Thanks Lockwood. If I disagree with anyone it does not give me the right to attack them or their beliefs.
That only distracts from the issues and kills the debate. Debates are important to forming and implementing policy.
Faceman this might be scary but we agree on the problems. Most people do.
What do we do with those that cannot be independent or won't attempt to become a funtioning member of soceity?
Those that cannot will always be dependent on the rest of us for. They are worthy of the programs the rest of us fund.
This is the hard part. Removing others from the programs will leave many women and children vulnerable to homelessness and hunger.
There is no politician alive or in the future that wants to be known for allowing millions of hungry children to suffer.
Politicans may talk about reform but the reality may be a hard pill to swallow.
Faceman I must disagree with you on one point my children will swear that I am in the bottom 10%. That I can assure you. LOL Shalom
Re-read what I posted. We have to take care of the segment that can't take cre of themselves...that goes without saying. I personally don't know of anyone that would just let them starve, although there may be some wacko out there somewhere that would. But here is the problem - because of liberals, we that work for a living are taking care of FAR more than that last segment. We are also taking care of the segment that WON'T be self sufficient - call them lazy, unmotivated or whatever - the entitlement society that seeks and is content with the government taking care of them. Let's be realistic here...we now have OVER 46 MILLION people on food stamps. If there were a country with 46 million people, it would rank 26th among the world's 266 countries. We have more people on food stamps than are in the entire countries of Poland, Ukraine, Spain, Argentina, Canada, or Australia, among the hundreds of others.
Look at the chart below - sorry the numbers are small, but the chart is by President for the number of people added or subtracted, from food stamp assistance. Obama is red, needless to say. Now we could talk about recessions but we have had them before, we could talk about "inheriting" problems, but if you do thatthen you have to look at how quickly Reagan turned things around after inheriting Jimmy Carter's disastrous legacy, but the bottom line is the Obama administration is an entitlement-happy administration. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone - his background is as a community planner, whose objective was to obtain as much welfare and aid for his community as possible. Everyone knew what his background was - it was no secret
I keep presenting both rhetoric and facts, but you are only presenting rhetoric. I try to be as open minded as possible, but am still awaiting some actual facts that support your contention that Obama has done a good job.
I know why, of course - because Obama has been a failure. That is why he CANNOT (and is not and will not) run on his record and CANNOT ask the question "are you better off than you were 4 years ago"?
TO LOCKWOOD: People can discuss political ideologies without slinging mud...you would never know it by watching TV election ads, though. All it takes is understanding that although you have your own opinions and beliefs, there are other valid opinions and beliefs. Most people, excepting the radical left and radical right, want the same things - they just disagree on how to attain them.
Also, neither db nor I are trying to change the other's mind, which is where the mud slinging comes in. The purpose of a debate is not to change the other person's mind, but to present your case in front of the audience and judges. In a venue like this, the hope is that people that don't see anything about political ideology beyond talking heads on TV, which are primarily just sound bites, or from around the water cooler, can actually read real issues and ideologies being presented and be better informed - no matter which side of the fence they are on. Or at least that is my hope. I would rather see 100 million people participate and vote and re-elect Obama than 50 million people participate and vote and elect my Republican candidate - whoever that will be. The majority should rule, but can't if a majority don't participate...