[QUOTE=Guest;1212155]

Originally Posted by Guest

You are replying to me. On another thread, you would be accused of "cubbyholing." This is usually reserved for liberals and they do not allow conservatives that privilege.

However, you asked how I would change the system.

ALL recipients of welfare should undergo drug testing before receiving their check.

Food stamps should only be used for items marked eligible for purchase using food stamps. Not brand named items, not high quality foods. Basics only. That information should be included on the barcode and the register could filter those items out.

Making it more difficult to obtain welfare when that person is perfectly capable to work is the right way to do it.QUOTE]

You have some great ideas!

The idea of mandatory drug testing for welfare recepients MUST include ALL recepients of Social Security checks, veteran benefits, and Medicare benefits!

The idea of food stamps being only for low quality basic foods is too liberal. Why not make it so the food stamps would only be good for meat, fish, and dairy products past their selling date and fruits and veggies that are bruised, wilted or spoiled? The canned foods eligible for food stamps would be those dented, bulging tops, and missing labels.

Thanks for your great ideas. I am sure Cruz or Trump would be glad to sign Exective Orders to bring them to fruition on their first day in office.

Why would you have folks that receive money DUE to them, be required for drug testing? Do you wish to punish them for some reason? Perhaps because they earned their benefits? People on welfare should be drug tested to see if they are attempting to better themselves and not just attempting to live off of others. It's not punishment, it's qualifying. There is a big difference, but apparently you liberals see it to be the same. You believe that the gov should support you, where as most of us believe that the gov should ONLY protect us when we can't protect ourselves.

After starting this response, I realized that you are just being an @ssh*le and not really attempting to have a discussion. You are just our pet troll, that gets his jollies poking those that are better than himself. You can go play now, you got your attention. Go turn on your cable cartoon network.

Originally Posted by Guest

You are replying to me. On another thread, you would be accused of "cubbyholing." This is usually reserved for liberals and they do not allow conservatives that privilege.

However, you asked how I would change the system. Well, I am not the politician and I am not a half-white president that gets away with creating law with an E.O. BUT, one possible suggestion is to make every person that is not handicapped or over a certain age, WORK for their welfare. A simple process of putting women to work in filing rooms, coping forms using copy machines, running errands, babysitting for gov workers at a child care center (supervised of course) or janitorial work. DO not pay them any more than their welfare check and they will be rushing out to seek employment. Men can do laborer work for the state, collect trash and garbage off the highways and other physical labor. ALL recipients of welfare should undergo drug testing before receiving their check. That would eliminate a lot, right there.

Food stamps should only be used for items marked eligible for purchase using food stamps. Not brand named items, not high quality foods. Basics only. That information should be included on the barcode and the register could filter those items out.

Making it more difficult to obtain welfare when that person is perfectly capable to work is the right way to do it. Since Obama took office there is a record number of food stamp recipients right NOW.

We should take care of the handicapped and the old, if they are unable to support themselves.

Now, the liberals will pipe in and say, that's impossible. That's just as impossible as building a wall at the border. That's toooo harddddd!

BS!

MAKING someone work is slavery. That's why you don't have to work. The blacks wouldn't stand for it...get it? Stand for it, they're lazy and sit on their ass all day... Anyway, nope, you can't MAKE someone work the fields.

I've seen the welfare queen, fancy clothes, jewelry, well coifed, manicured, buying t-bone steaks, Coke, and Ben and Jerry's ice cream. I was behind her and saw her pull out the foodstamps. (Now it's a credit card for less "stigma") Then saw her getting into a Mercedes SUV. Where is the 1-800 fraud number and what would happen to her anyway?

They give away welfare to keep the masses quiet and reasonably content. Bread and circus. Food and entertainment. You'd be surprised how effective it is... Obesity, overeating, and TV go hand and hand.

You don't work in the garden, you don't eat...simple as that.

Hillary said "I did NOT transmit or receive any emails that were MARKED classified."

Obama said" I guarantee that the justice department will not PROTECT Clinton."

Hillary transmitted and received classified information, but it wasn't marked. Still a felony, but technically she isn't lying when she says it "wasn't MARKED classified."

Obama's Justice Dept won't protect Hillary, but it won't prosecute her either. Technically they are not protecting her if they are not pursuing a conviction. If no one is charging her, then there is nothing to protect her from.

