Stop bringing back memories.

Spam, powdered milk (hated it), that awful yellow cheese (yuk), oatmeal for breakfast every day for a year, but we ate it. No choice.  Took me 30 years to be able to eat oatmeal.

DH's parents used to get canned beef. Don't know how they got that. We never did. He liked it.

• Commodities........... sm - m
  • Stop bringing back memories. - Backwards typist
  • Hey there! I like it, but what about clothing, housing, medicines......sm - Cyndiee
    • There are agencies out there to help......sm - m
      • And did you know there are waiting lists for subsidized housing? Why do you think there are....sm - Cyndiee
        • Why should the govt be able to tell people what to eat? - Amanda
        • True............sm - m
  • Yeah, but wouldn't it be great if they paid your mortgage? - Shirley U. Jest
    • Apparently you didn't read closely enough..........sm - m
  • With your generalization of what - sm
    • Isn't that coming anyway? - sm
      • Makes me think of that old saying... - sm
    • If you do all that you mentioned...........sm - m
      • Even those who work sometimes have - sm
        • I do...(sm) - Just the big bad
          • I grew up on..............sm - m
        • I didn't say it was a perfect solution....... sm - m
          • thanks for the website, i'll look at it when i get a chance... - sm
    • my own typo, sight, not site; must be an MT..nm - nm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

because you STILL don't get it.  I don't care that Bristol is an unwed mother.  I don't care if the guy lived in Palin's house.  And no, I don't rule my kids with an iron fist -- unlike the religious right.  You have simply missed the point...AGAIN.

The whole point isn't that this stuff is happening.  Dems (of all people) know these things happen.  However, we are not the ones out there preaching abstinence (that doesn't work), spouting out about how terrible unwed mothers supposedly are, how homosexuals are just going straight to he11, and how you MUST be a murderer if you have an abortion.  YOU guys --- REPUBLICANS -- are the ones preaching that day and night, 24/7.  I can guarantee that if that had been a democrat who had done that the first thing out of your mouths would have been--- where was her father?  As in, insinuating that the mother (in this case Palin) would somehow be at fault because she didn't provide the proper guidance for her child.

And now after all those years of preaching that crap, who do you put up as a potential leader of this country?  The mother of an unwed pregnant teenager -- who Palin decided to flaunt all over the country, and who also obviously encouraged this boy to move in with her daughter -- as in, living in sin.

There is only one word for this:  Hypocrisy.  You do know that Palin cut funding in Alaska for benefits for unwed mothers?  Hmmm....

I found this website while trying to look up some more info and thought I'd share it.

http://www.ncsl.org/print/health/CRSSbyS0807.pdf

I'm now thoroughly confused on the arguments against expanding it.  It does require proof of citizenship (states responsibility to document), so I'm not quite sure how that means it will allow illegal immigrants access - at least any more access than they already have to medicaid - however they get it.  It also seems to state that the limit on income will be determined by the states - which would somewhat answer the question I posted below.  I've heard interviews on television with those against the expansion quoting the $88,000 limit.  (which I did not see mentioned, but I certainly have no idea what's discussed in Congress).  As I said below, for a family whose living expenses are relatively low, $88,000 is a lot of money, but for a family who lives where the living expenses are insanely high, $88,000 does not go as far. 

Observer, or any others, have  you found a site that explains why some are against it? 

i wanted to bring this up from below because i want people to read it that are for abortion.  i want them to watch the video mentioned here.

into poverty, but you don't want the money it takes to care for these children to come out of your pocket????  Am I on the mark? 

Answer:  First of all, I wouldnt be forcing anyone to have a baby born into poverty.  That would be THEIR choice.  Yes, it is a CHOICE to get pregnant or not.  If you dont want to get pregnant you should use BIRTH CONTROL, given out FREE to anyone who cannot afford it.  Of course, you cannot actually shove it down someone's throat and make them swallow it, I guess.  Second, I already DO pay for these unwanted children.  It is called WELFARE. 

I guess this is another so-called way to sling mud at Obama.  The rich republicans can't have it both ways.  You either care for the unborn (welfare for their mothers) or you allow the mother the choice...  Which is it?

Answer:  First, I am not slinging mud at Obama.  I would be against abortion no matter who was running for office.  Second, I am not a rich republican but a poor democrat.  Sorry to dissappoint!  Third, I believe that education about birth control and sex should be funded more, there should be more support out there for teens on how to NOT GET PREGNANT in the first place.  Second, there are NO unwanted children in the world.  If the natural mother did not want the child, there should be, and I am sure there are, government funded programs to allow these girls to adopt out their babies to the MILLIONS of people who want to adopt.  Also, our government should help fund would be parents to be able to adopt w/o having to spend thousands of dollars to do it.  So that way people in the good ole' USA could adopt w/o having to go to third world countries to do it.  Another thing, the government should reevaluate their priorities in that it costs almost nothing to have an abortion and commit murder versus spending thousands on adoption.  Go figure that one!

Not all abortions are a form of birth control, ya' know.  I knew a very religious lady that aborted her child due to hydrocephalus.  The child would been born deformed/a vegetable.  This would have put this lady at high risk.  She prayed about it and soon after aborted the child.  She had to live with that. 

