Obama outperforms Reagan

[davekc]

They're hardly apocryphal stereotypes when reporters & journalists have provided countless examples, which they have. Dave is right about both parties being at fault, but there's just one party [maybe just the lunatic fringe that seems to be calling the shots the past few years] that is insisting on less government, regulation, & taxes as the solution.
When they mention specifics, such as eliminating the Department of Education, and battling the new Consumer Protection Agency, the voters don't agree with them, so they hire marketing experts to repackage the rejects. Because it's not their philosophy that's wrong, it's the public perception, right? If they present it differently, people will agree with them. Right. Their "Family Values" agenda was a great example: it failed, big time. Or they just skip the voters and get their pet politicians to put forth the legislation, and if it ends up in court, [like same sex marriage & abortion clinic restrictions], hey - that's what we pay taxes for, right? [Talk about wasting money!]
Sam Brownback just showed what's wrong with their reasoning - it would be great to think they're paying attention, but I doubt it.

You do realize the democrats have been in control for the past six years right? Their policies even as of late, hurt the very people you are defending. Not sure all of them need defending. Just look at our open door immigration policy because both parties want the Latino vote. Letting them in by the thousands and they are low wage and educated people. Guess who they will be taking money, jobs, and resources from? All kinds of examples with that being a recent one. Have to look at the whole picture.

 

[davekc]

Here is that lobster boy.
Welfare Surfer's Saga Continues as Lobster-Eating Food Stamps Recipient Refuses Hannity's Help to Find Job | Fox News Insider

 

[Turtle]

The lobster story suddenly is not all that apocryphal, huh. Maybe overs of apocryphal, the correct term or phrasing might be "exception to the rule," in which case my comment stays exactly the same, using exceptions to the rule to prove the norm. The comeback will be, "yeah, but look at all the business hiding in offshore tax havens," to which the response would be, "What's the percentage of US companies with offshore tax holdings?" to which the answer is surprisingly small, small enough to be the exception.

As for the Department of Education, it can be and should be . Not cut back or something, but straight-up, strikethrough eliminated. It preforms no useful or beneficial function other than tax funded jobs and taxpayer funded waste. Every since the creation of the Education Department, Americans have become less educated not more, and less intelligent in relation to the rest of the world.

Like poverty and drugs and health care costs, everything the government throws money at to combat, we simply get more of it. It's amazing, and amazingly consistent and predictable.

 

[cheri1122]

I'm entitled because I earned it.

I'm entitled because I breathe air and expect it.

Two entitlement mentalities. Nah, nobody reasonable could figure out where the "entitlement mentality" comes from.

Or: I'm entitled because I can pay people to clue me in on the 'workarounds'. High priced docs are a great example: when the last round of budget cuts included cuts to Medicare providers, the docs hired some new consultants. They advised requesting a specific colleague to "assist" during surgery. While an assistant [another pair of trained hands] is sometimes needed, it does not need to be a surgeon, and many hospitals provide the assistant at no charge, or a much lower charge than the surgeon's quarter of a million dollar bill. [Yep, that's right.] The doctors know it, but they also know the hospital will honor their request, and the insurance will pay for it, and they will be asked to assist others, in turn. At the end of the year, their income from Medicare, will exceed what they earned before the budget cuts.
But they deserve it, because they earned it, right?
And how about the 'consultants', who exist solely to find ways around the laws - like hackers for the well off - do they deserve the big bucks, for finding [or creating] loopholes to subvert the intent of the law?

If you don't believe the wealthy are the poster kids for the entitlement mentality, pay more attention to the ads for real luxuries, lol.