Ps. Also add in all of the putting down African Americans (Obama has their vote so why bother), I'd rather be latino...It would be easier for me to win and oh palestine...forget it lets kick the ball down the road on that one. Totally blows it for him. How can the leader of the free world have these views.

Romney may be a great businessman...but he'd be a terrible POTUS!

GregRogers, hey greg. it's rex from midtown high school. how have you been? i see you stil like to speak yuor mind. i saw rick last weekend and he said you guys are friends. it would be good to see you again.

Attacking Property Rights is akin to attacking Free Speech. Both are guaranteed in the Constitution. At debate currently is whether Free Speech should include making a film that offends Muslims. Either we will have limited speech or we will continue to have Free Speech. Either we will have Property Rights, or we will have public ownership of property and we will be allowed permission to keep only what others think is "enough."

Something worth pondering--if you diminish the property rights of others, what happens to you when the definition of "rich" changes downward?
From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluence_in_the_United_States
"Overall the term affluent may be applied to a variety of individuals, households or other entities depending on context."

"Fair" depends entirely on context. Do you not see a problem with that?

A fairly high number of the 47% who don’t pay federal income tax are rich people who don't pay capital gains and have their money sheltered. Also among the 47% are old people, veterans, disabled people, and the like – most of whom are white and many of whom will vote Republican. If I were in any of those boats, it would make me think twice about voting for someone so "arrogant and stupid," as William Kristol said.

LOL - Reminds me of this song about another pretty famous gaffe: http://youtu.be/bQu2SVFF-cU

Except "you didn't build that" wasn't a gaffe, Kristi. It was a quote taken deliberately out of context. Obama said that business owners did not build the roads and bridges that connected their businesses to customers, and he was entirely correct..

To say it's a gaffe because Fox News cut the rest of the quote is like MSNBC taking the Mitt Romney quote, "America cannot continue to lead the family of nations around the world if we suffer the collapse of the family here at home," and cutting it down to "America cannot continue to lead the family of nations around the world." Yes, he said those words, but to take them out of context is dishonest.

@Brian
You appear to have been spending some high quality time on Willie's tour bus…

Ryan, it wasn't out of context. He said it, and he meant it just the way it sounded. Read or listen to the whole thing, and nothing changes. The problem here is that it was actually the businesses that built everything, because that's where the money that the government used originated. Without the revenue going to the government, the government can't build anything. This is kind of the 'chicken before the egg' argument. However, in this case, government actually creates nothing it doesn't first get from somewhere else. So the proper statement from our fearless leader should have been something like "Government, while necessary, didn't build itself."

Just sayin....

Apparently Ryan has too

Karsten,
The full quote is this:

"If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business—you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."

He was clearly and explicitly saying that business owners benefited from the infrastructure provided by government programs. The quote that showed up at the RNC and in the Romney campaign was: "If you've got a business—you didn't build that." It made it appear that he was saying business owners did not build their own businesses, which he clearly wasn't. By definition, the quote was taken out of context. It's not as if the left isn't guilty of some low-blow electioneering -- the "Romney killed my wife" ad comes to mind -- but whatever your political persuasion, it is simply a fact that Obama's remarks were stripped of context for political purposes. It happens on both the right and the left, and either way it's a dirty trick.

Karsten,
Although your "government, while necessary, didn't build itself" statement is also very true. Very good point.

Ryan - point taken. Out of context quotes are dirty, and those that use them are beneath honor. However...I still don't really see the distinction in this quote. In reality, I understand what he was saying. But it was a way to push the agenda of those with the most need to pony up, since they're not paying their fair share, which they actually are. I also don't agree with the sentiment in general. Business owners, at least those that aren't being coddled by the government with bailouts and such, did build their businesses. They learned things along the way to help them get it right, but essentially people did what they are designed to do. You can look at this the other way and say "You didn't build anything and get rich? With all this help that's out there? How much do you suck?" I don't, however, hear anybody saying that.....