That is the child that God gave her.  I dont have all the answers about why that would be, but murder is still murder.  So does that mean because the baby was deformed that he was less of a baby, a human life?  Not our call to make.  As far as her having to live with that, this is true.  However, as a Christian, we also have to live with whoever we put into office.  They represent us, our beliefs.  We have to answer for who we give the power to.  We are all responsible. 

Not all situations are the same.  Furthermore, you can't force your child to have a baby or to have an abortion.  Either way, it's her body.

In the OT of the Bible God speaks about the children of Israel.  They were worshipping an idol and offering their children to it.  He spoke about innocent blood be shed and he was angered by it.  He speaks quite clearly that it is murder.  Also, if anyone supports abortion, I think they should go to the faith board and click on the post not for everyone and find the link in there to a video, copy and paste and watch what happens to an aborted fetus.  At 19 weeks what a baby looks like and see what happens to them when the are killed.  I mean, after all, if you can condone it, then you should be able to watch it.

At first we were told the outsourcing was to cut labor costs.  Only after this campaign rhetoric took hold did the issue of taxes come up.  Now I ask you, if the reason for outsourcing is taxes, what the heck?  Didn't Bush CUT taxes.

It seems that American people have lost the reasoning side of their collective brains.  When I quit working a few months ago I was making LESS than I made in the 80s.  How is that possible?  The cost of medical care has not gone down.  The cost of medical insurance has not gone down.  I posted some time ago about a local hospital that laid off their most experienced nurses, not a few of them, ALL of them, and hired new graduate nurses to replace them at lesser wages.  What was that about?  They got away with it though.  Anything to increase the bottom line profit.

This is true in every industry.  They like to blame labor for everything.  Well, how the heck can you buy a $2+ loaf of bread and $5 gallon of milk on minimum wage, ya know?  Take gasoline for example.  Sure it has gone down the last days but is it back where it was when oil was what?  $86 a barrel or whatever?  No and it never will be.

So that car you drive.........how much do you think of the price tag is labor? 

These things are what really aggravates me.  People just can't seem to use reasoning power any more.  I'll give you an example:  After my husband lost his job in the CF fiasco, he drove for awhile for a friend who owns a trucking company.  I went with him on a trip.  He picked up a load of beef in Boonesville, AR, hauled it to Chicago, no problem.  Then they sent him somewhere in Ohio to pick up a load of vinegar to take to Florida.  Got to Ohio and I forget the reason but he couldn't pick up the vinegar. Then he was sent (empty) to Logan (?), Kentucky where he picked up 40,000 pounds of chocolate covered doughnuts which he delivered to Phoenix.  In Phoenix they told him that most of that load would be routed back to Atlanta.  Now what kind of sense does that make?  Taxes the problem?  I would say poor management is a bigger problem than taxes OR labor.

I'm sorry about your dad's experience.  People used to do things like that.  I recall my late father-in-law, worked for the fire department in Fort Worth and he said during the depression they did the same thing, worked less so the ones with less seniority could keep a job.  They all suffered but they suffered together and somehow they all made it as did your parents.

I am just horrified at the apparent digress of intelligence in this country.  It seems people believe anything the news media or anyone else tells them.  Seems they have totally lost the ability to reason and God forbid that anyone should think of anyone other than themself.

All that said, feel free to go ahead and believe that companies are outsourcing jobs because of labor costs or taxes.  The unionized workers, under Reagan, started taking wage concessions, that is taking a DECREASE in pay to keep jobs.  How did that work?  Don't believe I've heard of any of the victims of outsourcing even being offered a pay cut to keep the jobs in this country.  Certainly not the Rheem plant in Fort Smith that the other day laid off the last 600 workers.  They sent most of their production to Mexico a few years ago.  Fort Smith they say is dying because of outsourcing.  Their reason?  They say, it's "labor costs."  Well, then, how is it that people can't afford to pay their bills with all the excessive wages they're supposedly receiving. Obviously the next in vogue EXCUSE will be that taxes are lower in other countries.  B.S.!!!!!!!

Took some looking, but found it.

o A $1,000 “Making Work Pay” Tax Credit. For 95 percent of workers and their families—150 million
workers overall—the “Making Work Pay” credit will provide a refundable tax cut of $500 for workers or
$1,000 for working couples. This credit will benefit over 15 million self employed workers and for 10
million low-income Americans, will completely eliminate their federal income taxes.
o A Refundable $4,000 American Opportunity Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a $4,000 fully refundable
tax credit to ensure that college is affordable for all American families. This credit will cover
100% of the first $4,000 of qualified tuition expenses, making community college essentially free and
covering about 2/3 of the cost of public 4-year college.iv
o A Universal 10% Mortgage Interest Tax Credit. Barack Obama will provide a 10% refundable credit to
offset mortgage interest payments and make homeownership more affordable for lower- and middle-income
families. This universal credit will provide an average tax cut of $500 to 10 million homeowners who do not itemize.

I see refundable in there a few times. And there you have the low income folks who will, with the help of this "credit," ELIMINATE their federal taxes. Who is going to take up that slack?

