Obama bypasses Congress on DREAM Act, stops deporting young illegals

[rightwinger]

My god! It's true......you are a caveman

My god! It's true......you are a communist

You cherish a society where men held other men as property.

You cherish a society where men hold other men as property through government with guns. Taking, against one's will, money earned through labor and handing it over to someone who did nothing to earn it is the very definition of slavery. And you love it because your the stoned slave owner sitting home collecting money from the labor of the rest of us conservatives.

A society that looks after ALL citizens....not just the ones with the most property

That's called Communism. Ask the U.S.S.R. how that worked out, you fool...

Commie bastard!

I thought that went out in the 70s. Glad to see some Neanderthals still hanging in their clinging to their guns and dreading the red menace

You have sunk so low to equate legal taxation to slavery. To whimper because you are expected to contribute to the society you belong to. You yearn for an 18th century society where you only looked out for yourself and the white property owner was king

 

[beagle9]

My god! It's true......you are a caveman

My god! It's true......you are a communist



You cherish a society where men hold other men as property through government with guns. Taking, against one's will, money earned through labor and handing it over to someone who did nothing to earn it is the very definition of slavery. And you love it because your the stoned slave owner sitting home collecting money from the labor of the rest of us conservatives.

A society that looks after ALL citizens....not just the ones with the most property

That's called Communism. Ask the U.S.S.R. how that worked out, you fool...

Commie bastard!

I thought that went out in the 70s. Glad to see some Neanderthals still hanging in their clinging to their guns and dreading the red menace

You have sunk so low to equate legal taxation to slavery. To whimper because you are expected to contribute to the society you belong to. You yearn for an 18th century society where you only looked out for yourself and the white property owner was king

The white property owner was "king" in your rant eh? Shows your hatred for anyone white (i.e. blanket analogy or accusation against white as a race or color in such an analogy as was given), and so your not dipicting ones character read through ones skin color are you????? This is the exact perfect case of the profiling of white people (something the blacks hate when it happens to them), and thus you have accused a person of color (in this case a white person) of something being based upon the color of their skin (ownership), and not based upon their actions or their character in which may have then led to their ownership or kingship, yet you claim one may have been involved in (being a king or was a king) because he was WHITE ?.

 

[JoeB131]

Imagine how much money we could save as a nation if we released all prisoners, and made EVERYTHING legal (murder, rape, etc.). We would need no police, no prosecutors, no judges.... ah, a liberal utopia! Idiot....

You might be on to something. Oh, not about the murderers and rapists...

But I've always wondered, how is it that the US locks up 2 million people, and we have one of the highest crime rates in the industrialized world, but a "soooooocialist" country (as you would call it) like Germany only locks up 78,000 people and they have a lower crime rate?

Oh, wait. Could it be that someone is making an obscene amount of money off prison industries?

Could be that a failed notion of "Extreme Freedoms" without conditions or laws or constitutuions guiding it and/or to be abided by, is what has lead this nation into the state that it is in currently in, where as in the past these stats weren't as bad in this nation of course (and don't go all population explosion on me next either), but we have been "progressing" towards what, running off of the edge of the cliff ever since this hope or drive to finally reach the edge of that cliff has been the goals by these "Extreme Freedom" lovers now in America, who have a twisted ideal of what freedom really is, or how to protect what is deemed good freedoms in this nation, instead of trying to protect the bad freedoms in this nation.