Actually, Romney's "47 percent" turn out to live primarily in dependably Republican states. (http://www.businessinsider.com/mitt-romney-47-percent-no-income-tax-map-red-republican-states-2012-9)

Most of them pay payroll taxes, and a good portion of them are the elderly. Regardless of politics, I just don't think there's a way to spin Romney's comment in a positive light. It was an ill-advised thing to say no matter how you look at it.

No..we can handle it but can th 47% (most whom are Red state voters) handle it...he was talking about them....your fellow Republican Voters!!!

Horse Poop! Now who's lying? Brian says "Those 47% are teachers and soldiers, the elderly and students, and anyone else trying to raise a family on less than $50k a year".

Brian obviously knows that weak liberals will believe this crap. I don't make $50k a year yet I have managed to feed my family of four, keep my home and two vehicles through this debacle. All this and I have been laid off twice since 2009. I have always worked my can off and saved while doing without and I continue to. I don't make excuses like you do Brian.
Show your facts or shut up! You people disgust me. I teach my children responsibility and they have seen people sleeping under bridges in Atlanta. I show my family by example what it takes to be outside the 47% and how to be happy without Obama.

Of course there are Americans that are retired, disabled and struggling but to make excuses for nearly half of this nation is appalling and a shame. Wake up America. Our beautiful nation is failing and excuses are useless.

Scott Terry....I commend you on what you've been able to accomplish. I really do...however, Brian is correct. Maybe before you condemn you may want to use google to look for yourself. Here are the stats from NPR.ORG

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/09/18/161337343/the-47-percent-in-one-graphic

So Mitt Romney was actually bashing, the poor, elderly, children students.

Also 28% pay payroll tax but not federal tax.

If you just take off your I hate Obama glasses and read...you will see the real reason why Americans are disgusted.

Again...most of the so called Mitt Moochers in the souther red states.

http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/17515-romney-decries-his-red-state-southern-base-as-lazy-moochers-the-47

Thank you GregRodgers so much for enlightening me. At this point in my life, I have never realized how blind and ignorant I am. And now, I find that I hate Obama as well.

Please take my word sir that I hate no one and I do my best to educate myself when I find time. I feel that I am fair minded all around. I do not assume to know everything nor do I believe everything I read. I do however consider what I hear another person say.

I can speak only for myself and assure you that I hate no one and I would never accuse a stranger of such. Obama has been very clear that he believes in redistribution. Those who produce will, and have the right to, produce until they feel the system in unbalanced. Our nation is reaching that state of unbalance and I pray we will make corrections before it is too late. I also feel that our time is limited.

Just because you pay payroll taxes means nothing if you get it all back, you are part of the problem not the solution. I am not a rich person but I pay a lot of taxes and when we get fed up and join the 47% you refer to then no one will be left to keep this 47% up. Good luck on getting your welfare and food stamps then as we all will be enjoying doing nothin and we will be just like Greece and Athens will die on the vine and no students will need to be educated because only college teacher jobs will be left for anyone to get. Think of what the future holds when you vote in November.

Jimmy...."You didn't buid that" was not a gaffe....it only is depending on which way the earwax was built up in the ears....

Most people understood exactly what was said.....

Except he didn't insinuate that 47 percent of voters had a victim mentality. He explicitly said it. I think that will hurt him in the long run, because it's not a matter of poor phrasing or being taken out of context. But you may be right, Jimmy -- election-year memories can be short, and this may blow over. It'll be interesting to see if it continues to have repercussions as the election draws closer.

It was a gaffe in the sense that it was easy for his critics to find fault with it...How 'bout "white folks greed runs a world in need"? Or maybe the time he said of his dear beloved grandmother, "she is a typical white person"?
Do you want to blame them on ear wax too? Or maybe just realize that politicians (of all stripes) are subject to saying stupid things?

What some of you fail to realize is that a lot of the 47% have worked hard all of there lives and paid taxes and into social security to be able to draw a check when they retire or if they happened to get hurt on there job. Now that Romney and some his fat cat friends have taken welfare from the government and our retirement investments to line their pockets, there many people who were well off needing that same , medicade , foodstamps and gov. assitance because they have lost their jobs and investments. I guess its welfare if its us 47% and a ballout if its the 1%?

