KD in CA Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 (edited) Because a hyperbolic fear campaign is always the solution. Apparently. No one in the Democratic party that I know of (which doesn't count for much admittedly) is advocating taking kids away from single mothers because they're single mothers. Edited August 30, 2012 by KD in CT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 I'd actually take the opposite tack and have step one to provide incentives for being married. (And if the federal government is gearing tax policy to support marriage, I am fine with providing civil unions with the same tax incentives.) Not gonna work. The actual act of being married doesn't do anything because being married doesn't automatically make someone be a responsible, nurturing, supportive spouse and parent. People are more than happy to have babies just to get more free money. They'll be more than happy to fake a marriage for more dough as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosmicBills Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Apparently. Did you read what my quote was in response to or just my quote? Because your making a correlation that doesn't exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck_dodgers007 Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 \ Step one is to remove the welfare incentive program that rewards welfare mothers with more money for having more children. And when they still have a kid, then what? Wait till the kid is five--if he survives that long--and dump on the school system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 And when they still have a kid, then what? Wait till the kid is five--if he survives that long--and dump on the school system? The difference (minus paying them for the kid) being...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 And when they still have a kid, then what? Wait till the kid is five--if he survives that long--and dump on the school system? Only if their name can't be confused with a firearm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 And when they still have a kid, then what? Wait till the kid is five--if he survives that long--and dump on the school system? I am certain that this thought never entered your head. The parents scrimp and save, raise the child on their own, and love them. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 And when they still have a kid, then what? Wait till the kid is five--if he survives that long--and dump on the school system? Then maybe that will be the day the parent finally breaks the cycle. Maybe that's the day they'll decide to teach THEIR children to stay in school, study hard, volunteer and keep it in their pants. Or maybe they'll teach their kids that unprotected sex is as stupid as smoking. Maybe they'll teach their kids to be responsible and self-reliant, to be a human who is not a burden on society, but rather a contributor. But continuing to give them money because you're worried about what MIGHT happen is pretty freaking stupid. Even for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 The parents scrimp and save, raise the child on their own, and love them. Ahem... "It takes a village." (Ignore the fact that the purveyors of that sentiment made the conscious decision to raise their daughter strictly without any assistance from said "village".) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Then maybe that will be the day the parent finally breaks the cycle. Maybe that's the day they'll decide to teach THEIR children to stay in school, study hard, volunteer and keep it in their pants. Or maybe they'll teach their kids that unprotected sex is as stupid as smoking. Maybe they'll teach their kids to be responsible and self-reliant, to be a human who is not a burden on society, but rather a contributor. But continuing to give them money because you're worried about what MIGHT happen is pretty freaking stupid. Even for you. Juror #8's mom would be a good example of what single mothers should aspire to be like. And I'm sure that Juror #8 would have rather have had a father in his life, and would aspire to be there for his kids (if he doesn't already). Speaking of unprotected sex, that's another reason I've been railing against free birth control. It's almost like telling people it's okay, we've got the pregnancy concerns covered, go have sex when you the urge hits and don't worry about protection/killing the mood with a condom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 What's wrong with the GOP: -Their systematic marginalization of true fiscal conservatism -Their steadfast belief in a centrally planed economy -Their continued expansion of federal reach -Their continued expansion of federal spending -Their zeel for curbing the liberties of US citizens in the name of "security" -Their opposition to gay marraige -Their belief in deficit spending -Their rigid stance on abortion -Their commitment to subsidizing big oil, big pharma, big aggro etc. -Their marraige to corporate special interests -Their xenophobia -Their insistance on managing K-12 education at the federal level -Their chickenhawk interventionist foreign policy -Their commitment to the UN and the World Bank I'll stop here, but this laundry list could go on for pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 What's wrong with the GOP: -Their systematic marginalization of true fiscal conservatism -Their steadfast belief in a centrally planed economy -Their continued expansion of federal reach -Their continued expansion of federal spending -Their zeel for curbing the liberties of US citizens in the name of "security" -Their opposition to gay marraige -Their belief in deficit spending -Their rigid stance on abortion -Their commitment to subsidizing big oil, big pharma, big aggro etc. -Their marraige to corporate special interests -Their xenophobia -Their insistance on managing K-12 education at the federal level -Their chickenhawk interventionist foreign policy -Their commitment to the UN and the World Bank I'll stop here, but this laundry list could go on for pages. And to think, the dems are twice as bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 And to think, the dems are twice as bad. We don't live in the comparitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 And to think, the dems are twice as bad. Dems aren't bad. It's liberal that are off their rocker. Not all Dems are liberals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Serious Nazi reference for a moment... Read about the Nazi government and how it operated, and one thing that stands out isn't that it was some sort of well-guided dictatorship directed by the will of Adolf; but rather it was primarily a mindless, faceless swamp of bureaucracy that stifled all initiative, discussion, and dissension through sheer inertia, and existed in large part just to maintain its own existence. The US government is a lot like that. (I'd guess it's the biggest bureaucracy on the planet.) You get to DC, and it just completely swamps you with bull ****, and fights any attempt to change or disagree with it with monolithic dedication to its own needs. That's not changing any time soon. Thats a good description of it. Its big, the perks are juicy, and it runs on other people's money.... its no wonder when people get there, the motivation to stay is very strong. Monolithic Dedication to its own needs... that is awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 So the solution is to wage war on the mothers? Who is waging war on the mothers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Who is waging war on the mothers? No one. Republicans just want it back in the kitchen where it belongs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 No one. Republicans just want it back in the kitchen where it belongs. Is that so unreasonable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Is that so unreasonable? ****, no! I'm hungry, and I need a beer, and where's my wife right now...? Next thing you know, she'll be wanting shoes and pants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 30, 2012 Share Posted August 30, 2012 Did you read what my quote was in response to or just my quote? Because your making a correlation that doesn't exist. Oh relax, I'm just having a little fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts