This person was talking about the 2000 debit cards and calling them handouts...sm
Posted By: Democrat on 2005-09-14
In Reply to: hand up from republicans..in your dreams - gt
Now is not the time to be talking about handups in the midst of a national disaster like the one in NO. In a time like this it is too late for that and inappropriate. But enlighten me, what kind of handup has the republican party offered the displaced NO citizens?
These people NEED HANDOUTS AND YESTERDAY, until they can regain some type of normal existence and then handups would be good. Some people can't stand to see a person get anything. I've learned that's just how some people are. Even though they are cush in front of their computers posting away, they think if I'm not getting 2000 dollars from the government neither should they. And then there's the, I got mine croud. They feel that these people should have educated themselves, worked harder and they wouldn't be in this position, so let em' stay in the astrodome until they can figure something out.
I don't agree and think these compasionate conservative Christians who think this way should ask themselves WWJD?
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
The $2000 debit card sm
has provisions that state the card cannot be used for alcohol or cigarettes. They will get no cash back on any purchase.
The government has already thought of all these things. The card can only be used for food, personal items, etc.
and calling someone ignorant and venous makes you a much better person??
nm
The plus is that it is a real person you are talking to and not
.
Say what?? I am talking about a specific person whom I personally think...sm
is over-the-top, an embarrasmment to the President in many ways because of her ultra-liberal stance, but I am not "bashing" any Democrats, Republicans, or anyone else in particular here except Ms. Pelosi herself, and I was trying put a teensy tiny bit of humor on the board, sorry I did not pass it by you first, and you make no sense here because I am generally Democratic, not that that has anything to do with this?????? Wow, I honestly gave you more credit for intelligence and fairness than that.
Worried about $2,000 debit card? Oh please!
I was reading some posts on MTStars main board last night and OMG some people are wondering what will happen to the $2,000.00 debit card money the victims will get. One posted she did not want her tax money going to alcohol or drugs!! Would she be saying that if it had been a middle class white neighborhood or just because most of the victims are black, so she thinks they spend all their money on alcohol and drugs. These people had jobs, they had lives, they had homes, they had animals..they now have NOTHING, due to not fault of their own, due to our governments inaction and criminal neglect. So, until they can get their lives back on track (dont know if I ever could, sure hope they can..God help them all), our government is their employer and whatever money they get through the government, they can do with what they want. My God, they have nothing, nothing. I cannot imagine. It blows my mind and each day I get sadder and more angry over the horror. I gotta tell ya, if I went through what they did, when I got that $2,000.00, I probably would buy a bottle of wine along with finding a home to rent, clothing, food, getting my kids back in school and paying for transportation so I could find another job and then I would relax the first night in my new home with my kids and drink that darn bottle of wine..and thank the powers that be that I am still alive.. I am glad my tax dollars will help these unfortunate people.
Name calling? Point out 1 instance of "nasty name calling" in response to your posts
Your childlike accusations are patently false - but you are indeed welcome to your own opinion. I just don't have to agree.
So you can pay for all those free handouts to
-
With all those cards he is playing.........sm
it is easy to see why he is not playing with a full deck of cards.
"House of Cards"
I saw this last night. It is scheduled to be on again today, Saturday and Sunday. This does a great job of explaining how Wall Street's greed not only messed up the USA but also other countries as well. This is a great show. Would highly recommend it.
Well, she's definitely laying all of the cards on the table.
And I think he should and WILL someday have his accountability moment. I don't think the US should have invaded Iraq and we wouldn't be having this conversation today. But the fact remains, if we pullout and bring troops home before we stabilize Iraq it will mean more trouble for the US in the long run. We have to finish what Bush has started.
Democrats give handouts. sm
Republicans give hand-ups. The Democrats have kept the black community in servitude long enough. Besides, they canceled the cards.
Get Ready to Pay off your credit cards
The government is looking into buying some banks instead of subprime mortgages. They are going to need some capital. All ready to pay up?
i pay off my cards EVERY month, living
x
I work my butt off and don't want handouts -
Voting for Obama does not mean I want anyone to give me anything. I have never asked for anything and don't intend to start taking anything.
