Comments (15) (Please sign in to comment)

1. 

   dapperdan61 said, 6 months ago

   That’s been the objective all along for Republicans. They want to keep cutting away at the social safety nets put in place by FDR & LBJ decades earlier. Without these safeguards in place more people will fall into poverty & homelessness. We as a Nation can’t be so heartless as to let our friends & neighbors lose all that we gained during good times.
2. 

   rdeage said, 6 months ago

   And the objective for liberals is to pay everything for everybody with our children’s money and let all illegal aliens have all our benefits and VOTE.
3. 

   dannysixpack said, 6 months ago

   the objective for liberals is civil liberties, (civility), fairness, social justice. do you really want to take us back to the days of robber barrons like john rockefeller, andrew carnegie and jp morgan and laizzes faire capitalism?
4. 

   doug said, 6 months ago

   @dannysixpack

   Well said, Danny.
5. 

   PlainBill said, 6 months ago

   @rdeage

   One (major) reason Romney lost is that 49% of all Americans receive some form of assistance from the government. This assistance can range from housing to food and medical care. The recipients range for the slacker who is trying to get more benefits, to the person holding two jobs and working toward the day when he can earn enough money he won’t be dependent on handouts, to the family of a soldier serving in Afghanistan

   And Romney and many other Rethuglican reptiles pretend that ALL of that 49% are lazy slackers. You shame yourself.
6. 

   ronald rini said, 6 months ago

   Not really we want to cut welfare cheats, do no mind the hand up it the hands out that we do not like. And there is no reason a senator should make 174,000 a year plus benefits etc.
7. 

   fritzoid said, 6 months ago

   @ronald rini

   “Not really we want to cut welfare cheats, do no mind the hand up it the hands out that we do not like. And there is no reason a senator should make 174,000 a year plus benefits etc.”
   

   
   Why not? In Romney’s America, $174,000 is barely Middle Class.
   

   
   Look, you can no more identify and eliminate all the poor “welfare cheats” than you could the rich “tax cheats.” Any necessary system will be vulnerable to people who figure out how to “work it,” but that doesn’t change the fact that the system is necessary.
8. 

   braindead08 said, 6 months ago

   “It is not enough that I should succeed – others should fail.”
   -
   Republicans should adopt this quote as their Party Motto.
9. 

   lindz.coop said, 6 months ago

   Most of the welfare cheats I know are Republicans.
10. 

    Wabbit said, 6 months ago

    most welfare cheats are few and far between. Far many more are the children born in poverty Then there are the old and retired, most of whom have paid into SS and Medicare. Then there are the disabled. Not all disabilities are visible. Mental health problems are a big part, speially in VETS. THat would be about 90% of the homeless..
11. 

    I Play One On TV said, 6 months ago

    I’ll go on record as saying probably 75% or more of Americans are partly dependent on government. Not including clean air/water/food, etc., but just based on tax deductions. I claim a mortgage interest deduction, and when I buy furniture or equipment for my office, I can consider it a business expense. Of course, I have to pay personal property tax and business taxes, but I can deduct some. Am I a taker? I am an employer, but I’m certainly far from rich. So we all get some monetary break from the feds. I’ll give up some of mine if we all do together.
12. 

    kamwick said, 6 months ago

    @I Play One On TV

    Yes, we would all do that. Trouble is, if you cut the safety net for the neediest during an economic downturn, the little advantage in debt reduction is overwhelmed by the certain plunge into depression.
13. 

    Paul Harvey said, 6 months ago

    @lindz.coop

    Really, so you follow them in the voting booth and see where they put an X. Seems unlikely. I would think just the opposite is true. If they are conservative they would not be welfare cheats.
14. 

    Redkaycei Repoc said, 6 months ago

    @Paul Harvey

    I would guess that lindz was being sarcastic and referring to the entitlements the rich seem to think they deserve, like paying a smaller share of taxes (and by using every tax loop hole and tax break to get out of paying anything at all) or companies demanding tax breaks or they will move etc. Not welfare as in food stamps but in other ways. Just my guess of course.
15. 

    oldrellek99 said, 6 months ago

    @Paul Harvey

    Years ago Colorado put in a state minimum wage law that forced these companies to pay a living wage; there reason was that the state should not have to subsidies mega corporations with welfare and food stamps for the employees. If you like you’re tax dollars going to subsidizing these types of companies that you’re projective. I for one don’t like it one bit.
16. Refresh Comments.