VP Joe Biden - race baiter

[PamK]

Do you think he could be in early stages of Alzheimer"s?

You mean like Regan.

Nope Biden is an idiot and has been for a while.

I've heard some people today comparing Biden's quote to Rep recent talk about unshackling from regulations. I don't believe that either Biden is just dumb.

[Blackstone]

Ok Blackstone, here is a more in-depth study taken during the last election of 12 Obama voters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_JJL...eature=related

Bill,

So, 10 people questioned at the same location constitutes an in depth study to you of the kind of people around the country that voted for Obama? What was the total sample size? How many other people did they interview? Surely they interviewed more than 10 people as a basis for their conclusions. How did the other people in the sample group answer the questions, and why weren’t their interviews included? What organization conducted the study? Was it an independent polling group, or was it a biased organization (I think we know the answer to that one)?

This is nothing but a version of Jay Leno’s Jaywalking skit. You find a few people that are clueless on a subject, and edit out anyone else that might seem knowledgeable or intelligent. And, by the way, they never asked them why they voted for Obama, so how do they know what their rational was for doing so? Maybe they had a reasonable answer.

Come on, Bill, you have to know this proves nothing. I’m sure you could have found the same kinds of answers from among the people that voted for McCain. Or, do you think McCain voters were so much better informed. I was listening to NPR when McCain announced Palin as his running mate. They interviewed a man, and asked what he thought. He said he was excited, and thought she was a great pick. He was behind her 100%. Then, they asked him what he based that on, and what he knew about Palin. He admitted he had never heard of her, but he was sure she was the right pick. Now, should we assume all McCain voters were like that?

[Blackstone]

I have known several that, when offered more hours and go to full time employment, with benefits, refused for fear they will loose their "checks". "Na man if I work more hours they take my checks away"

So, you know a bunch of people that turned down full time job with benefits that paid substantially more than what they were making working part time and receiving a welfare check, just so they wouldn’t lose their welfare check? They would rather have a lower standard of living just to keep that check? I’m sure there are some people that dumb, but I just don’t know any. Perhaps, what the full time job paid was less than the part time job and the welfare check combined.

[ARay11]

I think they want is “shared opportunity,” which will lead to shared prosperity. Of course there are always going to be those looking for something for free, but I believe the majority of people are willing to work for what they get. Free handouts from most social programs really don’t elevate a person’s standard of living much. Most people want to live better than what those handouts provide.

This is from an earlier thread. I thought it was worth re posting here.... This has nothing to do with race... but everything to do with socialism and transfer of power from the people to the government that feeds them:

Over the last couple of days, a question continues to nag at me. For those who are currently on the welfare system, what would it take to get off it?
(** denotes "value" of the service based on my own personal expenses)

In the State of Illinois:

An average family of 4 can earn up to $2442/mo gross income derived from either SSI, Unemployment, Child Support, or actual wages.

For my example, I will use a family of 4 earning $1200/mo via SSI (half the allowable to qualify for services) ($14400)

SNAP (food stamps) allowance for this family is $668/mo ($8016/year)
WIC program: approx $200/mo ($2400/year)
Housing allowance: up to $885/mo. ($10620/year)
ALLKids and MAP are paid (medical assistance/health insurance including prenatal and well child/preventive care) are paid for.
(my current family of 4 insurance premium is about $500/mo, ($6000 annually) **
LIHEAP (Low Income Home Energy Assist Prog. pays utilities incl elec/gas/water) ($6000 annually) **

I have not added in the child care assistance because I could not find an actual dollar amount, percentage paid, or calculator to determine a dollar value. The state does pay for daycare for kids who qualify, but I could not find a way to add a correct amount. Also left off the free cell phone program LOL.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total VALUE of all income: $47436.00 (NET)


IF this family used the available resources to educate and/or training to obtain employment, they would need to get jobs and earn in excess of $60,000/year to maintain their CURRENT situation.