These other nations that you list, yes they rule with an iron fist still in many cases, keeping their stats lower, but here in America where the liberals have convinced the more conservative citizens that it is somehow best to live and let live, party everynight till the break of dawn, use drugs as much as you wish, sex it up as much as you can with no decency involved, and on and on and on it all goes, well you begin to get the full picture of it all finally don't you ? Nothing wrong with Freedom as longs as it is a responsible decent type of freedom, steeped in abiding by our given laws and based upon good American cultures, surrounded by our American bible teachings or the Bible, in which gives us a blueprint on how to make it all work out, just like it did for so many years before our rapid decline that we are all now in, where once family could flourish, and their kids could play without the Sandusky's and his ilk FREELY doing what they did under a twisted vail of this so called loose freedom in America, in which has been re-interpreted or attempted to be re-interpreted for so many years now, because people have been convinced that we must have this total freedom in society now, which is the only way to true happiness and bliss in life. This is what they think now, but rather it is a killer of civilized societies, not an enhancer of those societies as they wish for all to believe now. If you want to go by stats, than that is fine, because the stats don't lie, and how you suppose to fix those stats, may just add to them in a negative way, so becareful what you hope for in life, because you just might get it, then what ?

Interesting rant, but silly.

The Germans are less religious than we are, so your whole notion that we just aren't right with Jay-a-zus and reading the Bible is sort of lame. So are most of the European countries, and Japan never had a use for Jesus from the get go. All of them lock up about the same small percentage of their population that Germany does. Meanwhile, the US locks up more people that China or Russia.

But things the Germans also do... they have a system of social welfare. They treat the drug problem as a medical one instead of a criminal one. They put an emphasis on complete employment.

Prisons should be there for murderers and rapists. It should not be there for pot-smokers and guys who pilfered a slice of pizza at the mall.

And when you have a silly law like "Three Strikes", where someone steals a slice of pizza and gets a life sentence because the Prison Lobby has fought for tougher laws to increase their profit margins, then you know we have an issue.

Stealing one slice of pizza results in life sentence - SFGate

 

[rightwinger]

"The Obama administration has brought hard times to Hispanics in America. The unemployment rate has jumped to 11% since January 2009 and the number of unemployed Hispanics has increased by 506,000 people, the graphic says, citing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics".

Yea.....they are really pissed about that DREAM act stuff

Hispanics, like everyone else, know that Republicans started the Great Recession and that they plan to leave them out of any recovery

 

[rightwinger]

My god! It's true......you are a communist



You cherish a society where men hold other men as property through government with guns. Taking, against one's will, money earned through labor and handing it over to someone who did nothing to earn it is the very definition of slavery. And you love it because your the stoned slave owner sitting home collecting money from the labor of the rest of us conservatives.


That's called Communism. Ask the U.S.S.R. how that worked out, you fool...

Commie bastard!

I thought that went out in the 70s. Glad to see some Neanderthals still hanging in their clinging to their guns and dreading the red menace

You have sunk so low to equate legal taxation to slavery. To whimper because you are expected to contribute to the society you belong to. You yearn for an 18th century society where you only looked out for yourself and the white property owner was king

The white property owner was "king" in your rant eh? Shows your hatred for anyone white (i.e. blanket analogy or accusation against white as a race or color in such an analogy as was given), and so your not dipicting ones character read through ones skin color are you????? This is the exact perfect case of the profiling of white people (something the blacks hate when it happens to them), and thus you have accused a person of color (in this case a white person) of something being based upon the color of their skin (ownership), and not based upon their actions or their character in which may have then led to their ownership or kingship, yet you claim one may have been involved in (being a king or was a king) because he was WHITE ?.

Actually.........yes

Property owners were white. Blacks were mostly slaves and even free blacks could not vote. Women were considered intellectually and emotionally incapable of voting and were given secondary status. Only land owners were given the right to vote and yes, they were white. Character had nothing to do with it. Money, skin color and gender were the only criteria

History sucks don't it?

 

[beagle9]

You might be on to something. Oh, not about the murderers and rapists...

But I've always wondered, how is it that the US locks up 2 million people, and we have one of the highest crime rates in the industrialized world, but a "soooooocialist" country (as you would call it) like Germany only locks up 78,000 people and they have a lower crime rate?

Oh, wait. Could it be that someone is making an obscene amount of money off prison industries?