Wow. Calling anybody on the right a liar when you have the king of liars in the White House currently is actually kind of funny...

Romney was right about the numbers, just not the source of the numbers. Roughly 47% will not vote for him no matter what. These are those that feel like victims, or feel like everybody else is. That feel like people stand no chance in this country without the government to back them up. Those that feel like government is the answer. OR...those that will vote for Obama purely because he's black. Those groups make up about 47%, and Romney's right - there's no reason to worry about them, they won't help him. This is different than not being worried about them, and why they feel the way they do, but he's not getting their vote.....

And while we're discussing it, Obama, Reid, Pelosi, none of them have any business making decisions for ANY Americans, much less the majority. It's decisions out of their camp that have put us in the positions we're in, with the income gap and huge numbers of people on the government dole. If you have policies that foster dependence, guess what you're going to get. If you force banks to give risky loans, guess what's going to happen eventually. Especially when you have policies that promote no sense of responsibility...

Right on, RL.

Yep....and the majority live in Republican Southern Strongholds...so yes...after what he said...he should know that he does no have a chance...

Only thing truthful was the percentage. However, to call grandma and grandpa and little poor Johnny a moocher and not having personal responsibility....is a head scratcher...wouldn't you agree?

47% right number, but he was wrong....

Not all 47% that don't pay federal income taxes are moochers or feel like victims.
But pretty much all 47% that will vote Obama are....

Details, details....

Not a demo...but OMG...Lies....only thing Repubs know how to do....

@ Greg you lay claim to an “independent” viewpoint and NOT being a DEM , but you can’t call out one side without an equal share for the other on this subject. LIEs, incomplete representations and befuddlement are by far the oldest and biggest bipartisan byproduct.

If we could just tax this material fairly, we’d have NO DEFICIT…

If we would allow it to burn as fuel, we would eliminate the high cost of energy or outright dependence on international suppliers.

If the man in office really had a plan for the next 4 years, why haven’t we seen the details? Why is Bill Clinton on the tube harping endlessly about a plan WITHOUT a single detail? Even H+R Block provides one of the 29 reasons in its ads.

Because to do so you would have to believe we are better off now than four years ago and that just isn’t reality, unless you specialize in foreclosed or short sale real estate…

WRONG!
47% of this country is not in need of a hand out. Give Obama another 4 years and this will more than likely become fact.

Stop getting your news from David Loserman sweetie.

Well Said Kathy!

@Kathy
At last a rational voice with the facts.Well said.

I am all for people paying their fair share because if they did I would pay a helluva lot less and the 47% we are speaking about would be paying moree than none which most pay. What is faair about that????

The whole redistribution and socialism are just keywords to disturb folks and rile up those old enough to remember the 50's.

In the USA we have socialist programs. These are called: Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, welfare, Tricare, Childrens Health Ins. Program CHIP, VHA....etc.

Its simple...the gov takes taxes and applies them to programs. Wealth will always be redistributed and has for 80 yrs for programs.

The democratic healthcare has a socialized slant to it, however, most folks will by into private ins. Again....there is not alot of difference in the socialized aspect from what we have today...(more folks will be covered under Medicaid and Medicare).

And doctors will be paid....any doc saying they wont receive payment is lying. In fact, the best HC payer is Medicare.

A redistribution of wealth can also be called money transferred from us to Big Business. Its called Corporate Welfare.

Explain to me why this socialist program is good, especially when some corporations in GA are sitting on billions, but its not good to help people?

Today... Deal gave 4.5million to a developer at Lake Lanier for a well but wants to limit access to healthcare for the people. Tell me how that is good to let people get sick but cut a deal to a developer? Seems like priorities are a bit skewed.

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/state-regional/governor-oks-45-million-for-lake-lanier-resort-run/nSFfF/

@GregRodgers, considering several posts you have made here today, I assume you are clearly sold on Obama. May I ask what it is that makes you feel Obama can or will restore the United States to what it once was? I think it's very doubtful that the redistribution concept will last very much longer.

