While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!

I think it's actually a waste of time- the people they catch are shmucks who have a hit of pot, which can be traced for weeks, while the cheats can afford test beater kits or use coke and meth etc whose trace is gone quickly. When testing becomes draconian, it turns out VERY few are ever caught, or are actually using to the extent of Pub dupes/haters.... see sig 1.

How bout ONE big jobs bill like Pubs have always voted for in the past, like thejobs act they've been sitting on since last August or something. Would add 2% to growth, cut UE by 1%- can't have that!! Would also start fixing up the infrastructure that's been falling apart under myopic voodoo for 30 years....messing up our global competitiveness, like education and health care costs, both up 4x the rest...

Pubs and dupes. An ignorant, myopic disgrace.
 
Sounds fair. I thought the government giving out gifts for votes=illegal. Only people that work for a living should be allowed to vote.



I agree. I had a fried who said he voted for Obama because of the many unemployment extensions he was getting. Of course he stupidly suggested that had Bush still been President, he wouldn't have been able to collect for 99 weeks.


Voting is a fundamental right, receipt of government assistance or other benefits is not justification for preempting that right. Such a measure is clearly un-Constitutional.
 
"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

Does that proposal include the employees and stockholders of companies that receive corporate welfare?

What is your definition of "Corporate Welfare" Liberals tend to have bizarre notions about these things
 
"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

Does that proposal include the employees and stockholders of companies that receive corporate welfare?

What is your definition of "Corporate Welfare" Liberals tend to have bizarre notions about these things

Anything from direct money from the gov't to specialized tax incentives.
 
"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?
Depends, you can easily bribe and manipulate the poor and unemployed; just offer them a few bucks or a meal to vote.
 
"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

I think it shows the meanspiritedness that passes for modern conservatism.

Personally, I am horrified that there are so many able-bodied people on the dole.

But who put them there?

Who outsourced the good jobs to China? Who hires the illegals because they don't want to pay Americans a fair wage? who constantly looks for ways to get two people to do the work three people used to do?

All in the name of higher profits.

And when you let Mitt Romney destroy a good paying union job at GS Steel and replace it with a crappy minimum wage job at Staples with no benefits, two things are going to happen.

1) People will seek any program they can to help them out.
2) They will vote for people who will keep that help coming.
 
"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?
Depends, you can easily bribe and manipulate the poor and unemployed; just offer them a few bucks or a meal to vote.

Recall a few months back when there was a rumor that Obama was handing out free money. The lines in NYC went around the block. It was a rumor but that's the mentality out there voting.

They reality is... are they really that stupid in the first place to think Obam was actually just going to hand them cash.
 
"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?
Depends, you can easily bribe and manipulate the poor and unemployed; just offer them a few bucks or a meal to vote.

Recall a few months back when there was a rumor that Obama was handing out free money. The lines in NYC went around the block. It was a rumor but that's the mentality out there voting.

They reality is... are they really that stupid in the first place to think Obam was actually just going to hand them cash.

Do you have documentation of this?
 
Voting is a right guaranteed by the Constitution to US citizens. Conservatives should really stop screwing around with it.
 
"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

That'll put out the catholics, alot of businesses people, farmers, etc.
 
I agree however I do agree with disallowing felons to vote.

Ever or just while in prison or on parole?

People on public assistance are not criminals.

You wouldn't know that if all you did was hang out here...

In NJ, felons can have their rights restored after successful completion of jail time, parole, and probation. I'm ok with that.

As for your second comment, :confused:
 
"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

Lot of republicans in Southern states would not be voting then.
 
I'm far more interested in drug testing EVERYONE who receives public assistance.

That may be due to your total lack of respect for our constitution and your falsely held belief that poor people are all smoking crack on your dime.

Bullshit. If our Tax payers are subsidizing people to sit on their asses, then it is not too much to ask that they not abuse substances on our dime. No different than the Constitutionality of requiring a new hire to pee in a cup when they get hired for a job.

Oh it's vastly different.

It's not surprising that you don't understand why..
 
That may be due to your total lack of respect for our constitution and your falsely held belief that poor people are all smoking crack on your dime.

Bullshit. If our Tax payers are subsidizing people to sit on their asses, then it is not too much to ask that they not abuse substances on our dime. No different than the Constitutionality of requiring a new hire to pee in a cup when they get hired for a job.

Oh it's vastly different.

It's not surprising that you don't understand why..

It is not different at all.... And I'm not surprised you don't understand why...
 

Forum List

Back
Top