Welfare Queen w 15 kids: "Somebody owes me", "Somebody need held accountable!"

Discussion in 'Race Relations/Racism' started by bucs90, Apr 19, 2012.

  1. bucs90
    Offline

    bucs90 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2010
    Messages:
    26,548
    Thanks Received:
    5,995
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +19,210
    Thats right bitch, YOU need to be held accountable!!! No job, 15 kids, on welfare, bitching about somebody owing her, that somebody (else) needs to be held accountable!! She got charged contempt of court for refusing to tell welfare judge is she was pregnant yet again!!!! What a whorish slut!!

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KUW2vCPX7w&feature=related]Woman With 15 Kids: "Somebody needs to be held accountable, and they need to pay." - YouTube[/ame]
     
  2. Stephanie
    Offline

    Stephanie Diamond Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    70,236
    Thanks Received:
    10,818
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +27,360
    How in the hell is she getting welfare for 15 kids?
     
  3. Caroljo
    Offline

    Caroljo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    Messages:
    6,596
    Thanks Received:
    1,175
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +1,337
    So unbelievable there's actually a lot of people like this out there.....scary!!!!!
     
  4. OohPooPahDoo
    Offline

    OohPooPahDoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    15,342
    Thanks Received:
    976
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    N'Awlins Mid-City
    Ratings:
    +1,320
    What do you think is cheaper

    1) Taking all her kids and farming them out to foster homes
    2) Building a time machine so she can go back in time and not ever have them (the right wing solution - the "she should have" solution - the most practical of all)
    3) paying her benefits so she can raise them


    ?
     
  5. Caroljo
    Offline

    Caroljo Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2009
    Messages:
    6,596
    Thanks Received:
    1,175
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +1,337
    If she's so stupid to have 15 kids and think someone else is going to take care of them, then i pick #1 ! ! AND i'd have her cut off from any help once all the kids are gone....she's too stupid to be responsible for anything.
     
  6. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    9,261
    Thanks Received:
    1,401
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,073
    Good thing those aren't our only choices. In fact, I don't thing "our" should play into it. I choose letting the parents deal with their own offspring and if that's not possible, they can go to charity for help, which I am happy to support. You?
     
  7. Peach
    Offline

    Peach Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2009
    Messages:
    17,179
    Thanks Received:
    1,708
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Ratings:
    +1,965
    Three threads on this ALREADY..................................................
     
  8. OohPooPahDoo
    Offline

    OohPooPahDoo Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2011
    Messages:
    15,342
    Thanks Received:
    976
    Trophy Points:
    175
    Location:
    N'Awlins Mid-City
    Ratings:
    +1,320


    So you choose to create a massive underclass of homeless children.


    That's a brilliant solution.
    And what solution will that charity enact that isn't one of the three outlined above?
     
  9. eflatminor
    Offline

    eflatminor Classical Liberal

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    9,261
    Thanks Received:
    1,401
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +2,073
    Or perhaps parents will come to understand that when they breed, the offspring is their responsibility. Can't have THAT can we?!

    The one that doesn't force some citizens to labor on behalf of other citizens they don't even know. Charities don't steal, government does. Big frickin' difference.
     
  10. Not2BSubjugated
    Offline

    Not2BSubjugated Callous Individualist

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,585
    Thanks Received:
    248
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    In a mysanthropic malaise
    Ratings:
    +372
    Here's the thing. . . the people that have a problem with this sort of entitlement mentality tend to have -moral- issues with citizens being forced to pay for irresponsibility on the part of parents who clearly shouldn't be parents (and I'm sorry, but anyone who's got over 10 kids, no employment, and is STILL FUCKING shouldn't be trusted to raise anything more complex than a gold fish).

    As opposed to this moral issue, what you discuss with your "what would be cheaper" argument is an issue of practicality. So how about this. . . if we're going with pure practicality and completely ignoring anybody's moral issues, how about we go as practical as possible? Cheapest solution? Extermination. 2 zip ties and 1 bullet per pair of children. Tie 'em together on the edge of a bridge over a nice deep body of water, 1 to the head of 1, let him drag down the other half of the pair. Very, -very- cheap, if the cost of this is your only consideration.

    Now, I'm not -actually- proposing that we start offing welfare children, just illustrating the logical conclusion of arguing purely for what's practical and ignoring someone's moral objection. Double edged is that blade.
     

Share This Page