If I were in a club of four and only myself and one other paid club dues, I think I would leave the club. And liberals wonder why businesses move out of the US.

Larry....

I believe that Romney is not very Presidential. He has been a gaffe factory since before the Olympics. The stuff he said in the video is horrendous. His own party is losing patience with him.

He will not show his tax returns, lied in Massachusetts and raised taxes sky high while he was Governor. He made Obamacare but runs from it and has flip flopped on gun control, and womens repro issues.

At Bain...he did kill and outsource jobs.

And you ask me why I would vote for Obama? Are you serious.

Look...believe what you want to believe. I will agree to disagree. But this country is turning around albeit slowly. It was not going to happen in 4 yrs and most people understood that.

I am simply not voting for a wooden man who really seems to want to shoot his own foot and who changes his mind with the way the wind blows.

Maybe thats your kinda guy but he is not mine.

Business move out of the USA in order to pay people less and to protect the bottom line. Period.

Doctors getting out of medicine because of Obamacare? To do what? Wait tables? Program computers? Manage Subways? They are now doing what they chose to do. They, like to rest of us, just don't like taking pay cuts!
BTW: Numerous studies - see Google - show that paying more for health care does not guarantee better care; just a light wallet.

Kathy....I am an indy voter. They call me a Demo Liberal too. I am probably more conservative than Liberal so do not take any slants they throw at you.

Most only see things two ways....Demo and Republican and cannot believe that folks get news from a variety of sources in order to draw a conclusion.

Again....I like your post!

Maybe these supporters see that Obama is taking us close to the cliff which he is. Get your head out of the sand before we go down never to be the same again.

Take my head out of what sand Russ? From what I can see the sand you are speaking of certainly doesn't support the Republicans. The Republicans have done very little to help kick start the economy over these past four years. I find the Republicans as much at fault for the situation we all find ourselves in. At every turn their efforts have been focused on keeping this Presidency to one term which has hurt everyone. No one is a winner in this debacle.

James...shame on those poor people and claiming that EIC Credit that the Republican Ronald Regan gave them so many years ago.

And shame on all of those Rich supporters of Romney who also take advantage of tax loopholes that allow them to pay zero percent as well....those bad people who do not take personal responsibility. Some of those folks are 47%ers too!

I think I've read this similar post before...so I am going to back on James bein a troll!!

Greg, how many rich supporters of Romney paid zero? Do you have those numbers, I'd love to see them?

Don't play stupid, you know good and well what poor people he's talking about. It's not the ones that paid in to the system and now have to take advantage of the system because they truly are in need. It's those that take advantage of the system to milk the entitlement programs for all their worth.

I am not sure how many Rich Romney supporters paid zero, however, its a fact that 4000 of the 47% are folks that made over a million last year.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/4-000-richest-romneys-47-190300071.html

Don't play stupid? Not sure what you mean. Are YOU suggesting that Romney meant that there are specific people in his 47%. Because I will have Romney's back on this fact....HE NEVER MADE ANY SPECIFICS WHEN HE MENTIONED the 47%.

So I have no idea what you mean. He made a blanket statement. And under that blanket are Old folks, war vets, working poor and students.

Please do make carve outs when there never was one.

No, you're correct. Because he was talking campaign strategies, not specifics about who and who doesn't take advantage of the welfare system. He WAS generalizing about people from that group that won't change their minds due to theie soci-economic status.

How convenient to be literal about those off the record comments but if we quote a public speech by Obama then we're taking it out of context?
Two faced.

Totally agree with North Georgia Weather. If Obama had made those same remarks, everyone would have been praising him and saying RIGHT ON! Romney says it and look out.

The so called redistribution you're talking about, the redistribution that Obama talks about are two VERY different animals. One is where almost all people pitch in and help those truly in need. The other one is take from the rich and give to the poor. If you give to the poor to the point that they expect it, then they will always vote for you as long as you're offering.