Not all Obama supporters are looking for handouts -
I am not asking for handouts - I don't need handouts - I don't want handouts - and I am THRILLED that Obama won the election.
Which is how Obama wants it....free handouts!!
nm
All the handouts we give them in California has helped our
No tax-refunds this year for those of us who work hard, pay taxes, and actually live here legally. This year all we get is *IOU's*.
Compassion is one thing......long-term handouts
In the case of New Orleans, the majority of those do not want a help up,they want what they had known prior to Katrina, a monthly hand out!
When the greatest majority of those folks are STILL without jobs, it is because they do not want a job. They didn't have jobs before and they certainly do not feel they should find one now.
Investigate credit cards donations to your heart's content.
Hamas information?
Excellent idea. I'm also charging up my cards, so I hope you bail me out! SM
But wait. If I bail you out and you bail me out and we bail out AIG and the government bails out mortgage-skippers and China bails out the US and...somebody tell me again, where does all this money come from? It's all so confusing.
2000 election
Yes, Bush did win only one election. The first election was handed to him by the Supreme Court Five. If it had been handled properly and fairly, Gore would have won as he had the popular vote.
2000 dead: How many is
2000 Dead: How Many Is Too Many?
By Mike Hoffman
When I left for the Middle East in February 2003 with a Marine artillery unit, I was told Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction, had been assisting Al Qaeda, was partly responsible for 9/11 and was an imminent threat to the United States and Iraq’s neighbors.
We destroyed Iraq’s under-equipped and demoralized military – the imminent threat to our nation -- in a little over a month. Since the invasion, no weapons inspection team has found evidence of any weapons of mass destruction and the claims that Saddam Hussein was working with Al Qaeda have been shown to be nonsense. When I left Iraq for home in May 2003, after President Bush told us “Mission Accomplished,” 139 Americans had died.
After the invasion was over and the occupation began, Iraqis didn’t throw flowers and candy at our feet. Instead roadside bombs and ambushes awaited us down every street. The administration said we were about to turn a corner. We were told that once Saddam and his sons were captured or killed the insurgents would give up, demoralized by the loss of their leader; peace would reign. By the time Saddam was captured in December 2003, 463 Americans had died in Iraq.
The capture of Saddam had no effect, and daily attacks against American forces and Iraqi security forces continued. It was during this time that the bloody Shiite Rebellion occurred. This was some of the fiercest fighting yet in Iraq. Even with this rebellion happening, we were told there was still hope. Sovereignty would soon be handed over to the Iraqis and another corner would be turned. But we needed to stay and provide the Iraqis security until we could “officially” turn the country back over to them. This would empower the Iraqis and end the Insurgency. By then, June 2004, 958 had come home in boxes.
Most Iraqis didn’t seem to care they had sovereignty, since we still occupied their country. They were still without electricity and faced an average unemployment rate of 70%. Every time US soldiers walked outside the wire they were still taking their lives in their hands. Then, we were told, elections would fix this. The Iraqis would have their own government in place and begin drafting a constitution. This would demoralize the terrorists and end the fighting. On the day of the elections, January 30, 2005, the U.S. death toll was 1,537.
What’s wrong with this picture?
The first time we were told the war was over we had lost 139 American; now we have lost 2,000 American lives in Iraq. Time and time again we are told things are getting better, that we have “turned a corner.”
In the Viet Nam War we didn’t “turn corners;” instead policy makers talked about the “light at the end of the tunnel.” We know now that by 1968 President Johnson knew there was no light at the end of the tunnel; he knew his war was lost. The Pentagon Papers showed this; Robert McNamara admits it today. Over 22,000 American troops died in Viet Nam after 1968 in a war our leaders knew was hopeless and just piling up American and Asian bodies.
Again, there is no light at the end of the tunnel, and we’ve turned so many corners we’re going in circles. Our leaders know they can’t win this war, but, like Johnson and McNamara, they refuse to admit it to the American people. Meanwhile, our troops remain a huge provocative force in the region and each individual soldier a prized target. Failure to face this reality is exacerbating the current chaos in Iraq and preventing real regional diplomatic solutions.
So the question falls to ordinary Americans: How many more brave men and women are we willing to sacrifice before we force our leaders to bring the troops home? I pray that it does not take another 56,000 like it did in Viet Nam.
