Department of Defense appropriations: $70 billion(estimated) for Iraq War-related costs
FY2007 Emergency Supplemental (proposed) $100 billion
FY2008 Bush administration has proposed around $190 billion for the Iraq War and Afghanistan
FY2009 Obama administration has proposed around $130 billion in additional funding for the Iraq War and Afghanistan.
FY2011 Obama administration proposes around $159.3 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Total, Iraq and Afghan wars thru 2009, $884billion
Total for both through 2011 $1,044 trillion.
That is ONE trillion through 2011. BOTH WARS, and Bush was president only until the beginning of 2009. Note that in FY 2009 it was the obama administration that asked for $130 billion.
Take out Tsunami relief figures, Global war on Terror figures, Iraqi Relief funds and both wars cost less than ONE trillion through 2011.. STILL extremely expensive and still a great waste. Just not a radical ideologically insane figure that you seem to relish.

An estimate done years earlier and from a left wing rag paper is hardly an authority. But maybe that kind of brainwashing works on you.

 

Taxi for Mr. Bickle!

 

Soo... your just going to stop counting at 2011? You aren't going to factor in all the billions of dollars worth of healthcare costs for wounded solders for the rest of their lives? You aren't going to factor in the cost of all the equipment destroyed by the desert sand? No wonder your Republican budgets have destroyed this country. Bush constantly underestimated the cost of his phoney war. Come back to me in 10 yrs and tell me which war cost less than a trillion dollars. Learn some math.

 

That is if you completely ignore the tripling of the defense budget and the increases in VA spending. Those appropriations paid only a small portion of spending on the wars.

 

Well bozo, the Democrats have been in charge since Jan 4 2007. And they've had the presidency since Jan 20 2009. The Iraq and Afghan wars are still going on. Have been expanded and now we are bombing Libya and Yemen. There comes a time when you are going to have to admit to yourself that Bush hasn't spend a dime of Federal money for a couple of years. Pour all the blame you wish on him in his time. But the utter stupidity of forgiving obama for everything is just hiding from reality. Liberal best trait.
Sheik Barack Hussein Obama is doing the spending now. Learn to recognize that FACT and live with it. But when he gets sent back to his Chicago corruption roots in 2012, you can then start blaming his Republican replacement like obama never existed. But our national debt will NEVER forget that obama existed and was insane.

AND THE TOTAL, allowing you complete leeway, is still one trillion thru 2011. NOT the $3 trillions you claimed through your left wing rag newspaper. You only missed the mark by 2 million millions. But maybe that's CLOSE in loony liberal land.

 

Based solely on the criteria of the poll, yes. Of course they should have a vote be counted.


That being said, I personally think a Civics Literacy test in English only should be required every 4 years, with a successful completion of said course in order to vote.

Someone receiving food-stamps doesn't mean they are dumb, lazy or a low life. Doesn't mean they aren't either, but its not because they are receiving welfare...


I was trying to be nice, but by the time I got to this pt. I can't stop myself from saying anybody who believes welfare recipients shouldn't be allowed to vote based solely on their current financial circumstance, should just do the rest of us a favor and jump off a very high bridge.

 

IMO no need to fear, poor and welfare people don't vote. They have excuses that prevent them from getting out to vote; No car, no insurance, had to take the kid to the doctor, the reapir man was comming over, the hot watter went out last night, I had no food and had to go out and get baby formula, relatives came over, I had to see my PO, the baby was sick, I got a bad back, etc....

 

Anyone not contributing to the betterment of the USA should not be allowed to vote, period.

Universal suffrage is the most stupid way of determining voters ever dreamed up.

Hmm, maybe only retired military should be able to vote, or maybe only Mothers with living children.

 

Only those with 5 acres and a mule should be allowed to vote.

 

Hmm, since there are less than 2 million mules currently in the US, I could go along with that, remove more than 90 percent of the ignorant voters from the list.
Oh, I love mules and dislike horses, I have 27 acres, 2 mules and eleven donkeys, does that mean I get two votes?