On 1/1/2014 5:48 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Whenever I click on one of your posts, an attachment
>> appears ... nothankyou.vcf
>>
>> Anyone know what that is? I'm sure not about to open it.
>
> No but I find it annoying.

Everything I do annoys you, Julie. Sorry!!

--
DreadfulBitch

I intend to live forever....so far, so good.
......Steven Wright

"DreadfulBitch" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/1/2014 5:42 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "DreadfulBitch" > wrote in message
>> ...
>
>>> You also need to take another look at your attitude. Very narrow and
>>> unfair of you.
>>
>> Very realistic. This has been discussed here before!
>>
> Well, no shit sherlock. That doesn't mean I'm going to ignore bigoted
> statements that have been made before!
>
> There but for the grace...

I swear you are one of the most touchy and judgmental people I have ever run
across. So that would make *you* somewhat of a bigot. Would it not?

"DreadfulBitch" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/1/2014 3:30 PM, Metspitzer wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 14:59:01 -0600, DreadfulBitch
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/1/2014 2:41 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> Whenever I click on one of your posts, an attachment
>>>> appears ... nothankyou.vcf
>>>>
>>>> Anyone know what that is? I'm sure not about to open it.
>>>>
>>>> nancy
>>>
>>> I have no idea why that shows up. nothankyou is the fake name I put in
>>> for my email address. I would never post my real address here, or a
>>> munged address.
>>>
>>> if anyone knows how I can 'fix' that .vcf thing please let me know!
>>
>> What news reader do you use? Fixing the problem will be in your
>> signature settings.
>>
> I think I have it fixed. I use Thunderbird and somehow checked the
> 'attach vcard' (or something like that) in the account settings. Is it
> gone?

Yes.

On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 8:25:38 PM UTC-5, DreadfulBitch wrote:
> On 1/1/2014 5:48 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> >
>
> > "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
>
> > ...
>
> >> Whenever I click on one of your posts, an attachment
>
> >> appears ... nothankyou.vcf
>
> >>
>
> >> Anyone know what that is? I'm sure not about to open it.
>
> >
>
> > No but I find it annoying.
>
>
>
> Everything I do annoys you, Julie. Sorry!!


Watch out, you'll be in the doghouse with me for rubbing widdle Bove the wrong way.

On 1/1/2014 8:24 PM, DreadfulBitch wrote:

> I think I have it fixed. I use Thunderbird and somehow checked the
> 'attach vcard' (or something like that) in the account settings. Is it
> gone?

It's gone, thanks.

nancy

"DreadfulBitch" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/1/2014 3:30 PM, Metspitzer wrote:
>> On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 14:59:01 -0600, DreadfulBitch
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/1/2014 2:41 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> Whenever I click on one of your posts, an attachment
>>>> appears ... nothankyou.vcf
>>>>
>>>> Anyone know what that is? I'm sure not about to open it.
>>>>
>>>> nancy
>>>
>>> I have no idea why that shows up. nothankyou is the fake name I put in
>>> for my email address. I would never post my real address here, or a
>>> munged address.
>>>
>>> if anyone knows how I can 'fix' that .vcf thing please let me know!
>>
>> What news reader do you use? Fixing the problem will be in your
>> signature settings.
>>
> I think I have it fixed. I use Thunderbird and somehow checked the
> 'attach vcard' (or something like that) in the account settings. Is it
> gone?

Yes.

Cheri

On 1/1/2014 6:49 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 19:52:06 -0500, Metspitzer >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Actually they don't. I was there tonight and a guy asked the waitress
>>> if they took EBT cards. I thought it was a pretty funny joke.
>>
>> The joke is lost on me... no idea what an EBT card is.
>
> Food stamps.


What is a food stamp?

On 1/1/2014 7:54 PM, Hench wrote:
> On 1/1/2014 6:49 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 19:52:06 -0500, Metspitzer >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Actually they don't. I was there tonight and a guy asked the waitress
>>>> if they took EBT cards. I thought it was a pretty funny joke.
>>>
>>> The joke is lost on me... no idea what an EBT card is.
>>
>> Food stamps.
>
>
> What is a food stamp?

Welfare.

On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 1:01:01 PM UTC-6, Metspitzer wrote:
>
> On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 10:38:49 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
> >The joke is lost on me... no idea what an EBT card is.
>
> It would have taken about the same amount of time to Google EBT as it
> did to post your reply.>
>
Or if she'd read the whole thread instead of showing up in the middle with a "Duh, I don't get it."

