I don't believe a handful of people who abuse the system are an excuse to destroy the system...it's simply a call to crack down on fraud, which as I've already stated, I support.

More Laws the Obama Administration is not enforcing. Simple.

You want to crack down on fraud you need to look into SSI disability fraud. I have patients who come into my office on Medicare who couldn't tell you the nature of their disability, or they broke their ankle or knee 15 years ago and have been "disabled" ever since yet do not walk with a limp, crutch, or cane.

(08-24-2014 12:16 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  More Laws the Obama Administration is not enforcing. Simple.

It's Obama's job to go and arrest those who abuse food stamps? He's President, not a cop.

(08-24-2014 12:16 PM)dfarr Wrote:  You want to crack down on fraud you need to look into SSI disability fraud. I have patients who come into my office on Medicare who couldn't tell you the nature of their disability, or they broke their ankle or knee 15 years ago and have been "disabled" ever since yet do not walk with a limp, crutch, or cane.

Completely agree. Like welfare, the Obama admin expanded the "conditions" for which you could qualify. As long as you aren't working on the books since the "disability", pretty much anyone can qualify.

(08-24-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:16 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  More Laws the Obama Administration is not enforcing. Simple.

It's Obama's job to go and arrest those who abuse food stamps? He's President, not a cop.

Of the three branches of gov't, which one is responsible for enforcement of the laws?

(08-24-2014 12:22 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:16 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  More Laws the Obama Administration is not enforcing. Simple.

It's Obama's job to go and arrest those who abuse food stamps? He's President, not a cop.

Of the three branches of gov't, which one is responsible for enforcement of the laws?

You answered a question with a question...bad form.

(08-24-2014 12:23 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:22 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:16 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  More Laws the Obama Administration is not enforcing. Simple.

It's Obama's job to go and arrest those who abuse food stamps? He's President, not a cop.

Of the three branches of gov't, which one is responsible for enforcement of the laws?

You answered a question with a question...bad form.

yes, it is Obama's responsibility. Now you.

(08-24-2014 12:26 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:23 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:22 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:16 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  More Laws the Obama Administration is not enforcing. Simple.

It's Obama's job to go and arrest those who abuse food stamps? He's President, not a cop.

Of the three branches of gov't, which one is responsible for enforcement of the laws?

You answered a question with a question...bad form.

yes, it is Obama's responsibility. Now you.

If you honestly think it's the US Presidents job to go out and arrest people, all I can do is say bless your heart since I'm a southern gent.

(08-24-2014 12:23 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:22 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:16 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  More Laws the Obama Administration is not enforcing. Simple.

It's Obama's job to go and arrest those who abuse food stamps? He's President, not a cop.

Of the three branches of gov't, which one is responsible for enforcement of the laws?

You answered a question with a question...bad form.

And you're deflecting. Besides, he did answer the question. Enforcement of laws falls under the executive branch i.e. to execute the rule of law. But our head law enforcement office is busy dicking around in a non-issue in Missouri.

(08-23-2014 06:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-23-2014 06:37 PM)TPBlaze84 Wrote:  

(08-23-2014 06:28 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-23-2014 05:43 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-23-2014 05:42 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  But I thought ID cards are racist.

Quote where I said that.

Who said that you did?

But your fellow left-wing morons have claimed that requiring an ID to vote is racist.

Why are you proposing a racist ideal?

The right to vote in a free election, one of our nation's most sacred rights, is a little different than eligibility for a government benefits program. I guess you're too busy hammering away at one political side of the spectrum to consider the disparity

And what part of that difference makes it more important to ascertain the identity of the person involved for one purpose than it is for the other?

Chirp chirp. You either stumped him or he knows there's no good answer for him.

(08-24-2014 12:35 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(08-23-2014 06:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(08-23-2014 06:37 PM)TPBlaze84 Wrote:  

(08-23-2014 06:28 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(08-23-2014 05:43 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  Quote where I said that.

Who said that you did?

But your fellow left-wing morons have claimed that requiring an ID to vote is racist.