I can think of one really great example... this summer our school served lunch to any child 18 or under... for free. No questions asked, nothing. Walk in an get a lunch. Doesn't matter if your family can afford it. Another example, free and reduced lunch program. Do you think there are any checks or verification's of the applications? No. Fill out the form, lie however you wish, and you get free lunch. What is right about that? Why is there no accountability for programs like these? And you know what, Obama wants it that way. Get the people hooked on what the government can do for them, and like magic, they're under your spell. They trust you and believe you and follow you like pied piper.
cont...

You can slant this anyway you want, you know exactly what Romney meant. We have way too many people that "believe" in the welfare system and they take full advantage of it, to the point that the system is terribly abused.

Our people are becoming more and more welfare dependent and truly believe they are entitled. The politics that Obama plays with money is simply a ploy to attract more and more lazy people to be "on his side". It's them against the rich, and yes, there are many more of them and growing. If you can't see which direction our country is sliding, you haven't been around very long and/or not very insightful.

NGW: " We have way too many people that 'believe' in the welfare system..."

FYI, George Romney, Mitt's father, was on welfare at one point in his life. Yet, another beneficiary of redistribution: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPZPaysBTqk (pay attention at about the 55 second point of the video)

No, you're not twisting my words. Believe means "live on". I'm not talking about using it when needed.

North GA....you are incorrect and are getting two different things mixed up.

One...WE ALL contribute to the redistibution of wealth. All of our taxes go for these programs. I am certainly not rich, but understand what Obama means. As for the ultra rich....he is only suggesting that the RICH go back to pay what they were paying under the Clinton years which is 2 percent more.

Considering that these folks have had ten years of breaks and created very few jobs with the trickle down theory....my guess is enough is enough.

North GA....no...Romney said 47%!!

You cannot make guesses at what he meant. He said 47% do not take personal responsibility. That is the whole collective. Not a carve out.

You guys are funny. When Obama clearly said "You didn't build that" and 70% of the public agree'd that Fox Heads twisted it but Repubs stick with it....when Romney without a doubt was clear...you want us to believe he meant something else.

Then he should have said...out of the 47% there is niche that is milking the system.

He didn't therefore, he slandered a bunch of good people too.

It is what it is.....even Republicans in office disagree.

Who is getting all of this fee stuff? Nathan Deals friends got a redistribution of wealth today. 4.5 million....are u saying that this is ok?

This comment makes about as much sense as stating for the record that Obama supporters are mainly drawn from the illegal aliens that were granted Federal work permits, instead of the deportation they are legally entitled to…

"Romney's main supports comes from people"
George, is it too much to ask that you lay off the juice before posting repetitious nonsense? I know... (Argumentium ad Hominem is a fallacy in logic).

It's just that when you and Athen's Moma write things here, it is often extremely difficult to decipher.

Your cooperation is greatly appreciate by all.
Thx

"Social Security right now is a collectivist system, it’s a welfare transfer system…"
-- Paul Ryan

http://www.americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?blog_id=2&entry_id=5368

@Chris
I know some things are difficult for you and others to understand, so I'll try to simplify more in the future. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

We all await your attempt ...

I wonder how Tammy feels about redistributing taxpayer money to oil, gas, nuclear, coal, and agricultural companies. Surprisingly, she hasn't seemed very broken up about it.

To be sure, Republicans aren't against redistribution. They're just against redistribution that isn't specifically customized to enrich the rich.

"GOP blocks Obama's bid to end oil subsidies": http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505266_162-57406930/gop-blocks-obamas-bid-to-end-oil-subsidies/

@Tammy Osier
The only confiscation I've seen from about the early 80's is the shift in wealth and income to the very wealthy and multi national corporations. I call it class warfare against the middle class by the very wealthy and Corporatist.

Tammy, to be fair, both sides edit recordings. This is why I feel this entitlement comment will have no affect on the already decided. The losers can always say that "FOX NEWS" edited the "You Didn't Build That" comment. Fox cut out Obama's ridiculous comment saying that government built the roads.

Doesn't matter. For some crazy reason, democrats want to see the US fail. Otherwise they would support Free Enterprise and personal responsibility.

