Where do I get an "Obama Phone"!!!!
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
Can anyone say entitlement reform?
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tpAOwJvTOio&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Ffeature%3Dplayer_embedded%26v%3DtpAOwJvTOio |
Anonymous
|
|
Anonymous
|
This is bs he was supposed to put gas in my car and pay for my mortgage
|
Anonymous
Oh my. That's not Clevland, California is it???? |
Anonymous
| This is a really lame thread. Obviously there are extremely stupid and misinformed people on both sides. Dems could pull out a host of goobers on your side. So what's your point? Smart people stick to policy debates, not junior high finger pointing. |
Anonymous
Ok. The policy of giving phones to ANYONE with taxpayer dollars is irresponsible and creates exponential dependency. Go: |
Anonymous
OP your kid wants you to fill his pool again.
|
Anonymous
Well then blame your messiah, the great Ronald Reagan, since it was under his administration that the program started. http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/cellphone.asp Think about it. You are unemployed and want to find a job. You don't have a permanent residence and even if you did, to start a phone service costs money upfront. It's a chicken and egg thing. To be a fully functioning member of society there are certain expectations including that you have some way of being reached, except if you don't have money you can't get a phone. The government helps you out in the short term expecting that in the long-term you will no longer need the service because by helping you now, you're opportunity for advancement increases. Where you see dependency, I see increased opportunity. Do you really think that the majority of this country is really just looking to mooch off the government. What about American exceptionalism, you know where we all are hard working and out to make the most out of life. Or does that only apply to those who have never found themselves at a point where they needed help. |
Anonymous
That's a completely fair and understandable scenario, it's not however reflective of the video OP posted. She's basically a mooches, I'm sorry to say. (Obama supporter). |
Anonymous
THERE IS NO POLICY, RETARD! |
Anonymous
| Well, actually, there IS a policy, but it was put in place BEFORE Obama was elected and is being lobbied for hard by the company providing the service. As a Democrat, I think you'd be hard pressed to find many of us who would support this. In my opinion if you need a phone, you need to find a way to pay for it out of the assistance you are already receiving. |
Anonymous
| ^^Plus, let's add that some sad person who is probably mentally ill calling this program "an Obama phone" is just completely innacuate and that yes, the Republican's lame attempt to use this as a campaign issue is just pathetic. |
Anonymous
|
so republicans want to blame obama for a program that started under reagan and was expanded to include cell phones by george bush? this is how far we are reaching?
thats like blaming obama for the entire financial collapse and the downturn of the economy before he took office. oh wait............ |
Anonymous
|
As many have noted, the woman in OP's link is just plain incoherent, and using her as an example is silly.
As to the woman in the 20:17 video, I interpret her statement about not having to worry about mortgage, etc, to represent optimism (perhaps naive or mistaken optimism) about how well the economy would treat her, rather than entitlement. I can't prove that was her intent, but if she said it about Romney, I am totally certain that's how Fox would report it. Except they probably would consider it realistic rather than optimistic. |
Anonymous
No one blames him for that, but the jobless recovery.... |