On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 2:04:13 PM UTC-6, DreadfulBitch wrote:
>
> On 1/1/2014 9:00 AM, wrote:
>
> > Welfare benefits paid to the recipient on a debit card instead of them getting food stamps. And you can be sure if there's something wrong with their card not being accepted they will whip out their Blackberries or iPhone to call the state office to bitch about a transaction not going through. ):-((
>
>
> That sentiment is very unfair and just plain bigoted.
>
>
(Ridiculous long winded rant snipped.) No, it's not. Just this past Thanksgiving there was a story in our local newspaper WITH PICTURES taken at the local homeless shelter of the meal provided for the 'homeless and out of work.' No faces were shown just the rows of place sittings with full plates and next to m-a-n-y plates were smart phones, Blackberries, and iPhones, NO TracFones to be seen anywhere. So don't preach to me about how bigoted I am. If they're 'homeless and out of work' how are they able to pay for access each month?

"Casa Milagro" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/1/2014 7:54 PM, Hench wrote:
>> On 1/1/2014 6:49 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 19:52:06 -0500, Metspitzer >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Actually they don't. I was there tonight and a guy asked the waitress
>>>>> if they took EBT cards. I thought it was a pretty funny joke.
>>>>
>>>> The joke is lost on me... no idea what an EBT card is.
>>>
>>> Food stamps.
>>
>>
>> What is a food stamp?
>
> Welfare.

Is it? I don't know. I never qualified for anything like that. I always
thought they were two different things. Dunno.

> wrote in message
...
> On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 1:01:01 PM UTC-6, Metspitzer wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 01 Jan 2014 10:38:49 -0800, sf > wrote:
>>
>> >The joke is lost on me... no idea what an EBT card is.
>>
>> It would have taken about the same amount of time to Google EBT as it
>> did to post your reply.>
>>
> Or if she'd read the whole thread instead of showing up in the middle with
> a "Duh, I don't get it."

Or even the previous but recent very long post about the very same thing.

> wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 2:04:13 PM UTC-6, DreadfulBitch wrote:
>
> On 1/1/2014 9:00 AM, wrote:
>
> > Welfare benefits paid to the recipient on a debit card instead of them
> > getting food stamps. And you can be sure if there's something wrong
> > with their card not being accepted they will whip out their Blackberries
> > or iPhone to call the state office to bitch about a transaction not
> > going through. ):-((
>
>
> That sentiment is very unfair and just plain bigoted.
>
>
(Ridiculous long winded rant snipped.) No, it's not. Just this past
Thanksgiving there was a story in our local newspaper WITH PICTURES taken at
the local homeless shelter of the meal provided for the 'homeless and out of
work.' No faces were shown just the rows of place sittings with full plates
and next to m-a-n-y plates were smart phones, Blackberries, and iPhones, NO
TracFones to be seen anywhere. So don't preach to me about how bigoted I
am. If they're 'homeless and out of work' how are they able to pay for
access each month?

---

I don't personally know homeless people or people who have to eat at such
places. I do know that some other people have very different priorities
than I do. I refused to get an Iphone until I learned that there are all
sorts of couponing apps that can let me save money on by using them. The
problem? I've yet to be able to redeem anything of use to me. Yes, there
are coupons. I just don't need 30% off of women's plus sized fashions or
various processed foods.

But... I know people who live with no TV whatever. Or they have TV but no
cable. Or no landline phone. Or a computer but no Internet. And yet these
same people have Smart Phones because it is a priority to them.

I would never assume anything just because I see a Smart Phone. I have seen
enough of those judge shows to know that people don't necessarily pay for
them and it would seem relatively easy to get others to pay for such things
for ya. I have also been gifted with many things I would never have bought
for myself. Like a color TV or a larger color TV. These days I don't even
think a black and white TV is an option. But it used to be a cheaper
option. Heck, I lived with no TV for months. Until people complained. So
I got a little black and white. Then I won another one. Even after I was
gifted with a little color one, I still didn't mind watching the black and
white. Having grown up in a house with no color TV, I was used to not
having the color.

However... It does annoy me to see people who are on WIC or EBT who will
not pry their phone from their ear and just keep talking on it. Here, the
type of phone isn't even an issue. I have just seen it time and time again.
Person picks up the wrong items, goes through the checkstand and keeps
talking on the phone. Clerk keeps trying to tell them that their items do
not qualify for whatever it is. Person just keeps talking, doesn't even
look at the clerk. Clerk has to call someone else to get similar foods that
do qualify. Then tries to get person's attention to see if the swap is
okay. Perhaps still does not so much as glance at the clerk. So clerk just
sighs and finishes the sale.

No, this was not the same person who did this. It was many different
people, almost all of them seeming to be foreign or at least speaking in a
different language. And in the case of the WIC vouchers, the person getting
the food did not seem to be a person who would qualify. Such as an elderly
male.

> wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 2:04:13 PM UTC-6, DreadfulBitch wrote:
>
> On 1/1/2014 9:00 AM, wrote:
>
> > Welfare benefits paid to the recipient on a debit card instead of them
> > getting food stamps. And you can be sure if there's something wrong
> > with their card not being accepted they will whip out their Blackberries
> > or iPhone to call the state office to bitch about a transaction not
> > going through. ):-((
>
>
> That sentiment is very unfair and just plain bigoted.
>
>
(Ridiculous long winded rant snipped.) No, it's not. Just this past
Thanksgiving there was a story in our local newspaper WITH PICTURES taken at
the local homeless shelter of the meal provided for the 'homeless and out of
work.' No faces were shown just the rows of place sittings with full plates
and next to m-a-n-y plates were smart phones, Blackberries, and iPhones, NO
TracFones to be seen anywhere. So don't preach to me about how bigoted I
am. If they're 'homeless and out of work' how are they able to pay for
access each month?

===========

Actually, I think there's a program that pays for access up to 200 minutes
or so for low income, at least I've seen it advertised in CA.

Cheri

"Julie Bove" > wrote in message
...

> No, this was not the same person who did this. It was many different
> people, almost all of them seeming to be foreign or at least speaking in a
> different language. And in the case of the WIC vouchers, the person
> getting the food did not seem to be a person who would qualify. Such as
> an elderly male.

How would you know the circumstance though? I believe a guardian,
grandparent, etc. of a child under a certain age can qualify if the child
lives with them.

Cheri

"Cheri" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote in message
> ...
> On Wednesday, January 1, 2014 2:04:13 PM UTC-6, DreadfulBitch wrote:
>>
>> On 1/1/2014 9:00 AM, wrote:
>>
>> > Welfare benefits paid to the recipient on a debit card instead of them
>> > getting food stamps. And you can be sure if there's something wrong
>> > with their card not being accepted they will whip out their
>> > Blackberries or iPhone to call the state office to bitch about a
>> > transaction not going through. ):-((
>>
>>
>> That sentiment is very unfair and just plain bigoted.
>>
>>
> (Ridiculous long winded rant snipped.) No, it's not. Just this past
> Thanksgiving there was a story in our local newspaper WITH PICTURES taken
> at the local homeless shelter of the meal provided for the 'homeless and
> out of work.' No faces were shown just the rows of place sittings with
> full plates and next to m-a-n-y plates were smart phones, Blackberries,
> and iPhones, NO TracFones to be seen anywhere. So don't preach to me
> about how bigoted I am. If they're 'homeless and out of work' how are
> they able to pay for access each month?
>
> ===========
>
> Actually, I think there's a program that pays for access up to 200 minutes
> or so for low income, at least I've seen it advertised in CA.

Probably for a phone. Probably not for a data plan.

"Cheri" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Julie Bove" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> No, this was not the same person who did this. It was many different
>> people, almost all of them seeming to be foreign or at least speaking in
>> a different language. And in the case of the WIC vouchers, the person
>> getting the food did not seem to be a person who would qualify. Such as
>> an elderly male.
>
> How would you know the circumstance though? I believe a guardian,
> grandparent, etc. of a child under a certain age can qualify if the child
> lives with them.

I don't. But my point was that the people I saw were not only clueless as
to what food and drink they were allowed to get but also horribly rude.

On 1/1/2014 8:43 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "Casa Milagro" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 1/1/2014 7:54 PM, Hench wrote:
>>> On 1/1/2014 6:49 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>
>>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 19:52:06 -0500, Metspitzer >
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually they don't. I was there tonight and a guy asked the
>>>>>> waitress
>>>>>> if they took EBT cards. I thought it was a pretty funny joke.
>>>>>
>>>>> The joke is lost on me... no idea what an EBT card is.
>>>>
>>>> Food stamps.
>>>
>>>
>>> What is a food stamp?
>>
>> Welfare.
>
> Is it?

It is.

> I don't know. I never qualified for anything like that. I
> always thought they were two different things. Dunno.

It's a government-paid electronic food benefits card = welfare.

"Casa Milagro" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/1/2014 8:43 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "Casa Milagro" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 1/1/2014 7:54 PM, Hench wrote:
>>>> On 1/1/2014 6:49 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 19:52:06 -0500, Metspitzer >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually they don't. I was there tonight and a guy asked the
>>>>>>> waitress
>>>>>>> if they took EBT cards. I thought it was a pretty funny joke.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The joke is lost on me... no idea what an EBT card is.
>>>>>
>>>>> Food stamps.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is a food stamp?
>>>
>>> Welfare.
>>
>> Is it?
>
> It is.
>
>> I don't know. I never qualified for anything like that. I
>> always thought they were two different things. Dunno.
>
> It's a government-paid electronic food benefits card = welfare.

Hmmm... Okay, I looked it up. It is a part of welfare. But there are other
parts as well.