Could be that a failed notion of "Extreme Freedoms" without conditions or laws or constitutuions guiding it and/or to be abided by, is what has lead this nation into the state that it is in currently in, where as in the past these stats weren't as bad in this nation of course (and don't go all population explosion on me next either), but we have been "progressing" towards what, running off of the edge of the cliff ever since this hope or drive to finally reach the edge of that cliff has been the goals by these "Extreme Freedom" lovers now in America, who have a twisted ideal of what freedom really is, or how to protect what is deemed good freedoms in this nation, instead of trying to protect the bad freedoms in this nation.

These other nations that you list, yes they rule with an iron fist still in many cases, keeping their stats lower, but here in America where the liberals have convinced the more conservative citizens that it is somehow best to live and let live, party everynight till the break of dawn, use drugs as much as you wish, sex it up as much as you can with no decency involved, and on and on and on it all goes, well you begin to get the full picture of it all finally don't you ? Nothing wrong with Freedom as longs as it is a responsible decent type of freedom, steeped in abiding by our given laws and based upon good American cultures, surrounded by our American bible teachings or the Bible, in which gives us a blueprint on how to make it all work out, just like it did for so many years before our rapid decline that we are all now in, where once family could flourish, and their kids could play without the Sandusky's and his ilk FREELY doing what they did under a twisted vail of this so called loose freedom in America, in which has been re-interpreted or attempted to be re-interpreted for so many years now, because people have been convinced that we must have this total freedom in society now, which is the only way to true happiness and bliss in life. This is what they think now, but rather it is a killer of civilized societies, not an enhancer of those societies as they wish for all to believe now. If you want to go by stats, than that is fine, because the stats don't lie, and how you suppose to fix those stats, may just add to them in a negative way, so becareful what you hope for in life, because you just might get it, then what ?

Interesting rant, but silly.

The Germans are less religious than we are, so your whole notion that we just aren't right with Jay-a-zus and reading the Bible is sort of lame. So are most of the European countries, and Japan never had a use for Jesus from the get go. All of them lock up about the same small percentage of their population that Germany does. Meanwhile, the US locks up more people that China or Russia.

But things the Germans also do... they have a system of social welfare. They treat the drug problem as a medical one instead of a criminal one. They put an emphasis on complete employment.

Prisons should be there for murderers and rapists. It should not be there for pot-smokers and guys who pilfered a slice of pizza at the mall.

And when you have a silly law like "Three Strikes", where someone steals a slice of pizza and gets a life sentence because the Prison Lobby has fought for tougher laws to increase their profit margins, then you know we have an issue.

Stealing one slice of pizza results in life sentence - SFGate

Again these nations are tougher than you think, because alot of what they do is unseen to the Americans eyes, where already we have got it way better than these nations have it now, but that isn't good enough yet for us, so we want to trump them, and to just go ahead and finish ourselves off, and do it without anyone saying a word about it, well that is OK, but when the children begin to fall under it all, then it's time to get tough again here ourselves, not easier. If we hadn't surcome to the liberal hippies in this nation convincing us in the past of a bunch of bull crap, with their free drug usage and sex gone wild, then the Sandusky's of this nation, who are many I believe now, would have thought twice about doing what he had done to so many peoples children, especially if hanging was still in affect to this day for such horrific crimes of such great maginitude. Keep on making excuses, and maybe we will sink a little bit lower than we are right now in this nation.

 

[beagle9]

Commie bastard!

I thought that went out in the 70s. Glad to see some Neanderthals still hanging in their clinging to their guns and dreading the red menace

You have sunk so low to equate legal taxation to slavery. To whimper because you are expected to contribute to the society you belong to. You yearn for an 18th century society where you only looked out for yourself and the white property owner was king

The white property owner was "king" in your rant eh? Shows your hatred for anyone white (i.e. blanket analogy or accusation against white as a race or color in such an analogy as was given), and so your not dipicting ones character read through ones skin color are you????? This is the exact perfect case of the profiling of white people (something the blacks hate when it happens to them), and thus you have accused a person of color (in this case a white person) of something being based upon the color of their skin (ownership), and not based upon their actions or their character in which may have then led to their ownership or kingship, yet you claim one may have been involved in (being a king or was a king) because he was WHITE ?.