Mike Hoffman was a lance corporal in a Marine artillery unit during the invasion of Iraq. He is a member of Iraq Veterans Against The War.
2000 yrs ago? Try 6000....
not looking for any kind of attention - you are awfully presuming/assuming for a public board/forum poster....you know nothing about me...
please do not respond to any of my posts if you don't like them - you DO have that choice.
I have never been called since 2000
to be included in a national poll. I'm Democrat. I answer all phone calls JUST to have my voice heard. Why haven't they called me?
Stolen, just like in 2000
I guess it is alright if the Republicans steal an election, but not the Dems???
yes, the first person did....the person replying to that post...
was talking about the founding fathers...who came along a long time after the witch trials. You replied to the second post, not the first one. I was replying to you based on that. Purtianism came first...Christianity was the religion practiced by the founding fathers. It is evident in their writings and in most of our original documents.
I think we can stop whipping this dead horse now.
I can't believe it matters. 2000 or 6000, what's... sm
The difference? It's still an ancient piece of fiction written by primitive, superstitious people from a corner of a long-dead empire. Why anyone in the present day would chose to believe any of it, let alone feel compelled to organize their life around it (or believe that it predicts the future, of all things!) is beyond me.
Here is the lastest immigration law, 2000. sm
http://www.aca.ch/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=91&Itemid=80
Then you'll just have to do what the dems did since 2000
Suck it up, tune him out and go on about your business.
Then you'll just have to do what the dems did since 2000
Suck it up, tune him out and go on about your business. He's not going anywhere anytime soon.
Another look at the 2000 Bush v. Gore debate.
I wonder if Bush would still have won if voters knew the extent to which he blatantly lied during this debate. To find the TRUTH, all someone has to do is take just about EVERYTHING Bush said, REVERSE IT (with the possible exception of the comment: "I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from happening in the first place." I didn't understand it in 2000 and still don't know what it means. And why did he only focus on "our friends in the Middle East?") I know this isn’t new news, but I found it interesting to take a second look at this. Hindsight being 20/20, I'm amazed at how good Gore is suddenly starting to look!
From www.debates.org/pages/trans2000a.html
MODERATOR: New question. How would you go about as president deciding when it was in the national interest to use U.S. force, generally?
BUSH: Well, if it's in our vital national interest, and that means whether our territory is threatened or people could be harmed, whether or not the alliances are -- our defense alliances are threatened, whether or not our friends in the Middle East are threatened. That would be a time to seriously consider the use of force. Secondly, whether or not the mission was clear. Whether or not it was a clear understanding as to what the mission would be. Thirdly, whether or not we were prepared and trained to win. Whether or not our forces were of high morale and high standing and well-equipped. And finally, whether or not there was an exit strategy. I would take the use of force very seriously. I would be guarded in my approach. I don't think we can be all things to all people in the world. I think we've got to be very careful when we commit our troops. The vice president and I have a disagreement about the use of troops. He believes in nation building. I would be very careful about using our troops as nation builders. I believe the role of the military is to fight and win war and therefore prevent war from happening in the first place. So I would take my responsibility seriously. And it starts with making sure we rebuild our military power. Morale in today's military is too low. We're having trouble meeting recruiting goals. We met the goals this year, but in the previous years we have not met recruiting goals. Some of our troops are not well-equipped. I believe we're overextended in too many places. And therefore I want to rebuild the military power. It starts with a billion dollar pay raise for the men and women who wear the uniform. A billion dollars more than the president recently signed into law. It's to make sure our troops are well-housed and well-equipped. Bonus plans to keep some of our high-skilled folks in the services and a commander in chief that sets the mission to fight and win war and prevent war from happening in the first place.
MODERATOR: Vice President Gore, one minute.