It only makes things worse, not better. The anger it causes with "outsiders" coming to that small town does not do any good. Let the people of that town alone. They're doing okay without outsiders stirring up trouble.

I'm not just talking about that town. It happens all over the USA. These groups get together and go to a town just to stir up trouble. I've seen it happen again and again. They have no right sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong. Let them protest in their own towns.

The KKK does this all the time, too. They don't get the press, though, and they shouldn't be sticking their noses in where it doesn't belong, either.

I'm proud to be a gun-toting, religious, redneck from PA, but we are not any more racist than any other state or person.

The O thinks we are all of the above, so why does he keep coming into the state to campaign? You would think he would fear us.  His buddy Murtha really blundered on his comment and now thinks an apology will smooth things over. If the O gets in, he will take our guns away and we will have no protection at all from criminals.  It's our constitutional right to own guns.

He's a glib talker but what is he really saying? He definitely can't smile or debate his way through the terrorists.

Rendel-D, our precious governor, ran our state into the ground with giving money away to Philadelphia and Pittsburgh mostly for convention centers and sports centers and now for casinos. Why?  He loves sports and gambling. When Rendel was mayor of Philadelphia, he almost bankrupt that city with his shenanigans.  I'm so glad his term will be over soon. Maybe then Pennsylvanians will be able to get back to work. Our roads are back to being #1 on the Worst Roads in the U.S. He made sure there would be no money for road construction.

He promised all kinds of tax cuts, property taxes mostly, if the bill passed for the casinos. That was a few years ago. Where's the cut? Our property taxes went up, not down! No rebates as he promised, but we have 20,000 (exaggeration) different ways to play the lotteries between instant tickets and 3 digit, 4 digit, 5 digit, 6 digits, power ball, etc.

Casey-D didn't do a good job for us, either. He made everyone who owned a service business (that was me back then) pay 6% sales tax on our earnings EXCEPT lawyers and doctors. I'm confused. Don't they provide a service? Sure they do. He also upped our taxes. His son, sad to say, is now a Senator. First he ran for another post and won, and before that term was up, he ran for Senator and won.  How can the people of of PA fall for this again? Just hearing him talk makes me sick.

Sorry, I don't buy the dems making a better life for us. They make it worse.

I will get off my soapbox now.

Obama told George Stephanopoulos at ABC News:

"We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our Constitution."

I'm sorry, but those being held at Gitmo are not citizens of the United States; therefore, are not entitled to any protection under the Constitution.  Why not say 'abide by the Geneva Convention'?  Even then, how many of our POWs were treated as outlined in the Geneva Convention?  Let's not forget, this is a war and these terrorists are POWs.  President Bush sought to protect the citizens of this country whatever the cost.  After the awful events of 9/11, it was his priority.  The world needs to know if you target the U.S. there are consequences. 

And I want to know where they are going to put these 250 or so terrorists?  I live 50 miles from Fort Leavenworth and that's a little too close for comfort for me.  I assume some will be released to return to their country where, of course, they will plot their next terrorist attack.  While others will be housed in federal facilities like Leavenworth and then what?  We sit them down for tea and crumpets and ask them nicely if they plan on blowing anything else up here in America? 

Shelley this is not me doing this.  Someone is just being stupid.  I'm sick and tired of other people trying to post like it is me and it isn't. 

FYI.....Chele is just pronounced like shell.  No Shelly.

the many lives that were saved by taking out these people?  Or would you rather many more Americans be subjected to events like 9/11?  How many people did we lose in one day on 9/11?  Yet so many people want to cry and whine over how we should be nice to terrorists and treat them fairly.  They would sooner cut our heads off than be civil but OMG...don't torture them to get information that might save American's lives.  How horrible would that be?  I have no problem with covert operations taking out dangerous people.  In fact, it makes me feel safer knowing that these terrorists aren't going to hurt anyone anymore.

Our government under Obama is getting bigger and bigger and government is controlling more and more things and you are worried about Cheney giving orders to take out terrorists?  I tell ya what....I felt a heck of a lot safer back then than I do now.  The idea of government controlling what I do....is scary as heck and yet all you guys can focus on is how Bush and Cheney kept us safe after 9/11 but you turn it around to be a bad thing.  You people are friggin amazing, you know that?  What a load of crap.

recognizing "marriages" just because gay people declare this to be fair to them?  I just think it is sad that something that has always been recognized legally should be undone just for a small group of people. If you want civil unions with benefits...fine.  More power to you, but why can't you just leave us alone and let our marriages be like they have been for years?  Why must we change to accomodate few people?  Why must we always compromise and bend things to accomodate this increasingly secular world? 

You can have abortions but you can't refuse to perform them.  You can't pray in school or say anything about God in school so we don't offend the non-believers but by all means allow homosexuality be taught to young children as an acceptable thing even though not everyone feels that way......and as evident by the vote in CA...the majority doesn't agree with it!!!  Now you want marriages to not be recognized legally because that isn't fair to gay people and for us to have marriages, we must first have a civil union and then get married by our pastor because it would make the gay community feel better.  Do you not see a pattern here?