Actually.........yes

Property owners were white. Blacks were mostly slaves and even free blacks could not vote. Women were considered intellectually and emotionally incapable of voting and were given secondary status. Only land owners were given the right to vote and yes, they were white. Character had nothing to do with it. Money, skin color and gender were the only criteria

History sucks don't it?

The only Kings I know of, lived in England or elsewhere (none in America) so what or where are you making your claim against the whiteman King at ? Were their Kings in Africa, and how are they as Kings over the people there? Was everything just peaches and cream under the leaderships found in Africa who were black ? Old History does suck doesn't it ?

 

[rightwinger]

The white property owner was "king" in your rant eh? Shows your hatred for anyone white (i.e. blanket analogy or accusation against white as a race or color in such an analogy as was given), and so your not dipicting ones character read through ones skin color are you????? This is the exact perfect case of the profiling of white people (something the blacks hate when it happens to them), and thus you have accused a person of color (in this case a white person) of something being based upon the color of their skin (ownership), and not based upon their actions or their character in which may have then led to their ownership or kingship, yet you claim one may have been involved in (being a king or was a king) because he was WHITE ?.

Actually.........yes

Property owners were white. Blacks were mostly slaves and even free blacks could not vote. Women were considered intellectually and emotionally incapable of voting and were given secondary status. Only land owners were given the right to vote and yes, they were white. Character had nothing to do with it. Money, skin color and gender were the only criteria

History sucks don't it?

The only Kings I know of, lived in England or elsewhere (none in America) so what or where are you making your claim against the whiteman King at ? Were their Kings in Africa, and how are they as Kings over the people there? Was everything just peaches and cream under the leaderships found in Africa who were black ? Old History does suck doesn't it ?

I hope you are not going down the blacks were better off as slaves path

 

[thanatos144]

Actually.........yes

Property owners were white. Blacks were mostly slaves and even free blacks could not vote. Women were considered intellectually and emotionally incapable of voting and were given secondary status. Only land owners were given the right to vote and yes, they were white. Character had nothing to do with it. Money, skin color and gender were the only criteria

History sucks don't it?

The only Kings I know of, lived in England or elsewhere (none in America) so what or where are you making your claim against the whiteman King at ? Were their Kings in Africa, and how are they as Kings over the people there? Was everything just peaches and cream under the leaderships found in Africa who were black ? Old History does suck doesn't it ?

I hope you are not going down the blacks were better off as slaves path

It is you liberals enslaving the black people in ghettos and on welfare. Us conservatives want them, to be treated like a adult and make something of themselves as free men. The democrat party is the party that institutionalized racism.

 

[rightwinger]

The only Kings I know of, lived in England or elsewhere (none in America) so what or where are you making your claim against the whiteman King at ? Were their Kings in Africa, and how are they as Kings over the people there? Was everything just peaches and cream under the leaderships found in Africa who were black ? Old History does suck doesn't it ?

I hope you are not going down the blacks were better off as slaves path

It is you liberals enslaving the black people in ghettos and on welfare. Us conservatives want them, to be treated like a adult and make something of themselves as free men. The democrat party is the party that institutionalized racism.

Code word for....."Fuckem.......we don't care"

 

[thanatos144]

I hope you are not going down the blacks were better off as slaves path

It is you liberals enslaving the black people in ghettos and on welfare. Us conservatives want them, to be treated like a adult and make something of themselves as free men. The democrat party is the party that institutionalized racism.

Code word for....."Fuckem.......we don't care"

No it is truth in saying we dont believe they are fucking retarded monkeys like liberals do.