How is this help? What can be done differently? This shows me that there is ZERO incentive to achieve. Generation after generation will simply require more and more assistance.

We cannot abandon the poor or refuse to help. That's not right and I do not advocate leaving anyone out in the cold

[HPL]

Ok Blackstone, here is a more in-depth study taken during the last election of 12 Obama voters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e_JJL...eature=related

I went to Wikipedia to see what they had on Bill Ayers (I knew that he had been a domestic terrorist and avowed communist, but had forgotten some of the specifics) and here are the first two sentences:

William Charles "Bill" Ayers (born December 26, 1944)^[1] is an American elementary education theorist and a former leader in the movement that opposed U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. He is known for his 1960s activism as well as his current work in education reform, curriculum, and instruction.


Makes him sound like you might be ok with him for a neighbor.

[HPL]

Bill,

So, 10 people questioned at the same location constitutes an in depth study to you of the kind of people around the country that voted for Obama? What was the total sample size? How many other people did they interview? Surely they interviewed more than 10 people as a basis for their conclusions. How did the other people in the sample group answer the questions, and why weren’t their interviews included? What organization conducted the study? Was it an independent polling group, or was it a biased organization (I think we know the answer to that one)?

This is nothing but a version of Jay Leno’s Jaywalking skit. You find a few people that are clueless on a subject, and edit out anyone else that might seem knowledgeable or intelligent. And, by the way, they never asked them why they voted for Obama, so how do they know what their rational was for doing so? Maybe they had a reasonable answer.

Come on, Bill, you have to know this proves nothing. I’m sure you could have found the same kinds of answers from among the people that voted for McCain. Or, do you think McCain voters were so much better informed. I was listening to NPR when McCain announced Palin as his running mate. They interviewed a man, and asked what he thought. He said he was excited, and thought she was a great pick. He was behind her 100%. Then, they asked him what he based that on, and what he knew about Palin. He admitted he had never heard of her, but he was sure she was the right pick. Now, should we assume all McCain voters were like that?

What this really proves is that probably MOST people have no business voting. I myself have cast an incomplete ballot if there were races for which I felt too ill informed to make a knowledgeable choice.

[HPL]

I think they want is “shared opportunity,” Most people want to live better than what those handouts provide.

What leads you to believe in the first sentence and how do Obama's policies and stated goals help with that?

I can agree with the last sentence, but in a country of 314+ million (where, by the way, 1/3 are receiving some form of direct govt assistance (not SS or Medicare)) most could be only about 160 million leaving about 150 mil who don't see things that way. It takes a certain level of cognitive ability to even make those relationships and since about half the population is at or below "average" intelligence, it statistically stands to reason that around 77 mil Americans are, to put it bluntly "dumb as a stick". So........

[Blackstone]

What this really proves is that probably MOST people have no business voting. I myself have cast an incomplete ballot if there were races for which I felt too ill informed to make a knowledgeable choice.

That's the intelligent thing to do, but eveyone doesn't fall into the intelligent catregory. I just don't think it's safe to assume that all voters are the same, and that everyone chooses who they vote for for the same reasons.

[M&K's Retrievers]

Ted Baxter and George Jefferson. What a pair to lead the country.

[Gerry Clinchy]

I went to Wikipedia to see what they had on Bill Ayers (I knew that he had been a domestic terrorist and avowed communist, but had forgotten some of the specifics) and here are the first two sentences:

William Charles "Bill" Ayers (born December 26, 1944)^[1] is an American elementary education theorist and a former leader in the movement that opposed U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. He is known for his 1960s activism as well as his current work in education reform, curriculum, and instruction.


Makes him sound like you might be ok with him for a neighbor.

Interestingly, I also recall reading that the $12 million grant that was given to implement Ayers' educational program in Chicago (which I think also involved Obama in managing the grant) was a failure. Did not improve students' performance as he theorized it would.