I said "Agreed. I apologize for the confusion."
I didn't want to publicize it, but as an act of contrition I donated a KFC
two-piece dinner to the Salvation Army.
I'm prepared to do more - it is (pretty close to) Yom Kippur after all -
what would you suggest?
You may be right, although not for the reason you posit. There's a YouTube
video of a woman saying she'll vote for Obama because he gave her a free
'phone and another where the woman arrested for shoplifting asserts "If the
government gave me more money I wouldn't have to steal!"
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
Everything you said here falls by the way side after you said:
"There's a YouTube video of a woman saying she'll vote for Obama because
he gave her a free 'phone"
Fact is, the fre phone thing is a result of a long-standing program to
help truly indigent people with communication devices and service. And
this is paid for by charges on everyone's phone bill, not by any
government agency, administered by a collaborative telecom company
Oh gee, the fact that it's not a govt agency and I'm just paying
via a tax on my phone for anyone that CLAIMS they can't
afford a cell phone to get one for free makes me feel real good.
I'm glad you pointed out that essential difference. I see those
ads on TV all the time. Just like Obama's radio ads encouraging
more people to apply for food stamps. You libs are really
I'm just as concerned about freeloaders getting something for nothing as
you are. But perhaps I wasn't quite clear in my post - the free phone
has nothing to do with Obama, or Democrats. It is part of a long-
standing program that also subsidizes rural telephones for "freeloading"
farmers and out in the boonies people. Just like many people are taking
advantage of lower tax rates for dividends and cap gains. It is the
/system/ that allows it.
I also see and hear many ads for reverse mortgages, mortgage "relief"
etc, etc. Many of those are (IMO) grand theft, but Henry Winkler and
other actors are getting paid to speak the regurgitated words in the ads.
Which party do you think would get rid of that in a minute if
they could? Does it fit with conservative values or liberal ones?
How did all of us survive without a cell phone a mere 20 years ago?
When did a cell phone become an entitlement?
And how you can compare it to lower tax rates for capital gains
is beyond me. In one case, someone put their money to
work, put their money at risk to EARN income. That investment
helps produce jobs. In the other case,
many just sit on their asses and say, give me a phone, I'm
entitled to it. And meanwhile many of them are out scamming
for cash, but claiming to be dirt poor.
What exactly is grand theft about a free market program that
allows a senior to use up the equity in their house over time
to support themselves? Would you prefer they be forced to
sell their house instead? And what the hell does any of that
have to do with a govt program whereby those that CLAIM
they have little income get a free cell phone and cell phone
service? Did the seniors get the house for free? I'll
never understand how libs minds operate.
On 9/28/2012 12:42 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
Is this a trick question? USF came into being in 1996. The house and
senate held by Republicans passed (81/18 in the senate and 414/16 in the
house) the telecommunications act of 1996 which was sent to and signed
into law by the democrat president Clinton.
Not nearly as efficiently as we do now. I can remember the days of
leaving a message on someones answering machine and getting a return
call the next day.
It is to lots of people. A friend who can quote chapter and verse of
everything Rush Limbagh told him thinks we should all pitch in to put a
cell tower in the sparsely populated area where they live. He also
thinks we should pay to extend miles of cable TV infrastructure for 3
Yes, but prior to that a similar fee was imposed on phone
companies starting in 1934. Who was in charge back then?
It was with the deregulation of telecom
that the new method of achieving some of the same things went into
effect in 1996. And the Republicans aren't fool proof and sometimes
get things wrong too. They also have to sometimes accept some
of what they don't want in order to get the rest of what they do
want. So the fact that a Republican controlled Congress
in 1996 passed it doesn't mean that Republicans today would not
pull the plug on this crap if they could. The Republican party of
today is not what it was in 1996 or even 2010. Who do you
think is more likely to be in favor of this? Obama and the libs or
the Republicans, particularly the Tea Party Republicans?
>The house and
I don't have to see the above. Only a lib would think it's a swell
to hand out free cell phones to people too lazy to work as an
I see, so now everyone is entitled to the latest and greatest in
When will my new iPhone be arriving?
And that is why the country is going broke and down the
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.