Why are you proposing a racist ideal?

The right to vote in a free election, one of our nation's most sacred rights, is a little different than eligibility for a government benefits program. I guess you're too busy hammering away at one political side of the spectrum to consider the disparity

And what part of that difference makes it more important to ascertain the identity of the person involved for one purpose than it is for the other?

Chirp chirp. You either stumped him or he knows there's no good answer for him.

Believe it or not, I can only respond to one thread at a time...I know you guys hang on my every thought...but wait your turn.

I've said over and over...an ID is not hard to get, you should need one to vote.

(08-24-2014 12:27 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:26 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:23 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:22 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 12:18 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  It's Obama's job to go and arrest those who abuse food stamps? He's President, not a cop.

Of the three branches of gov't, which one is responsible for enforcement of the laws?

You answered a question with a question...bad form.

yes, it is Obama's responsibility. Now you.

If you honestly think it's the US Presidents job to go out and arrest people, all I can do is say bless your heart since I'm a southern gent.

So you don't know? It's understandable. Considering.

The problem with the Welfare State is that although it encompasses a very small portion of our national budget?...it is in our faces daily. We all see these abuses every day.

I hope we all are aware that in order to reform the system...it must be ditched totally for a more efficient and transparent system. No way in hell are the bureaucrats going to do it on their own. They are not going to cut their own throats. It is their source of income and they are in fact incentivized to GROW it...not reduce it. The system would require a purge to be reformed.

"I hope we all are aware that in order to reform the system...it must be ditched totally for a more efficient and transparent system."

I would never support that, and I think most Americans would agree with me.

(08-24-2014 01:29 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  "I hope we all are aware that in order to reform the system...it must be ditched totally for a more efficient and transparent system."

I would never support that, and I think most Americans would agree with me.

Keep on doing things the same failed way...looking for better results. Nah...That's not the definition of insanity.

Why would you support ANY system that was not efficient and transparent?....or....Does the end truly justify the means for you?

(08-24-2014 01:36 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:29 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  "I hope we all are aware that in order to reform the system...it must be ditched totally for a more efficient and transparent system."

I would never support that, and I think most Americans would agree with me.

Keep on doing things the same failed way...looking for better results. Nah...That's not the definition of insanity.

Why would you support ANY system that was not efficient and transparent?....or....Does the end truly justify the means for you?

it hasn't failed.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/econ...efficienty

(08-24-2014 01:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:36 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:29 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  "I hope we all are aware that in order to reform the system...it must be ditched totally for a more efficient and transparent system."

I would never support that, and I think most Americans would agree with me.

Keep on doing things the same failed way...looking for better results. Nah...That's not the definition of insanity.

Why would you support ANY system that was not efficient and transparent?....or....Does the end truly justify the means for you?

it hasn't failed.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/econ...efficienty

So the end justifies the means. I thought so.

(08-24-2014 01:39 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:36 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:29 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  "I hope we all are aware that in order to reform the system...it must be ditched totally for a more efficient and transparent system."

I would never support that, and I think most Americans would agree with me.

Keep on doing things the same failed way...looking for better results. Nah...That's not the definition of insanity.

Why would you support ANY system that was not efficient and transparent?....or....Does the end truly justify the means for you?

it hasn't failed.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/econ...efficienty

So the end justifies the means. I thought so.

Basing your ideas off a false premise is a fallacy...

(08-24-2014 01:40 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:39 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:38 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:36 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-24-2014 01:29 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  "I hope we all are aware that in order to reform the system...it must be ditched totally for a more efficient and transparent system."

I would never support that, and I think most Americans would agree with me.

Keep on doing things the same failed way...looking for better results. Nah...That's not the definition of insanity.

Why would you support ANY system that was not efficient and transparent?....or....Does the end truly justify the means for you?

it hasn't failed.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/econ...efficienty

So the end justifies the means. I thought so.

Basing your ideas off a false premise is a fallacy...

Returning only 25% of a budget to actually fix any problem...successfully or not....is a dismal failure unless you believe the end justifies the means.