Tammy,

What do you think that Romney said in those missing two minutes out of 30+ minutes?

Maybe he said, "All that stuff I just said? I mean the opposite. And all the stuff I'm about to say? Yeah, I believe the opposite of that, too."

If so, then you're absolutely right...Romney's been screwed. Otherwise,...

RE: "Germans did that once."

Classic.

Tammy, I wouldn't count on Libs reading anytime soon. They get their facts from Chris Matthews.

We must be patient.

I not only read Anne Frank's diary, but I also visited Amsterdam and stood in the bedroom where Anne Frank wrote most it. Of course that isn't relevant, but it is a strange coincidence that Tammy would accuse somebody who actually visited the annex where Anne Frank hid of not knowing anything about her.

Nevertheless, the notion that President Obama is leading the people who voted from him down the path of Nazi Germany (presumably because most of them aren't old enough to know about the Holocaust?) is, as I said, classic.

I think it's interesting that conservatives accuse liberals of not reading and doing their own thinking, and "drinking the kool-aid," when liberals accuse conservatives of the exact same thing. And both sides have compared each other to Nazis. The Republican NDAA got the Fascist label, and Obama's "redistribution" comment and concept gets the same wrap. Does that mean that we have two sides of the same coin? Or are we really misunderstanding each other that much? (Not really making a point, just an observation.)

Crystal, I believe that is why a free press is so important. We've all been completed subjected to propaganda with the 24 hour news channel etc, but at least it is propaganda of our own choosing. Imagine if it wasn't - frightening. If you think about it, if we had someone telling us what coffee to drink, and why, as often as we are subjected to being told what candidate to vote for and why, we would all be complete caffeine addicts.

RE: "...both sides have compared each other to Nazis. Does that mean that we have two sides of the same coin?"

Hi Crystal,

For the record, I haven't compared anybody to a Nazi or a fascist. Nobody who does that speaks for me. So, I would appreciate it if you would avoid projecting some other person's ridiculous comments onto me?

@C.J. - Not directed at you.

Hey Perry, if you don't have anything to contribute, please stay out of the conversation.

Folks don't take offense at @NJ4America...

That's just a Jersey styled "Hello", a close cousin to the "New York Echo" made famous by Robin Williams.

Amen, Crystal! I'm with you all the way.

Amen Hal, THAT's what I've been trying to say, you said it VERY well.

You're right, it's an insidiously slow evolution. What politicians don't think about (or maybe they do) when they make all of these welfare laws, is how the human mind works. If you give people what they need/want then they have no incentive to do for themselves. Of course they'll vote for the person that appears to care for them and take care of them, but they've been duped and tricked for the personal gains and agendas by a group of politicians. And it is already too late for some of those to ever change their ways.
We're headed down the road that Greece, Spain, and France are headed and no one seems to care or want to do anything about it.
There is something very wrong about a President that wants to tell us that business is bad and government is good, and believe in us and we'll lead you to the promised land. Then the stooges mindlessly line up believing in their beloved leader as he tragically walks them to the cliff.

You people can't see the forest for the trees.

You sound like Mayor Bloomberg. Unfortunately sodas have become an ingrained part of our diet and unless the Surgeon General wants to label them a health hazard and slap warning labels on them who's to say SNAP recipients shouldn't be allowed to purchase them.

Isn't it funny how you never see a headline like this on FOX? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/food-stamps-poor-children_n_1335298.html

Brian- That headline is very misleading. The article even says "Since President Obama took office in 2008, 14 million more Americans have enlisted in the program, due in large part the economic crisis, according to Reuters."
Yes, I believe that if you are going to take a handout, you should only be allowed healthy food. No sodas (at all). If I were on food stamps that is all I would want and I would be friggin grateful to get it.

So what is misleading about the headline? My point is you never hear anything positive about the "safety net" from FOX because the Republican party is intent on demonizing it. The fact that the food stamp program is lifting so many children out of poverty is a good thing. You never hear the good on FOX.

