USDA advertises Food Stamps on Spanish Soap Operas

[oletoes]

http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/12/u...mp-participation-among-non-citizens-citizens/

wow, so lets see how many illegal immigrants we can get on Food Stamps. Awesome!

 

[tsmith7559]

http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/12/u...mp-participation-among-non-citizens-citizens/

wow, so lets see how many illegal immigrants we can get on Food Stamps. Awesome!

Its the lib way.....get all the dependents you can. Have them to rely on the gvt for everything. Pretty sad

80,000 jobs created last month....85,000 added to the SS disability rolls. Obama Rules!!!

 

[oletoes]

Yup, they are actually harming the very people they say they want to help. Rather than try to help them become self sufficient and independent from the gov't; they make them become more dependent. "Womb to Tomb"

 

[mhughes0021]

Its the lib way.....get all the dependents you can. Have them to rely on the gvt for everything. Pretty sad

80,000 jobs created last month....85,000 added to the SS disability rolls. Obama Rules!!!

As the Wall Street Journal noted in the last month of Bush?s term, the former president had the ?worst track record for job creation since the government began keeping records.? And job creation under Bush was anemic long before the recession began. Bush?s supply-side economics ?fostered the weakest jobs and income growth in more than six decades,? along with ?sluggish business investment and weak gross domestic product growth,? the Center for American Progress? Joshua Picker explained. ?On every major measurement? of income and employment, ?the country lost ground during Bush?s two terms,? the National Journal?s Ron Brownstein observed, parsing Census data.

Bush Rules!!! Not to mention the only jobs bush created were government and federal jobs. I thought the republicans wanted smaller govt? Awwww.....its kinda sad how confused you people are. Go spend millions trying to find a birth certificate!

 

[KAWDUP]

LOL - everytime someone brings up Obama's lackluster record or the country's lackluster performance, you're only answer is to point to Bush and say "see look at that - he was worse, so Obama is OK by comparison".

. . . but that isn't going to win anybody an election. At some point, even you have to admit that being better than Bush doesn't get you much.

 

[Michchamp]

Bush Rules!!! Not to mention the only jobs bush created were government and federal jobs. I thought the republicans wanted smaller govt? Awwww.....its kinda sad how confused you people are. Go spend millions trying to find a birth certificate!

that's basically it. "Homeland Security" and the War on Terror was Pork-barrel spending at its worst.

see also: the massive credit & mortgage boom & eventual cratering bust...

or as they preferred to call it now "job creation"

 

[Michchamp]

LOL - everytime someone brings up Obama's lackluster record or the country's lackluster performance, you're only answer is to point to Bush and say "see look at that - he was worse, so Obama is OK by comparison".

. . . but that isn't going to win anybody an election. At some point, even you have to admit that being better than Bush doesn't get you much.

true. Bush set the standard very, very low.

The problem is, there is no real alternative. What Romney offers is more of what Bush offered: domestic spending cuts, a complete lack of regulation and oversight of business and finance, more corrupt crony-capitalism, more limitless war... those things have all been bad enough under Obama. Why would we vote for the guy/party that wants more of it?

 

[Mitchrapp]

LOL - everytime someone brings up Obama's lackluster record or the country's lackluster performance, you're only answer is to point to Bush and say "see look at that - he was worse, so Obama is OK by comparison".

. . . but that isn't going to win anybody an election. At some point, even you have to admit that being better than Bush doesn't get you much.

Is that why people are okay with Ryan Raburn because he's better than Brandon Inge?

Anyway, spot on.

 

[KAWDUP]

true. Bush set the standard very, very low.

The problem is, there is no real alternative. What Romney offers is more of what Bush offered: domestic spending cuts, a complete lack of regulation and oversight of business and finance, more corrupt crony-capitalism, more limitless war... those things have all been bad enough under Obama. Why would we vote for the guy/party that wants more of it?

Hey I can't necessarily fault your logic, although I disagree with some of your points. In other words, though, what you are saying is Obama may win because he is better than Romney, but it will have nothing to do with the low bar that Bush set, right?

So you agree with me? That'd be a first.

 

[Mitchrapp]

I think Romney just by pure luck would be better than Obama.

 

[mhughes0021]

LOL - everytime someone brings up Obama's lackluster record or the country's lackluster performance, you're only answer is to point to Bush and say "see look at that - he was worse, so Obama is OK by comparison".

. . . but that isn't going to win anybody an election. At some point, even you have to admit that being better than Bush doesn't get you much.

If you want me to get started on Mitt all you had to do is ask. He got rich by firing people and putting strugg;ing companies out of business lmao. And you ppl nominated him for president. ridiculous...

 

[mhughes0021]

ps hes mormon.

 

[mhughes0021]

ps he hates gays, blacks and poor people.

 

[mhughes0021]

ps he has an elevator for his car.

 

[KAWDUP]

Well if you're going to lie/exaggerate. How is this one?

Obama is a socialist muslim, and you people elected him president.

Gee see how that works?

 

[Michchamp]

Hey I can't necessarily fault your logic, although I disagree with some of your points. In other words, though, what you are saying is Obama may win because he is better than Romney, but it will have nothing to do with the low bar that Bush set, right?

So you agree with me? That'd be a first.

sort of. If Bush had been a better president, if the economy had not collapsed at the end of his second term, as Obama was coming into office... I think Romney would stand more of a chance.

his schpiel might resonate with voters. however, as it is, enough voters hear Romney spewing the standard GOP line on jobs, spending, taxes, and wonder "where have we heard that before???"

and on top of that, Romney is COMPLETELY unlikable, whereas, Bush was only sort of unlikable.

 

[Michchamp]

ps he hates gays, blacks and poor people.

I don't think he hates them; he just doesn't consider them people like him.

 

[mhughes0021]

sort of. If Bush had been a better president, if the economy had not collapsed at the end of his second term, as Obama was coming into office... I think Romney would stand more of a chance.

his schpiel might resonate with voters. however, as it is, enough voters hear Romney spewing the standard GOP line on jobs, spending, taxes, and wonder "where have we heard that before???"

and on top of that, Romney is COMPLETELY unlikable, whereas, Bush was only sort of unlikable.

Romney has no standard schpiel....he changes it every other week. Hes even condradicting things he said a couple of months ago during the GoP nomination. Dude cant go 2 months with being consistent in his "schpiel"

 

[mhughes0021]

Well if you're going to lie/exaggerate. How is this one?

Obama is a socialist muslim, and you people elected him president.

Gee see how that works?

when did i lie?

 

[KAWDUP]

sort of. If Bush had been a better president, if the economy had not collapsed at the end of his second term, as Obama was coming into office... I think Romney would stand more of a chance.

his schpiel might resonate with voters. however, as it is, enough voters hear Romney spewing the standard GOP line on jobs, spending, taxes, and wonder "where have we heard that before???"

and on top of that, Romney is COMPLETELY unlikable, whereas, Bush was only sort of unlikable.

Still drawing a parallel where one does not exist. I understand you think Bush was a criminal and the worst president in history, but really, that is not going to affect how people are going to vote in the upcoming election. If any do, it is such a small percentage that it will be negligible to the outcome. Seriously, that is just hoping for something that isn't going to happen. Very few voters are going to change now because Bush was a "bad" president.