"Cheri" > wrote:
> "Julie Bove" > wrote in message ...
>
>> No, this was not the same person who did this. It was many different >
>> people, almost all of them seeming to be foreign or at least speaking in
>> a > different language. And in the case of the WIC vouchers, the person
>> > getting the food did not seem to be a person who would qualify. Such
>>> as > an elderly male.
>
> How would you know the circumstance though? I believe a guardian,
> grandparent, etc. of a child under a certain age can qualify if the child lives with them.
>
> Cheri

You can also authorize a designated person to pick up on your behalf.
Their signature must also be on the front of the WIC folder, which must be
brought with at the time of purchase. WIC fraud isn't as easy as EBT
fraud.

--
jinx the minx

"The Other Guy" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 1 Jan 2014 19:43:57 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>>> What is a food stamp?
>>>
>>> Welfare.
>>
>>Is it? I don't know. I never qualified for anything like that. I always
>>thought they were two different things. Dunno.
>
> It is public assistance for those who need it,
> which to closed-minded fools equals welfare.

I did look it up and apparently it is a part of welfare. But then according
to another site I looked at, Social Security is also welfare. I fail to see
how though.

In article >, says...
>
> "DreadfulBitch" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On 1/1/2014 5:42 PM, Julie Bove wrote:

> >> Very realistic. This has been discussed here before!
> >>
> > Well, no shit sherlock. That doesn't mean I'm going to ignore bigoted
> > statements that have been made before!
> >
> > There but for the grace...
>
> I swear you are one of the most touchy and judgmental people I have ever run
> across. So that would make *you* somewhat of a bigot. Would it not?

no, it would not.

Yet again you're using a word you don't understand.

Janet UK

"Janet" > wrote in message
t...
> In article >, says...
>>
>> "DreadfulBitch" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On 1/1/2014 5:42 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> >> Very realistic. This has been discussed here before!
>> >>
>> > Well, no shit sherlock. That doesn't mean I'm going to ignore bigoted
>> > statements that have been made before!
>> >
>> > There but for the grace...
>>
>> I swear you are one of the most touchy and judgmental people I have ever
>> run
>> across. So that would make *you* somewhat of a bigot. Would it not?
>
> no, it would not.
>
> Yet again you're using a word you don't understand.

Well, no. I did look it up just to be sure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigotry

Specifically:

"Bigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their
prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust, hatred,
contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's opinion, ethnicity,
race, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual
orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics."

So basically, intolerance. Doesn't really matter as to what, in terms of
applying the word. People tend to use it in reference to people who are
prejudiced against people because of their race. But that's only one
definition.

I have seen her judge on the basis of another's opinion, time and time
again. Particularly when it comes to child raising. She has her own ideas
and if other do things that are not what she did, then she considers them to
be wrong.

Sure, people disagree with things others do all the time. But that's not
the same as going around and telling them what you do or did and acting like
that is the only way to go.

I also don't think it is bigotry to say that you have seen those who are on
public assistance using Smart Phones. I have seen them too! Now most
likely they are not the norm. But the ones I have seen have been most
obvious given the way they act, and act poorly while getting their
groceries.

I am sure there have been countless others ahead of me in line who were on
public assistance and I never would have noticed because they were behaving
in a normal fashion.

We do tend to notice things that stick out like a sore thumb whether we want
to or not. And around these parts it does take a lot to stick out. It is
not at all unusual for people to have wildly colored hair, piercings,
tattoos or even to go out in pajamas and slippers. We're pretty laid back
here.

But pull the sort of stunt that I've seen pulled many times and you will be
noticed! Which is picking up things that can not be purchased with WIC or
EBT then stand there ignoring the clerk and talking on your IPhone all the
while. That's not exactly normal behavior.

On 1/1/2014 9:31 PM, wrote:

> (Ridiculous long winded rant snipped.) No, it's not. Just this past Thanksgiving there was a story in our local newspaper WITH PICTURES taken at the local homeless shelter of the meal provided for the 'homeless and out of work.' No faces were shown just the rows of place sittings with full plates and next to m-a-n-y plates were smart phones, Blackberries, and iPhones, NO TracFones to be seen anywhere. So don't preach to me about how bigoted I am. If they're 'homeless and out of work' how are they able to pay for access each month?



So in your world, people on welfare or food stamps or eating a meal at a
shelter should have to give up their cell phones in order to receive any
assistance?

And of course, we have already heard from the "they buy junk food" crowd
so let's restrict food stamps to buying rice and beans and powdered milk.

And we have also heard from the "they have a car" and the "they have a
TV" crowds so maybe before someone gets any assistance we should make
them sell their cars and TVs to buy food.

So someone on food stamps buys a candy bar and everyone gets in an
uproar. Meanwhile, the Wall Streeters award themselves $91 billion in
bonuses and no one blinks an eye. Government subsidies for Farm and Big
Oil run into $$Billions more. Government Corporate tax breaks run into
even more $$Billions.