 

[beagle9]

Actually.........yes

Property owners were white. Blacks were mostly slaves and even free blacks could not vote. Women were considered intellectually and emotionally incapable of voting and were given secondary status. Only land owners were given the right to vote and yes, they were white. Character had nothing to do with it. Money, skin color and gender were the only criteria

History sucks don't it?

The only Kings I know of, lived in England or elsewhere (none in America) so what or where are you making your claim against the whiteman King at ? Were their Kings in Africa, and how are they as Kings over the people there? Was everything just peaches and cream under the leaderships found in Africa who were black ? Old History does suck doesn't it ?

I hope you are not going down the blacks were better off as slaves path

Wouldn't you like to get me to go there, even if I weren't going there because I don't believe in that kind of stuff at all, but somehow you are either confused or you are an instigator... I think you are both, in which is typical for this internet and these forums anymore...

Uh how about maybe trying to screw your head on better when you get up in the morning, that might help maybe. When I asked were the Kings in Africa, I meant were the black Kings there? You are the one who brought up the word Kings and then placed white in front of that, as if all Kings are white in your mind..

No I am no racist, even though you wish I were... B/

 

[rightwinger]

The only Kings I know of, lived in England or elsewhere (none in America) so what or where are you making your claim against the whiteman King at ? Were their Kings in Africa, and how are they as Kings over the people there? Was everything just peaches and cream under the leaderships found in Africa who were black ? Old History does suck doesn't it ?

I hope you are not going down the blacks were better off as slaves path

Wouldn't you like to get me to go there, even if I weren't going there because I don't believe in that kind of stuff at all, but somehow you are either confused or you are an instigator... I think you are both, in which is typical for this internet and these forums anymore...

Uh how about maybe trying to screw your head on better when you get up in the morning, that might help maybe. When I asked were the Kings in Africa, I meant were the black Kings there? You are the one who brought up the word Kings and then placed white in front of that, as if all Kings are white in your mind..

No I am no racist, even though you wish I were... B/

Why don't you look up the terms literal and figurative.

It may help you

 

[rightwinger]

It is you liberals enslaving the black people in ghettos and on welfare. Us conservatives want them, to be treated like a adult and make something of themselves as free men. The democrat party is the party that institutionalized racism.

Code word for....."Fuckem.......we don't care"

No it is truth in saying we dont believe they are fucking retarded monkeys like liberals do.

It comes down to looking at the needs of all people who are struggling economically. First off, you need a safety net to look after basic needs. Secondly, you need a path out of poverty. Education, jobs programs, childcare, jobs placement

Republicans say.....Fuckem.....they are a bunch of retarded monkeys

 

[P@triot]

Code word for....."Fuckem.......we don't care"

No it is truth in saying we dont believe they are fucking retarded monkeys like liberals do.

It comes down to looking at the needs of all people who are struggling economically. First off, you need a safety net to look after basic needs. Secondly, you need a path out of poverty. Education, jobs programs, childcare, jobs placement

Republicans say.....Fuckem.....they are a bunch of retarded monkeys

No, Republicans say "this is not the Constitutional responsibility of the US government". Democrats say "fuck 'em - this is our chance to make promises we can't keep, spend money we don't have, and collapse the system so we can convince America that capitalism doesn't work - all while consolidating more and more power for our greedy selves by passing out money to those willing to trade freedom for handouts".

The "needs" of the people is completely irrelevant to the US government. And you would actually know that if you read the Constitution just once in your lazy life.

 

[rightwinger]

No it is truth in saying we dont believe they are fucking retarded monkeys like liberals do.

It comes down to looking at the needs of all people who are struggling economically. First off, you need a safety net to look after basic needs. Secondly, you need a path out of poverty. Education, jobs programs, childcare, jobs placement

Republicans say.....Fuckem.....they are a bunch of retarded monkeys

No, Republicans say "this is not the Constitutional responsibility of the US government". Democrats say "fuck 'em - this is our chance to make promises we can't keep, spend money we don't have, and collapse the system so we can convince America that capitalism doesn't work - all while consolidating more and more power for our greedy selves by passing out money to those willing to trade freedom for handouts".