Double speak from the best liars America has to offer.

Originally Posted by Guest

Hillary said "I did NOT transmit or receive any emails that were MARKED classified."

Obama said" I guarantee that the justice department will not PROTECT Clinton."

Hillary transmitted and received classified information, but it wasn't marked. Still a felony, but technically she isn't lying when she says it "wasn't MARKED classified."

Obama's Justice Dept won't protect Hillary, but it won't prosecute her either. Technically they are not protecting her if they are not pursuing a conviction. If no one is charging her, then there is nothing to protect her from.

Double speak from the best liars America has to offer.

And when the repubs are in charge, they do the same crap.

Both parties are corrupt, stop voting for either.

Originally Posted by Guest

And when the repubs are in charge, they do the same crap.

Both parties are corrupt, stop voting for either.

You know, I believe you are right. After this, I am never going to vote again. That will fix them. They'll definitely remember me when I don't vote for them.

Naw, just kidding.

Originally Posted by Guest

You know, I believe you are right. After this, I am never going to vote again. That will fix them. They'll definitely remember me when I don't vote for them.

Naw, just kidding.

Vote, but vote for someone you might actually WANT to win. I know it's a novel idea to not vote for the lesser of two evils. But you CAN do it. Pick the Libertarian who wants everyone to live and let live.

We have 2 votes now. Anyone else ready to stop the madness in DC? Anyone else tired of "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"? HALF the cost of the things you buy is tax. Tax gets added to tax along the supply chain, almost 10% each time it passes hands. Taxes add up quickly. Taxes is the government stealing from you and giving it to their contributors.

Originally Posted by Guest

And when the repubs are in charge, they do the same crap.

Both parties are corrupt, stop voting for either.

Yeah but nobody...NOBODY...N-O-B-O-D-Y does it as frequently and continuously as Clinton.
She lives the lies and can switch hats and faces faster than any other human known to mankind.

After starting this response, I realized that you are just being an @ssh*le and not really attempting to have a discussion. You are just our pet troll, that gets his jollies poking those that are better than himself. You can go play now, you got your attention. Go turn on your cable cartoon network.[/QUOTE]

I really got a chortle out of this reply! He fell face first into a trap set for the Wackadoodle Gang of Three and spent time trying to vindicate himself!

Mr. Wackadoodle, get a life away from the political forum. Go play some golf, take a line dancing lesson, or just drink yourself into oblivion but stay away from anything that requires you to have brain power. That goes for the entire Gang of Three!!

Originally Posted by Guest

After starting this response, I realized that you are just being an @ssh*le and not really attempting to have a discussion. You are just our pet troll, that gets his jollies poking those that are better than himself. You can go play now, you got your attention. Go turn on your cable cartoon network.

I really got a chortle out of this reply! He fell face first into a trap set for the Wackadoodle Gang of Three and spent time trying to vindicate himself!

Mr. Wackadoodle, get a life away from the political forum. Go play some golf, take a line dancing lesson, or just drink yourself into oblivion but stay away from anything that requires you to have brain power. That goes for the entire Gang of Three!! [/QUOTE]

Still trying to figure out who the "gang of three" is that you refer to. I do realize that there are only one or two liberals on here, one being a troll. Are you suggesting that there are only three conservative posters on here? There would not be much reason to have a political forum if only three made comments. Although, if they wish to have a political conversation, it doesn't help much if there is a liberal troll interrupting and diverting the subject.
If you are the troll that sets traps, it's a shame that you get your jollies from ill-mannered interrupting of conversations. But, I have noticed that liberals have a tendency to have little regard for disciplining their children and often fail to instill manners, leaving their children to run amok making a nuisance of themselves.

Originally Posted by Guest

Although, if they wish to have a political conversation, it doesn't help much if there is a liberal troll interrupting and diverting the subject. .

How can you interrupt? I skip the posts that are too long to read especially if there is no support, no links or I find it offensive. Doesn't everyone?

When you interrupt a vocal conversation the others talking have to stop or you talk over you. That's hardly the case with posts. Who reads all their email?

Obama "guarantees" justice department will not protect Clinton!?

This is the subject of this thread.
Your post diverted the conversation, didn't it. I don't get it. Why didn't you start a new thread?

Originally Posted by Guest

I really got a chortle out of this reply! He fell face first into a trap set for the Wackadoodle Gang of Three and spent time trying to vindicate himself!