GORE: I want to make it clear, our military is the strongest, best-trained, best-equipped, best-led fighting force in the world and in the history of the world. Nobody should have any doubt about that, least of all our adversaries or potential adversaries. If you entrust me with the presidency, I will do whatever is necessary in order to make sure our forces stay the strongest in the world. In fact, in my ten-year budget proposal I've set aside more than twice as much for this purpose as Governor Bush has in his proposal. Now, I think we should be reluctant to get involved in someplace in a foreign country. But if our national security is at stake, if we have allies, if we've tried every other course, if we're sure military action will succeed, and if the costs are proportionate to the benefits, we should get involved. Now, just because we don't want to get involved everywhere doesn't mean we should back off anywhere it comes up. I disagree with the proposal that maybe only when oil supplies are at stake that our national security is at risk. I think that there are situations like in Bosnia or Kosovo where there's a genocide, where our national security is at stake there.
BUSH: I agree our military is the strongest in the world today, that's not the question. The question is will it be the strongest in the years to come? Everywhere I go on the campaign trail I see moms and dads whose son or daughter may wear the uniform and they tell me about how discouraged their son or daughter may be. A recent poll was taken among 1,000 enlisted personnel, as well as officers, over half of whom will leave the service when their time of enlistment is up. The captains are leaving the service. There is a problem. And it's going to require a new commander in chief to rebuild the military power. I was honored to be flanked by Colin Powell and General Norman Schwartzkopf recently stood by me side and agreed with me. If we don't have a clear vision of the military, if we don't stop extending our troops all around the world and nation building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road, and I'm going to prevent that. I'm going to rebuild our military power. It's one of the major priorities of my administration.
I just hope we don't have a repeat of the 2000 election...sm
Whoever wins, let them win by a wide enough margin that the is no question. To this day I do not know how Bush et AL got away with that one. Talk about stupid democrats!
By trying to address 2000 and 2004 election corruption
nm
Pot meets kettle. You mean like Tom Delay's 2000-2001
We are still dealing with the aftermath. But hey, he was just trying to help out the shrub and the rest of the GOP good ole boys.
Whoops....A person....not I person.
.
When McBush is talking, he isn't talking to you unless you are wealthy or CEO
who provides campaign funds. Do you know why lobbyists are making the headlines? Because they are bribing the politicians of both parties - lobbyists work for private interests (AIPAC) along with the pharmaceutical company ($280.00 for a bottle of pills? Only in America, folks), oil industry (record profits at your expense) credit card companies and unethical banking procedures (Funny isn't it how Visa wrote the reformed BK bill, making virtually everyone end up in ch 13 (garnishing income, including SS) after raising credit limits and offering transfer balances at 0 percent to everyone with a last name and a roof over their head? Along with mtgs that were bound to turn into bad loans when house prices dropped which they always do after a bubble. God, I could go on and on here but I get tired. The nation is in such trouble. Serious serious trouble. There is a huge loan to an unfriendly country (did you watch the Olympics? did you ever see Bush look more uncomfortable other than during the Stephen Colbert roast during the national press conference. lol.
Well I want you to know what fascism. And I want you to know that those treasury notes are backed up by the taxpayers (you) and real estate including roads and govt buildings and parks. Have you noticed why Save-Mart Center is owned by savemart and not a community business or the community itself? There is somethign happening slowly and surely and it is NOT going to benefit middle class america one iota. You must know that as a poor person, you have no power, no voice. Elections are rigged and the politicans cease to care whether you like them or not - oh wait, that has already happened.
THINK ABOUT THIS!!!! Your 401Ks and investments/assets are what at are stake!
Fascist governments nationalized key industries and made massive state investments. They also introduced price controls, wage controls and other types of Soviet-style economic planning measures.[12] Property rights and private initiative were contingent upon service to the state.[13].[14] Fascists promoted their ideology as a "third way" between capitalism and Marxian socialism.[15] Fascists in Germany and Italy claimed that they opposed reactionaries, and that they were actually revolutionary political movements that fused with conservative social values.
Talking to them is talking to a brick wall.
nm
rhetoric rhetoric - just tell people what they want to hear, it worked in 2000 and 2004 right?
xx
I only lost $1000 so far-Hubby lost $2000 in a week (sm)
so, I called his financial advisor yesterday and told him to put hubby in a "safe" plan. It's now in a money market fund that is part of his IRA.
I have no choice. I have to stay where I am. I have no "safe" available. Neither of us will be able to retire on what is now in our 401Ks and you're not the only one. We couldn't buy a car with Both our 401Ks, let alone live on it.