The "needs" of the people is completely irrelevant to the US government. And you would actually know that if you read the Constitution just once in your lazy life.

Yes...to you and your Libertarian circle jerk buddies it is not a role of the Government

To 300 million Americans and 235 years of history......It is

 

[P@triot]

First off, you need a safety net to look after basic needs.

Let's talk about "safety nets" leftwinger. Your idea of "safety nets" collapsed the former U.S.S.R. Your idea of "safety nets" also collapsed Cuba and Greece. Your idea of "safety nets" is in the process of collapsing Spain, Italy, England, and the U.S. Your idea of "safety nets" essentially has a 100% failure rate (much like liberals themselves).

Here is how the U.S. flourished for nearly 200 years until the rise of Karl Marx and Communism created the failed way of doing "safety nets":

Your first safety net is yourself. Living within you means, putting savings aside for a rainy day, improving your skill set to make yourself a more valuable (not to mention marketable) asset. Your second safety net is your family. If you don't have family, your third safety net are your friends. If you don't have friends (you're probably a fucking asshole - otherwise known as a liberal), your fourth safet net are your neighbors. Your fifth safety net is your church. Your sixth safety net are charities.

That is more than enough "safety nets" for anyone who is not a scam artist looking to abuse the system so they can stay home all day getting high. It also is Constitutional and it does not place a financial collapsing strain on the nation.

So why do liberals reject this absolutely flawless system of safety nets? For the same reason they do everything - control. Under this flawless system that the U.S. used to use, the idiot liberal cannot force people against their will, endlessly abuse the safety net, or live off of it for life. Those around them will discuss with them job opportunities, which means the liberal would be forced to actually provide for themselves or they would eventually lose the gravy train as those around them see their lack of effort (something the government doesn't) and grow tired of the endless mooching. Both of which the idiot liberal cannot accept. So they chose Communism over freedom and try to force that on the rest of us.

 

[rightwinger]

First off, you need a safety net to look after basic needs.

Let's talk about "safety nets" leftwinger. Your idea of "safety nets" collapsed the former U.S.S.R. Your idea of "safety nets" also collapsed Cuba and Greece. Your idea of "safety nets" is in the process of collapsing Spain, Italy, England, and the U.S. Your idea of "safety nets" essentially has a 100% failure rate (much like liberals themselves).

Here is how the U.S. flourished for nearly 200 years until the rise of Karl Marx and Communism created the failed way of doing "safety nets":

Your first safety net is yourself. Living within you means, putting savings aside for a rainy day, improving your skill set to make yourself a more valuable (not to mention marketable) asset. Your second safety net is your family. If you don't have family, your third safety net are your friends. If you don't have friends (you're probably a fucking asshole - otherwise known as a liberal), your fourth safet net are your neighbors. Your fifth safety net is your church. Your sixth safety net are charities.

That is more than enough "safety nets" for anyone who is not a scam artist looking to abuse the system so they can stay home all day getting high. It also is Constitutional and it does not place a financial collapsing strain on the nation.

So why do liberals reject this absolutely flawless system of safety nets? For the same reason they do everything - control. Under this flawless system that the U.S. used to use, the idiot liberal cannot force people against their will, endlessly abuse the safety net, or live off of it for life. Those around them will discuss with them job opportunities, which means the liberal would be forced to actually provide for themselves or they would eventually lose the gravy train as those around them see their lack of effort (something the government doesn't) and grow tired of the endless mooching. Both of which the idiot liberal cannot accept. So they chose Communism over freedom and try to force that on the rest of us.