Mr. Wackadoodle, get a life away from the political forum. Go play some golf, take a line dancing lesson, or just drink yourself into oblivion but stay away from anything that requires you to have brain power. That goes for the entire Gang of Three!!

Still trying to figure out who the "gang of three" is that you refer to. Are you suggesting that there are only three conservative posters on here? There would not be much reason to have a political forum if only three made comments. Although, if they wish to have a political conversation.
If you are the troll that sets traps, it's a shame that you get your jollies from ill-mannered interrupting of conversations. [/QUOTE]

Political conversations? Puleeze, give me a break! It is just name calling of the President by the Gang of Three and answering themselves with their one liners.

Originally Posted by Guest

I know hw was responding to a question but why the emphasis on "guarantee" that they will not protect her?

I would have expected him to say something more lawyerly like he would support what ever the findings of the FBI and the justice system dictate.

And in the lawyerly terminology if someone else in his administration does in fact protect her somehow......he has deniability.

I have no confidence and do not trust anything from him or his administration. They all earned that!!!

Obama: I 'guarantee' Justice Dept. won’t protect Hillary - POLITICO

Always remember:

- Who has her and the Justice Dept. on puppet strings and can make her dangle awhile and then feed some more dirt to make her squirm;

- Who can pardon her next January (to keep her quiet about his dirty laundry) after he serves her up to an indictment so Biden-Warren can be parachuted in instead of Bernie. Bernie never joined their party (oops) their club, until he declared his run for the office now, and he is being reminded of this every day with the stacked super-delegate count against him. They will not allow him--an outsider--to take over their club. The RNC is doing the same thing, using Cruz as a doorstop to keep the door open to a brokered convention and putting Kasich in.

Originally Posted by Guest

Always remember:

- Who has her and the Justice Dept. on puppet strings and can make her dangle awhile and then feed some more dirt to make her squirm;

- Who can pardon her next January (to keep her quiet about his dirty laundry) after he serves her up to an indictment so Biden-Warren can be parachuted in instead of Bernie. Bernie never joined their party (oops) their club, until he declared his run for the office now, and he is being reminded of this every day with the stacked super-delegate count against him. They will not allow him--an outsider--to take over their club. The RNC is doing the same thing, using Cruz as a doorstop to keep the door open to a brokered convention and putting Kasich in.

That would be something. Is it exactly the same backers paying both parties the same amount?

Is that information kept confidential?

Originally Posted by Guest

Always remember:

- Who has her and the Justice Dept. on puppet strings and can make her dangle awhile and then feed some more dirt to make her squirm;

- Who can pardon her next January (to keep her quiet about his dirty laundry) after he serves her up to an indictment so Biden-Warren can be parachuted in instead of Bernie. Bernie never joined their party (oops) their club, until he declared his run for the office now, and he is being reminded of this every day with the stacked super-delegate count against him. They will not allow him--an outsider--to take over their club. The RNC is doing the same thing, using Cruz as a doorstop to keep the door open to a brokered convention and putting Kasich in.

Quite the imagination. And it sounds plausible. Let me suggest a bit more, based on my imagination. Bernie has just picked up the endorsement of Occupy Wall St, miscreants. Bernie has a large voter base, but is already slated to lose the nomination. Hillary has bought and paid for her super delegates, so she is a winner. BUT, think of this new perspective. Hillary faces off against ________ (fill in the blank) and finds out that Bernies folks are really ****ed off. She loses a large voter base because Bernie is no longer in the picture. On top of that, she doesn't have the majority of the Independents. Hillary loses.

Originally Posted by Guest

Quite the imagination. And it sounds plausible. Let me suggest a bit more, based on my imagination. Bernie has just picked up the endorsement of Occupy Wall St, miscreants. Bernie has a large voter base, but is already slated to lose the nomination. Hillary has bought and paid for her super delegates, so she is a winner. BUT, think of this new perspective. Hillary faces off against ________ (fill in the blank) and finds out that Bernies folks are really ****ed off. She loses a large voter base because Bernie is no longer in the picture. On top of that, she doesn't have the majority of the Independents. Hillary loses.

Possible--but asking Sanders base, a collection of young people and intellectuals to make an angry vote for a republican is not likely. If they didn't read, comprehend and know what was in the country's best interest they wouldn't be his his base.