Brian, at what point do you personally consider one to be impoverished enough to receive benefits? And please also tell me why anyone REQUIRING payments from fellow Americans would spend that money on sodas as opposed to maybe stocking up on shampoo and soap and absolute necessity items? As of YET, my family has managed without the aid of fellows Americans and we never buy sodas. You have said yourself that welfare is a temporary hand up. (maybe not exact terms) My point is, America has given until it's given out. If it isn't a necessity, why the hell buy it? You've been clear that FREE cell phones are to aid those in finding a job. I have never in my life owned a cell phone (i know, i'm a freak) and I've been laid off several times in life. I just think it's time for both sides to be realistic as out children and grandchildren haven't a chance of enjoying the life that we have been blessed with. Is that too much to ask?

What is it that you think Obama is going to do for my grandchildren? I fear that another four years of Obama will certainly give us the change he promised and I don't feel it's a change for the good.

Becky, I may not see the things you have. I never said that people on welfare are living larger than life. My point is that if I were to need government assistance, I think I would try to use it in an appreciative fashion and hope to cut it off as soon as possible. I have no issue with people needing help. I, as many others, have helped needy people all my life. I feel that my help may accepted with appreciation and responsibility more than some do with help from government welfare programs.

Wow Becky your compassion is overwhelming. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps the person with the expensive shoes and iphone may have lost a good paying job through no fault of their own and have no choice but to use food stamps to feed their family. They're probably pretty humiliated by the whole thing. Wouldn't you be? Maybe you'll get to find that out first hand some day. Until then, stay classy.

Oh please, I have plenty of compassion. I just call it like I see it. People I know who use food stamps during times of need (and I have, unfortunately, known a lot of them in my lifetime) are the ones that are buying the necessities and not the $20 steaks or brand name of everything. Those truly in need buy store brand mac and cheese, bologna, eggs, milk, etc. to just get by for the week. It's the ones that milk the system and LIVE off the system that I am talking about. I have 3 very close friends that have had to take food stamps just this summer and believe me, they are not squandering it. Sure they may carry their Coach purses and iPhones to the store but they also know how to stretch their food stamp dollars too. Talk about classy....right back attcha Brian. Nice comment.

This whole idea of the modern welfare queen is a myth. They used to exist but that ended with welfare reform in '96. There may be a few who are committing welfare fraud who manage to live high on the hog, but most states do a pretty good job of rooting those folks out and prosecuting them.

Brian, go spend some time at the grocery store and spend some time at the registers and watch people. Or go befriend somebody that works at one and talk to them. You'll find out real quick that you're wrong. EBT cards can't be used to buy alcohol or some other things, but you can buy a lot of approved things and return them for cash, since they can't refund money onto the card. And this happens more than you would think. Along with people buying crab and steak and prepared meals, rather then trying to stretch their dollars....

Oh, and ask how many of those EBT cards are pulled out of Coach or Dooney purses...

You want people to hock their shoes?

RE: "I've been laid off and lived off of my OWN savings to provide for myself."

Chris,

Are telling us that you were eligible to collect unemployment, but did not apply?

Unemployment and food stamps are two different things. Employers pay an unemployment tax to the government to help employees should they ever have to lay them off. However, this too comes back to the personal responsibility topic. Chris took the responsibility to ensure that should something happen with his job he would have enough to survive. What a novel approach to life. Kudos to him.

Yes, if they're Manolos or Guccis, then hock away. If there's more than one pair, then feel free to hock as well. People need to do what they can streamline their lives before they start taking money from my pocket. I pay my own bills, so if I want cable TV with all the frills, then I get cable TV with all the frills. However, I get laid off or disabled and can't pay my bills, I will cut my cable and sell off my TVs before I expect you to give me anything....

Amen to that Karsten!

Chris,

You specifically wrote that you lived off your "OWN savings." The unemployment checks that you collected didn't come out of your savings.

Incidentally, Georgia borrowed millions from the federal government to pay unemployment because the state’s unemployment trust went into a deep deficit. So, it turns out that federal taxpayers picked up the tab for Georgia's unemployed. Lucky for you that we didn't successfully secede from the union.