Nonsense. We tried your safety net and people suffered

The US has had a modern democracy since the 1930s. In that time, we have ensured that people have a safety net for when they retire, a safety net if they lose their jobs, a safety net if they are disabled. That is what modern democracies do. The society you desire exists in Somalia

 

[P@triot]

It comes down to looking at the needs of all people who are struggling economically. First off, you need a safety net to look after basic needs. Secondly, you need a path out of poverty. Education, jobs programs, childcare, jobs placement

Republicans say.....Fuckem.....they are a bunch of retarded monkeys

No, Republicans say "this is not the Constitutional responsibility of the US government". Democrats say "fuck 'em - this is our chance to make promises we can't keep, spend money we don't have, and collapse the system so we can convince America that capitalism doesn't work - all while consolidating more and more power for our greedy selves by passing out money to those willing to trade freedom for handouts".

The "needs" of the people is completely irrelevant to the US government. And you would actually know that if you read the Constitution just once in your lazy life.

Yes...to you and your Libertarian circle jerk buddies it is not a role of the Government

To 300 million Americans and 235 years of history......It is

First, that is as fucking stupid as saying that 235 years of rape & murder proves that those things are ok and perfectly legal. Just because something illegal has been occuring for 200 years doesn't mean that the unlawful action magically becomes legal.

Second, the U.S. government has not been helping citizens for 235 years. They didn't start until the 1930's stupid. And that was after the rise of Marxism (late 1800's) and Communism (early 1900's).

Third, 300 million Americans do not agree with you. In fact, only 21% of America agrees with your ignorant, anti-constitutional Communism/Marxism/Socialism (or roughly an embarassing 66 million out of 330 million are registered Democrats ). All of the unconstitutional failed safety nets that are now collapsing this once great nation were implemented by ignorant liberals looking to trade other people's earnings (ie the American tax payer) for power: Social Security under FDR, Medicare & Medicaid under Lyndon B. Johnson, and Obamacare under Barack Hussein Obama.

 

[P@triot]

First off, you need a safety net to look after basic needs.

Let's talk about "safety nets" leftwinger. Your idea of "safety nets" collapsed the former U.S.S.R. Your idea of "safety nets" also collapsed Cuba and Greece. Your idea of "safety nets" is in the process of collapsing Spain, Italy, England, and the U.S. Your idea of "safety nets" essentially has a 100% failure rate (much like liberals themselves).

Here is how the U.S. flourished for nearly 200 years until the rise of Karl Marx and Communism created the failed way of doing "safety nets":

Your first safety net is yourself. Living within you means, putting savings aside for a rainy day, improving your skill set to make yourself a more valuable (not to mention marketable) asset. Your second safety net is your family. If you don't have family, your third safety net are your friends. If you don't have friends (you're probably a fucking asshole - otherwise known as a liberal), your fourth safet net are your neighbors. Your fifth safety net is your church. Your sixth safety net are charities.

That is more than enough "safety nets" for anyone who is not a scam artist looking to abuse the system so they can stay home all day getting high. It also is Constitutional and it does not place a financial collapsing strain on the nation.

So why do liberals reject this absolutely flawless system of safety nets? For the same reason they do everything - control. Under this flawless system that the U.S. used to use, the idiot liberal cannot force people against their will, endlessly abuse the safety net, or live off of it for life. Those around them will discuss with them job opportunities, which means the liberal would be forced to actually provide for themselves or they would eventually lose the gravy train as those around them see their lack of effort (something the government doesn't) and grow tired of the endless mooching. Both of which the idiot liberal cannot accept. So they chose Communism over freedom and try to force that on the rest of us.

Nonsense

The US has had a modern democracy since the 1930s. In that time, we have ensured that people have a safety net for when they retire, a safety net if they lose their jobs, a safety net if they are disabled. That is what modern democracies do. The society you desire exists in Somalia

You're so ignorant about the subject matter, you don't even know that the U.S. is not, nor has it ever been, a "democracy". We're a Republic stupid. Look it up.