OBAMA DOESN'T BELEIVE IN WORK REQUIREMENTS....

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by CJ7

when you finish humping each other, there this

or as sane people would put it, the FACTS.

enjoy

Um, OK; I'll play. Fact, I didn't say the states never asked to re-examine the work / training directive. I said I didn't agree with their request. People get paid to work.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

I don’t care that Romney, Perry or any governor asked for it. Asking ain’t getting. They were probably trying to buy minority and poor votes just like Hommie is! Da, don’t you get it? Two wrongs don’t make a right.

What i get is Romney asked for something, Obama gave it to him, and you come on here lambasting Obama.

Pretty much speaks for itself.

[CJ7]

Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton, and Bush 43 did the same thing

now, its a fucked up thing to do.


good to know that


in case nobody noticed the talk about Willards tax returns or him raising taxes doesnt get any responses/input from the rightwing ... Im shocked!

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by Doove

What i get is Romney asked for something, Obama gave it to him, and you come on here lambasting Obama.

Pretty much speaks for itself.

Believe it or not, I haven't spent the last few years following Romney's career around. You and CJ need to read what I said. What I said is NO ONE has the right to circumvent a law that was legally enacted unless it is legally repealed / changed.

I'm sorry the law either doesn't buy the correct amount of poor votes or, and this is more likely, that it is too expensive to implement. But unfortunately, it is the law, and giving work force skills to the unskilled is the right thing to do. Go figure it's expensive.

Leme hear it. All together now. WE GET PAID TO WORK.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Believe it or not, I haven't spent the last few years following Romney's career around. You and CJ need to read what I said. What I said is NO ONE has the right to circumvent a law that was legally enacted unless it is legally repealed / changed.

I'm sorry the law either doesn't buy the correct amount of poor votes or, and this is more likely, that it is too expensive to implement. But unfortunately, it is the law, and giving work force skills to the unskilled is the right thing to do. Go figure it's expensive.

Leme hear it. All together now. WE GET PAID TO WORK.

nobody circumvented anything ... theres the rub

[Doove]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

]You and CJ need to read what I said.

I did. You said you don't care if Romney asked for it.

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

WE GET PAID TO WORK.

Aren't you an advocate of single payer universal healthcare?

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by CJ7

nobody circumvented anything ... theres the rub

Read the AP article I quoted. See the part in RED. I've reposted it here. Geezz, I've had to point this out twice. You and Doove are so desperate to prove everybody wrong, that you end up saying the stupid stuff.

This:

but they may get federal approval to try to accomplish the same goals by using different methods than those spelled out in the legislation.

by default is circumventing! Hello! So unless you are prepared to prove that the AP is lying or stating opinion, then "they" are trying to circumvent the law.

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Here’s the opening from the AP article I posted a link to:

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration has quietly opened the door for states to seek major changes in how they meet federal welfare-to-work requirements for some of their poorest residents, and leading conservatives are crying foul.

In a memo to states issued with little notice late Thursday, the federal Health and Human Services Department said it is interested in approving state experiments that will help “find more effective mechanisms for helping families succeed in employment.”

States will not be able to escape the work requirements of the landmark 1996 federal welfare reform law, the administration said, but they may get federal approval to try to accomplish the same goals by using different methods than those spelled out in the legislation.

Originally Posted by Doove

I did. You said you don't care if Romney asked for it.

I don't. I don't care who asked for it. Whoever asked for it was wrong. That is unequivocally what I said.

Originally Posted by Doove

Aren't you an advocate of single payer universal healthcare?

What does one have to do with the other. I believe in social safety nets. If someone isn't working, they need to be kept warm, fed, healthy and given a skill other than flipping burgers so they can support themselves and their families. What's so hard to figure out about that?

That's your whole argument? I don't think any one should circumvent the law and I believe in social safety nets?

Both of you need to go back to obsession over not getting laid at home or whatever brought you here in the first place and stop obsessing on my posts. I'm obviously not your type. CJ's didn't even know women had hair; clearly he's not interested in women that can think or do anything other than spread their legs.

[Randy4Candy]

Whirly, you must not, either. At least for roofers.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Read the AP article I quoted. See the part in RED. I've reposted it here. Geezz, I've had to point this out twice. You and Doove are so desperate to prove everybody wrong, that you end up saying the stupid stuff.