But lets solve the problem by cutting the food stamp and welfare
benefits for poor people.

Christian nation my ass. Some of you should be ashamed of yourself.

George L

On 1/2/2014 8:05 AM, George Leppla wrote:

> Christian nation my ass.

No, we're not, as much as some people would like it to be so.
No offense meant, and I agree with much of what you say, but
we have too many people trying to insist we live by their
religious rules already.

nancy

"George Leppla" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/1/2014 9:31 PM, wrote:
>
>> (Ridiculous long winded rant snipped.) No, it's not. Just this past
>> Thanksgiving there was a story in our local newspaper WITH PICTURES taken
>> at the local homeless shelter of the meal provided for the 'homeless and
>> out of work.' No faces were shown just the rows of place sittings with
>> full plates and next to m-a-n-y plates were smart phones, Blackberries,
>> and iPhones, NO TracFones to be seen anywhere. So don't preach to me
>> about how bigoted I am. If they're 'homeless and out of work' how are
>> they able to pay for access each month?
>
>
>
> So in your world, people on welfare or food stamps or eating a meal at a
> shelter should have to give up their cell phones in order to receive any
> assistance?
>
> And of course, we have already heard from the "they buy junk food" crowd
> so let's restrict food stamps to buying rice and beans and powdered milk.
>
> And we have also heard from the "they have a car" and the "they have a TV"
> crowds so maybe before someone gets any assistance we should make them
> sell their cars and TVs to buy food.
>
> So someone on food stamps buys a candy bar and everyone gets in an uproar.
> Meanwhile, the Wall Streeters award themselves $91 billion in bonuses and
> no one blinks an eye. Government subsidies for Farm and Big Oil run into
> $$Billions more. Government Corporate tax breaks run into even more
> $$Billions.
>
> But lets solve the problem by cutting the food stamp and welfare benefits
> for poor people.
>
> Christian nation my ass. Some of you should be ashamed of yourself.
>
> George L

I don't know about Christian nation but I'm pretty sure that one of the
complainers is not Christian. And I'm not either.

I also wish that nobody would eat junk food. And it sure would be easier if
it weren't available to anyone but... Dream on. They'll still eat it and
so will I. Although I try not to eat a lot of it.

What I don't want is the food police! I've never been on WIC but I would
imagine it would be rather difficult to sort out what all you are allowed to
get with your coupons. Perhaps after you have been on it for awhile but
they are very picky as to what you are allowed to get. I don't think any
meat is allowed but perhaps canned tuna is. Don't quote me on this. I
haven't looked at the list for a couple of years. Grain things have to be
certain whole grains. Like brown rice. Only certain sizes of things are
allowed and for the most part they seem to want them to go for the pretty
generic things.

And who would make the decision as to what is considered junk food? My
daughter's school thinks baked chips are fine. Some people consider granola
bars to be healthy. I don't.

I don't think anyone should have to give something up to get assistance.
But it does annoy me a tad bit when I see someone in line ahead of me who is
dressed in what would appear to be more expensive clothing and shoes than
what I own and flashing a fancy phone around yet buying things with WIC
vouchers. Of course I don't know any particulars of the person. Just makes
me feel a tad annoyed.

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/2/2014 8:05 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>
>> Christian nation my ass.
>
> No, we're not, as much as some people would like it to be so.
> No offense meant, and I agree with much of what you say, but
> we have too many people trying to insist we live by their
> religious rules already.
>
> nancy

Yep!

On 1/2/2014 7:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 1/2/2014 8:05 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>
>> Christian nation my ass.
>
> No, we're not, as much as some people would like it to be so.
> No offense meant, and I agree with much of what you say, but
> we have too many people trying to insist we live by their
> religious rules already.
>
> nancy
>

What I was trying to point out is that many of the people who claim that
this is a nation founded on Christian principles are the first to turn
their backs on the poor. The Teabaggers want God back in our country
and in our classrooms, but when it comes to helping poor people, that is
something else. They are all about cutting welfare, unemployment
benefits, food stamps and health care for the poor.

Sunday Saints, Monday sinners.... and anyone who claims to have
Christian values and turns their back on the poor are hypocrites.

George L

On 1/2/2014 8:51 AM, George Leppla wrote:
> On 1/2/2014 7:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>> On 1/2/2014 8:05 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>>
>>> Christian nation my ass.
>>
>> No, we're not, as much as some people would like it to be so.
>> No offense meant, and I agree with much of what you say, but
>> we have too many people trying to insist we live by their
>> religious rules already.

> What I was trying to point out is that many of the people who claim that
> this is a nation founded on Christian principles are the first to turn
> their backs on the poor.

I could not agree with you more. Some of the most heart hearted
people never shut up about religion.

