A Complete Waste of Space

Pudfark wrote:If the "poor" folks couldn't vote?
You Dem's wouldn't give a feck about'em.

The poor folk can vote..... and the repubes still don't give a feck about'em!

Mitt Romney wrote:"I'm not concerned about the very poor.

Pudfark wrote:The first two hundred years of this country's history...you didn't.
Only, in the last fifty or so years...when, things started to go to shit.

Yeah, cuz the repubes have such a stellar history over those same 250 years for giving a flying fuck about the poor.

True that pud...

Reservoir_Dog wrote:

Pudfark wrote:If the "poor" folks couldn't vote?
You Dem's wouldn't give a feck about'em.

The poor folk can vote..... and the repubes still don't give a feck about'em!

Mitt Romney wrote:"I'm not concerned about the very poor.

Pudfark wrote:The first two hundred years of this country's history...you didn't.
Only, in the last fifty or so years...when, things started to go to shit.

Yeah, cuz the repubes have such a stellar history over those same 250 years for giving a flying fuck about the poor.

Government replacement of charity has not worked. And Romney's point is that the safety net is already there - we do not need to further expand the welfare state.

Same can be said about "giving a feck" in regard to the "illegal immigrants...with one exception? Obama offered the "Dream Act" and then jerked away Obamacare from the "dreamers". Which is the "True Tell" on both the "dreamers" and the "poor".

Barfly wrote:

Reservoir_Dog wrote:

Pudfark wrote:If the "poor" folks couldn't vote?
You Dem's wouldn't give a feck about'em.

The poor folk can vote..... and the repubes still don't give a feck about'em!

Mitt Romney wrote:"I'm not concerned about the very poor.

Pudfark wrote:The first two hundred years of this country's history...you didn't.
Only, in the last fifty or so years...when, things started to go to shit.

Yeah, cuz the repubes have such a stellar history over those same 250 years for giving a flying fuck about the poor.

Government replacement of charity has not worked. And Romney's point is that the safety net is already there - we do not need to further expand the welfare state.

Exactly

Barfly wrote:we do not need to further expand the welfare state.

And if it's thrust upon you, would you have your people live in the streets?

Reservoir_Dog wrote:

Barfly wrote:we do not need to further expand the welfare state.

And if it's thrust upon you, would you have your people live in the streets?

Certainly not.
They can all go live with Buzz.
Clean air, spring water (well, when California ain't siphoning it all off) and the ability
roam the beautiful countryside, whilst waiting for a job.

Why do you keep using California, and my name in the same sentence?

On the other topic. I guess you rebubs would prefer we take care of the poor in other countries, and kick ours out in the street?

I'm sure Romney wants to keep the Chinese healthy.

Buzz wrote:Why do you keep using California, and my name in the same sentence?

On the other topic. I guess you rebubs would prefer we take care of the poor in other countries, and kick ours out in the street?

I'm sure Romney wants to keep the Chinese healthy.

Because, Colorado is the "new" California.

Everybody has to be somewhere... Not to mention, poor folks elsewhere are needier.

He sure does want to keep the Chinese happy.
Ewe dew too. Cuz?
Thanks to Obama & Co., we owe them a huge dab of money....wait fer it.....
with "interest". Yours, mine, his and ours.