This:

but they may get federal approval to try to accomplish the same goals by using different methods than those spelled out in the legislation.

by default is circumventing! Hello! So unless you are prepared to prove that the AP is lying or stating opinion, then "they" are trying to circumvent the law.





I don't. I don't care who asked for it. Whoever asked for it was wrong. That is unequivocally what I said.



What does one have to do with the other. I believe in social safety nets. If someone isn't working, they need to be kept warm, fed, healthy and given a skill other than flipping burgers so they can support themselves and their families. What's so hard to figure out about that?

That's your whole argument? I don't think any one should circumvent the law and I believe in social safety nets?

Both of you need to go back to obsession over not getting laid at home or whatever brought you here in the first place and stop obsessing on my posts. I'm obviously not your type. CJ's didn't even know women had hair; clearly he's not interested in women that can think or do anything other than spread their legs.

spoken by a woman who spreads her legs for a living and isnt interested in anything but the $ ..

youre right, I dont care about, or mention hair when Im throat fucking a lady ... that wouldnt be politically correct

[Doove]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

[SIZE=3]Read the AP article I quoted. See the part in RED. I've reposted it here. Geezz, I've had to point this out twice. You and Doove are so desperate to prove everybody wrong, that you end up saying the stupid stuff.

How many times was it pointed out to you that Obama visited Normandy on D-Day in '09?

but they may get federal approval to try to accomplish the same goals by using different methods than those spelled out in the legislation

.

From your own article: "States will not be able to escape the work requirements of the landmark 1996 federal welfare reform law,"

I don't. I don't care who asked for it. Whoever asked for it was wrong. That is unequivocally what I said.

Then being the super centrist that you, ahem, are, i would think you'd be at least a little bit outraged over the hypocrisy of asking for something, then running ads criticizing the guy who gave it to you.

You over-estimate yourself. Clearly.

What does one have to do with the other. I believe in social safety nets.

You believe in social safety nets alright. Except for the ones that come from Obama.

One could even argue you were for the mandate until it became an Obama mandate. And you apparently aren't too fazed by a Romney mandate either.

That's your whole argument? I don't think any one should circumvent the law and I believe in social safety nets?

No, my whole argument is that you're quickly becoming the most ridiculous poster here. You think you're being cute, but when you're not sounding like Sarah Palin with your platitudes, you're just sounding like Sarah Palin.

I've listened to you criticize Obama for probably 2 years now, if not longer. Not once have i heard you come up with something, valid or not, that can't also be applied to the guy you claim we need to save us from another Obama term. Not once. "Mandate", "Truthy", "Waffler", and on and on. And now your big thing is criticizing Obama for agreeing with Governor Romney on this topic.

Both of you need to go back to obsession over not getting laid at home or whatever brought you here in the first place and stop obsessing on my posts.

Interesting that you call me a misogynist, while you proceed to make comments like this which is an affront to every guy here.

And again you flatter yourself by claiming we're obsessed with your posts. You trying to convince the readers here? Or yourself?

I'm obviously not your type.

No, you're clearly not.

clearly he's not interested in women that can think or do anything other than spread their legs.

Or maybe he's just turned off by woman who are hypocrites. And seem quite proud of it.

[CuteOldGuy]

Jesus. CBJ7 and Doove taking the cheapest of shots. Classy bastards, aren't you?

You two are an embarrassment to this board, which is really saying a lot.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Jesus. CBJ7 and Doove taking the cheapest of shots. Classy bastards, aren't you?

You two are an embarrassment to this board, which is really saying a lot.

cheap shots?

if you play in the deep end its best to know how to swim ... Olivias mouth is half her problem, her IQ is the other half

[Doove]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Jesus. CBJ7 and Doove taking the cheapest of shots. Classy bastards, aren't you?

You two are an embarrassment to this board, which is really saying a lot.

Comparing her to Sarah Palin is a cheap shot?

I guess you couldn't come up with a substantive comment, couldja?

[CuteOldGuy]

The comment implied that since she "spreads her legs" for a living was cheap and offensive. Only a classless bastard would use such an epithet. You guys are classless bastard losers. Simple as that.

[i'va biggen]

Just curious old guy if she isn't fucking for money what is her vocation?