Before i manage to offend everyone, I know there are many, many
generous and kind religious people. I'm not talking about you.

> The Teabaggers want God back in our country
> and in our classrooms, but when it comes to helping poor people, that is
> something else. They are all about cutting welfare, unemployment
> benefits, food stamps and health care for the poor.

We are on the same page. They don't even see themselves.
Whatever happened to WWJD.

> Sunday Saints, Monday sinners.... and anyone who claims to have
> Christian values and turns their back on the poor are hypocrites.

It's people like those trying to shove their religious principles
on all of us when I think they are the least Christian people that
make me kind of touchy when someone says we're a Christian nation.
Those same people who would rightly scream bloody murder if someone
mentions Sharia law want to run things according to their interpretation
of the Bible.

nancy

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/2/2014 8:51 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>> On 1/2/2014 7:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>> On 1/2/2014 8:05 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>>>
>>>> Christian nation my ass.
>>>
>>> No, we're not, as much as some people would like it to be so.
>>> No offense meant, and I agree with much of what you say, but
>>> we have too many people trying to insist we live by their
>>> religious rules already.
>
>> What I was trying to point out is that many of the people who claim that
>> this is a nation founded on Christian principles are the first to turn
>> their backs on the poor.
>
> I could not agree with you more. Some of the most heart hearted
> people never shut up about religion.
>
> Before i manage to offend everyone, I know there are many, many
> generous and kind religious people. I'm not talking about you.
>
>> The Teabaggers want God back in our country
>> and in our classrooms, but when it comes to helping poor people, that is
>> something else. They are all about cutting welfare, unemployment
>> benefits, food stamps and health care for the poor.
>
> We are on the same page. They don't even see themselves.
> Whatever happened to WWJD.

I think he might very well remind us that there are the poor, and then there
are the truly needy.

On 1/1/2014 11:02 PM, The Other Guy wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Jan 2014 19:43:57 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>>> What is a food stamp?
>>>
>>> Welfare.
>>
>> Is it? I don't know. I never qualified for anything like that. I always
>> thought they were two different things. Dunno.
>
> It is public assistance for those who need it,
> which to closed-minded fools equals welfare.

Yes, public assistance is welfare.

Words have meanings - learn them:


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/welfare

Financial or other aid provided, especially by the government, to people
in need.

On 1/1/2014 11:50 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "Casa Milagro" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 1/1/2014 8:43 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>> "Casa Milagro" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 1/1/2014 7:54 PM, Hench wrote:
>>>>> On 1/1/2014 6:49 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2013 19:52:06 -0500, Metspitzer
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Actually they don't. I was there tonight and a guy asked the
>>>>>>>> waitress
>>>>>>>> if they took EBT cards. I thought it was a pretty funny joke.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The joke is lost on me... no idea what an EBT card is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Food stamps.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What is a food stamp?
>>>>
>>>> Welfare.
>>>
>>> Is it?
>>
>> It is.
>>
>>> I don't know. I never qualified for anything like that. I
>>> always thought they were two different things. Dunno.
>>
>> It's a government-paid electronic food benefits card = welfare.
>
> Hmmm... Okay, I looked it up. It is a part of welfare. But there are
> other parts as well.

Quite true.

On 1/2/2014 12:21 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "The Other Guy" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2014 19:43:57 -0800, "Julie Bove"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>>> What is a food stamp?
>>>>
>>>> Welfare.
>>>
>>> Is it? I don't know. I never qualified for anything like that. I
>>> always
>>> thought they were two different things. Dunno.
>>
>> It is public assistance for those who need it,
>> which to closed-minded fools equals welfare.
>
> I did look it up and apparently it is a part of welfare. But then
> according to another site I looked at, Social Security is also welfare.
> I fail to see how though.

Simple:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/welfare

"Financial or other aid provided, especially by the government, to
people in need."

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 07:05:13 -0600, George Leppla
> wrote:

>On 1/1/2014 9:31 PM, wrote:
>
>> (Ridiculous long winded rant snipped.) No, it's not. Just this past Thanksgiving there was a story in our local newspaper WITH PICTURES taken at the local homeless shelter of the meal provided for the 'homeless and out of work.' No faces were shown just the rows of place sittings with full plates and next to m-a-n-y plates were smart phones, Blackberries, and iPhones, NO TracFones to be seen anywhere. So don't preach to me about how bigoted I am. If they're 'homeless and out of work' how are they able to pay for access each month?
>
>
>
>So in your world, people on welfare or food stamps or eating a meal at a
>shelter should have to give up their cell phones in order to receive any
>assistance?
>
>And of course, we have already heard from the "they buy junk food" crowd
>so let's restrict food stamps to buying rice and beans and powdered milk.
>
>And we have also heard from the "they have a car" and the "they have a
>TV" crowds so maybe before someone gets any assistance we should make
>them sell their cars and TVs to buy food.