We are late starters for retirement not until our late 40s funds (most of our employers did not offer pensions). We are now of the first retirement tier and although we own our home outright, if we live until we are 90, there is no way we can live off retirement 401Ks or SS.
My husband's father told him back in the 50s that we would experience something like what is happening today and stated it would be worse than the ཙ crash. It is sure starting to look that way, but we will survive some way, I hope.
We need to pray for the people on SS now that cannot survive. I, for one, would love to help them, but can't help ourselves at this moment.
I am, not talking about Clinton, I am talking
about the torture of prisoners, crimes against the Geneva conventions.
It seems that you did not read the last sentence in my former post.
Are you saying that crimes from the near past should all be forgotten?
Who's doing the name calling here? LOL
Try reading a little closer!
I said it was an ignorant post. There is a lesson in semantics here:Surly you can tell the difference between "ignorant poster" and ignorant post?
My post was not "name calling" - I simply pointed out the poster's opinions were not based in known fact.
As to name calling, I would point out your use of the term 'naïve' - what part of my post criticising Obama A DEMOCRAT - didn't you read? Why would you assume I give the Clintons a pass?
both parties are corrupt to the gills and Americans in general are ignorant of what they are actually do to us ALL and to the world.
Read a little closer before you rant :)
Why do they keep calling?
Over the last 3 or 4 days I have gotten 6 or 7 calls (they call twice a day and always when I am sitting down to eat). They are the democrats calling telling me all the wonderful things about Obama and I have to show my support and vote for him). I keep telling them I am a registered democrat so they know who I am voting for and after they've gone on about him they then say "well you should vote your concious", but they always say it quite softly and one person I asked him to repeat what he said because I couldn't hear it. The last one I told them if I'm voting my conscious why are you propping up Obama?
I don't understand if I'm a registered democrat why are the democrats calling me, shouldn't the republicans be calling me? I have not received one call from anyone on the republicans side (and I haven't left my house since last Saturday when I went grocery shopping so know I haven't missed any calls).
This is just so frustrating. I'd turn off my phone but I have friends and family that call me too. Boy I cannot wait for the election to be over.
There was no name calling at all there nm
nm
Name calling. How like you.
xx
Again with the name calling?
What are you, 9?
Name calling
What are you a child with your name calling? How can anyone take anything you say seriously when you act like a 5-year-old calling names?
name calling
I have bedbugs crawling all over me as I lie on the bed in this cheap motel.
Things zoom past me that I just don't get.
I am such a wrong poor widdle victim of meanies and misogynists, and I play the race card too. And I drank so much Kool-Aid that I cannot face unpleasant truths.
I refuse to grow up. And I can't put a sentence together.....
But you have a face only a mother could love...
I don't appreciate you calling me a liar
and neocons liars in general (BTW, I'm not a neocon), and I refuse to discuss the gross inaccuracies in the article above with a person who thinks we're all liars. It's blatant waste of time.
Like Pat Robertson calling for
of Chavez? Or telling the people of Dover not to pray to God 'cause God won't answer? Must be nice to have such a straight line to the Lord God. Yeah, that's REAL Christianity alright.
Can you stop with the name calling please?
The moderator asked that we be respectful, and "ignorant conservatives" is far from that. Branding a whole group of people based on the way one person posts shows very little tolerance on your part. I thought liberals were supposed to be tolerant and believe in the rights of EVERYONE...EVEN...GASP...OH NO...conservatives!!! You do not sound very tolerant and you walked ALL OVER this poster's rights. I guess it is a case of Do as I say...not as I do? It kinda makes any statement or point you wished to make here ring very hollow...at least in this ignorant conservative's view.
You keep calling me your friend...
...why is that? I hope you don't generally treat your friends this way.
As far as me singling people out to torment -- it would only be you and it would be singular. Plus, I didn't "single" you out, just saw your posts on a PUBLIC forum and as I said, they looked kind of mean and cruddy. However, I would say you are the PLURAL stalker. Come one, come all you will take them on and condemn and mock all that folks say on the liberal board!! And then accuse them of all being the same person. Lots of paranoia goin' on in that ole brain of yours, doesn't sound very healthy at all!!! No, sir!!!
|
