I heard this the other day and had to laugh a bit. I don't really blame the woman that is happy about, what appears to be, some sort of handout. I doubt that many would turn down money handed to them. What is sad is this person seems to be oblivious to where this money comes from, so gives the impression of not being a contributor to the kitty (i.e. does not pay taxes). She is also right, that's exactly why she, and millions like her, voted for Obama, to get something for nothing. Most of us would be happy to just keep more of what we make, a handout is unnecessary.

It is much easier to sit back and wait for a handout than to make your own way. Does eating from the government feed trough only encourage more gluttony? Everyone has their own opinion on this. IMO in many cases it does. In these times when everyone is being asked to dig deeper, it seems irresponsible to try and pull the dead weight (they know who they are) while folks that need just a temporary helping hand are having trouble finding it because they don't know how to game the system or are too proud to ask for help.

This sound clip should play nationwide during the next election. Then the voter can decide if someone else's jubilation over a cash windfall justifies the taxes they pay or not. For now, it sounds like Detroit is firmly in Obama's hands. The problem here is he needs to keep feeding the beast, lest it bite him.

That's exactly how I feel right now. I am currently in a bind where I may lose my car or my apartment and don't know where to turn for help. Most people will tell me to get some kind of Gov't assistance but I refuse because this is my problem that i caused and I don't want burden tax payers with my personal problems.

Don't be too quick to refuse help from Uncle. People make mistakes. If your intention is to get on your feet, that's what it's there for. When you're back up get off it. You have plenty of time to pay it all back (and then some) in taxes. Personally, I only have a problem with those that make a career out of it.

by refusing you are enabling communism. you are paying for handouts to others, and you are refusing to take back when you are in need.

The more people take, the faster the house of cards will collapse and we healing could begin. (and it better be fast or people will not be able to make the connection; they can't even figure out where obama is getting his money)

I second Nitro and Taltamir.

There is a difference between legitimate users of government programs and those that make a career out of it.

I don't know about Obama Money, but I was surprised to find that due to some buffs to the tuition credits this year (via the stimulus bill) I'll at least be getting a fair amount of "kryo money" back.

I read that they were auctioning off homes in Detroit for 500 bucks and couldn't even unload any of em. Detroit is quickly becoming a total wasteland... Its a microcosm of what the Democrats would do to all of America if given the chance.

democrat1: You know that thing we tried several times and was a total failure? lets try it again but on a BIGGER SCALE this time...

democrat2: *puffs some more weed* duuuuude, thats like, an awesome idea.

[/sarcasm]

Did you know that they had universal health insurance in two states already and it went bankrupt in both?

I know about Mass. and I know about the one they had for children in Hawaii. In the later they decided that children without health care, from families making under a certain dollar amount, should have paid by the state. People loved the idea so much that those that had insurance dropped their kids policies for the "free" state insurance. It was in the red in only eight months. The problem now is killing it. It's a popular entitlement and none of the "blue state" politicians want to be the bad guy and stop the bleeding.

It makes sense, the only difference between a family making under X a year who insures it kids and one that doesn't, is that the latter doesn't care for their children's well being as much and would rather blow it on drugs, cigs, and booze.

The vast majority fall into the first type... they eschew their own spending to insure their kids. This made the democrats feel sorry for the other kids and institute such a program...

They actually expected people who qualified to pay twice (for themselves and those who didn't insure their kids) and receive once despite being qualified as poor enough to need the help.

Drugs, cigs, booze, or food for those same children... a place to live... you know, necessities?  Health INSURANCE is not one of those necessities.

If two people both qualify for the program, aka both make the same amount, and one of them insures their kids and one doesn't, then the one who doesn't has higher priorities. Or do you think that the reason some of the people making the SAME AMOUNT who chose to insure their kids are taking insurance over food and housing?