I think they should have to work, if able bodied let them sweep the
streets, do something, not just mooch.

On 1/2/2014 10:27 AM, Pico Rico wrote:
> "Nancy Young" > wrote

>> On 1/2/2014 8:51 AM, George Leppla wrote:

>>> The Teabaggers want God back in our country
>>> and in our classrooms, but when it comes to helping poor people, that is
>>> something else. They are all about cutting welfare, unemployment
>>> benefits, food stamps and health care for the poor.
>>
>> We are on the same page. They don't even see themselves.
>> Whatever happened to WWJD.
>
> I think he might very well remind us that there are the poor, and then there
> are the truly needy.

Though I am not religious, I did go to Sunday school and church as
a kid. I remember Jesus felt it was important to make wine for people
who didn't really need more, and no means test for all those loaves
and fishes, just handed it out because they were hungry.

Regardless, the people we're discussing would begrudge a crumb
to even truly needy people.

nancy

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 07:51:30 -0600, George Leppla
> wrote:

>On 1/2/2014 7:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>> On 1/2/2014 8:05 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>>
>>> Christian nation my ass.
>>
>> No, we're not, as much as some people would like it to be so.
>> No offense meant, and I agree with much of what you say, but
>> we have too many people trying to insist we live by their
>> religious rules already.
>>
>> nancy
>>
>
>What I was trying to point out is that many of the people who claim that
>this is a nation founded on Christian principles are the first to turn
>their backs on the poor. The Teabaggers want God back in our country
>and in our classrooms, but when it comes to helping poor people, that is
>something else. They are all about cutting welfare, unemployment
>benefits, food stamps and health care for the poor.
>
>Sunday Saints, Monday sinners.... and anyone who claims to have
>Christian values and turns their back on the poor are hypocrites.
>
>George L

But the "poor" turn their backs on the productive society. Make those
poor lazy *******s earn their keep. I'm not religious so Christianity
be damned... that's just an excuse for the blind belief retards... to
me religious leaders are no different from carny hucksters, separating
suckers from their money.

There are plenty of jobs, the moochers are just ascared of dirty
hands, calluses, and perspiration... at minimum hand them a broom and
a paintbrush. The citys are filthy and all public buildings are in
need of paint. When I was ten years old I earned good money painting
stoops... $50/day was a lot of money in 1953. I always had a job,
some not much fun like cleaning blood and guts in a live chicken
market, but someone has to do that kind of work... wasn't such a bad
summer job when my pockets were jingling. I worked at every mom n'
pop in the hood, I was never idle and I never got an allowance. I
look at young adults on TV literally sobbing how they can't find
work... poor babies... they make me wanna puke, those useless lazy
*******s.

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 12:46:30 -0500, Brooklyn1
> wrote:

>On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 07:51:30 -0600, George Leppla
> wrote:
>
>>On 1/2/2014 7:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>> On 1/2/2014 8:05 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>>>
>>>> Christian nation my ass.
>>>
>>> No, we're not, as much as some people would like it to be so.
>>> No offense meant, and I agree with much of what you say, but
>>> we have too many people trying to insist we live by their
>>> religious rules already.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>>
>>
>>What I was trying to point out is that many of the people who claim that
>>this is a nation founded on Christian principles are the first to turn
>>their backs on the poor. The Teabaggers want God back in our country
>>and in our classrooms, but when it comes to helping poor people, that is
>>something else. They are all about cutting welfare, unemployment
>>benefits, food stamps and health care for the poor.
>>
>>Sunday Saints, Monday sinners.... and anyone who claims to have
>>Christian values and turns their back on the poor are hypocrites.
>>
>>George L
>
>But the "poor" turn their backs on the productive society. Make those
>poor lazy *******s earn their keep. I'm not religious so Christianity
>be damned... that's just an excuse for the blind belief retards... to
>me religious leaders are no different from carny hucksters, separating
>suckers from their money.
>
>There are plenty of jobs, the moochers are just ascared of dirty
>hands, calluses, and perspiration... at minimum hand them a broom and
>a paintbrush. The citys are filthy and all public buildings are in
>need of paint. When I was ten years old I earned good money painting
>stoops... $50/day was a lot of money in 1953. I always had a job,
>some not much fun like cleaning blood and guts in a live chicken
>market, but someone has to do that kind of work... wasn't such a bad
>summer job when my pockets were jingling. I worked at every mom n'
>pop in the hood, I was never idle and I never got an allowance. I
>look at young adults on TV literally sobbing how they can't find
>work... poor babies... they make me wanna puke, those useless lazy
>*******s.

Remember when reality TV shows like Court TV used to introduce the
participants. They used to tell names and occupations. Today they
don't do that since we have 3rd generation welfare families.

It is almost criminal to say things like.....if you want to increase
your chances that your children will succeed, you should pick them out
a good father.

On 1/2/2014 12:26 PM, Metspitzer wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 12:46:30 -0500, Brooklyn1
> > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 07:51:30 -0600, George Leppla
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/2/2014 7:26 AM, Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> On 1/2/2014 8:05 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Christian nation my ass.
>>>>
>>>> No, we're not, as much as some people would like it to be so.
>>>> No offense meant, and I agree with much of what you say, but
>>>> we have too many people trying to insist we live by their
>>>> religious rules already.
>>>>
>>>> nancy
>>>>
>>>
>>> What I was trying to point out is that many of the people who claim that
>>> this is a nation founded on Christian principles are the first to turn
>>> their backs on the poor. The Teabaggers want God back in our country
>>> and in our classrooms, but when it comes to helping poor people, that is
>>> something else. They are all about cutting welfare, unemployment
>>> benefits, food stamps and health care for the poor.
>>>
>>> Sunday Saints, Monday sinners.... and anyone who claims to have
>>> Christian values and turns their back on the poor are hypocrites.
>>>
>>> George L
>>
>> But the "poor" turn their backs on the productive society. Make those
>> poor lazy *******s earn their keep. I'm not religious so Christianity
>> be damned... that's just an excuse for the blind belief retards... to
>> me religious leaders are no different from carny hucksters, separating
>> suckers from their money.
>>
>> There are plenty of jobs, the moochers are just ascared of dirty
>> hands, calluses, and perspiration... at minimum hand them a broom and
>> a paintbrush. The citys are filthy and all public buildings are in
>> need of paint. When I was ten years old I earned good money painting
>> stoops... $50/day was a lot of money in 1953. I always had a job,
>> some not much fun like cleaning blood and guts in a live chicken
>> market, but someone has to do that kind of work... wasn't such a bad
>> summer job when my pockets were jingling. I worked at every mom n'
>> pop in the hood, I was never idle and I never got an allowance. I
>> look at young adults on TV literally sobbing how they can't find
>> work... poor babies... they make me wanna puke, those useless lazy
>> *******s.



The problem with Sheldon's argument is that it assumes that the people
on food stamps or welfare are "able bodied" when in fact, most people
are children or the elderly.

http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fig...realities.aspx

or http://tinyurl.com/6ncmdtb

"76% of SNAP households included a child, an elderly person, or a
disabled person. These vulnerable households receive 83% of all SNAP
benefits."

"The average SNAP household has a gross monthly income of $744"


As for the argument that we are raising generations of welfare
families... here is the fact:

"SNAP already has strict time-limits for unemployed workers. Able-bodied
adults without dependents (ABAWDs) may only receive 3 months of SNAP
benefits during any 3 year period, unless they are working in a
qualifying job training program.

The SNAP benefit formula is structured to provide a strong work
incentive – for every additional dollar a SNAP participant earns, their
benefits decline by about 24 to 36 cents, not a full dollar, so
participants have a strong incentive to find work, work longer hours, or
seek better-paying employment."

So you guys just keep watching Fox news and whining about how the poor
are bleeding you dry and while you do that, the Bankers, Wall Street
moguls and the Corporate Tax breaks and subsidies are emptying out our
country's bank accounts.

George L

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message
...
> On 1/2/2014 10:27 AM, Pico Rico wrote:
>> "Nancy Young" > wrote
>
>>> On 1/2/2014 8:51 AM, George Leppla wrote:
>
>>>> The Teabaggers want God back in our country
>>>> and in our classrooms, but when it comes to helping poor people, that
>>>> is
>>>> something else. They are all about cutting welfare, unemployment
>>>> benefits, food stamps and health care for the poor.
>>>
>>> We are on the same page. They don't even see themselves.
>>> Whatever happened to WWJD.
>>
>> I think he might very well remind us that there are the poor, and then
>> there
>> are the truly needy.
>
> Though I am not religious, I did go to Sunday school and church as
> a kid. I remember Jesus felt it was important to make wine for people
> who didn't really need more, and no means test for all those loaves
> and fishes, just handed it out because they were hungry.
>
> Regardless, the people we're discussing would begrudge a crumb
> to even truly needy people.
>

I think that would be a small subset of the people folks are always
complaining about being uncharitable.

On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 13:26:50 -0500, Metspitzer >
wrote:

> It is almost criminal to say things like.....if you want to increase
> your chances that your children will succeed, you should pick them out
> a good father.

The educational level of the parents is the main indicator of how well
children will succeed. Granted, there are always notable exceptions -
but you can take it to the bank as a generality and that's why both
poverty and affluence are generational.

--
I take life with a grain of salt, a slice of lemon and a shot of tequila