What's new

The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots.

Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

:eek: Wow!!! I bet there is soooo much more fraud with food stamps.

tons..on the news they were talking about restaurants that would buy people's food stamps for a certain percentage and use the cards to buy food for the restaurant. They would be caught, shut down and a relative would then open it and do the same thing. Unbelievable amounts of OUR money being spent here!
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

263enhx.jpg
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

I think I am more of a democrat. I believe more on that side than the other from things I've been reading lately.
*this is what I'm adding*> I believe in gay rights & womens right to choose/ pro chioce.

I always believed in helping my fellow man, and working together instead of fighting against each other...compromise I guess it should be called. I respect both sides, and I guess my rose tinted glasses are a little foggy, lol, but I think this country would be better off if our leaders could work out their differences and do what is right for the people. We can't base the whole country on being any one single religion, and all the people will never see eye to eye. I bet a lot of our families are like that too- we don't all agree 100% with them, but we work together to make our family work, right? (unless of course we go our separate ways- but even then no one is pushing their thoughts and beliefs if they aren't there). I believe in teaching my kids values that I feel are important- being smart, kind, compassionate people- that hard work builds character and pays off, all the golden rule stuff......As for whoever is running for president- none of the past ones have been perfect, none of the future ones will be either.


*adding this too* I didn't mean for this to read as just "democrats" believe in the whole golden rule thing- I was just adding and stating what else I believe in. I believe that good, true hearts do believe in the golden rule and the good work ethics- and there is no political view that would be against those things, IMO. I was never really able to understand the differences in the parties until I noticed one believed in gay rights, pro-choice and the other doesn't favor those choices. Those rights are the reason I guess I would lean to the democrat side if I had to choose one. In my heart- I love everyone, and that is why I wish (rose tinted glasses here) we could all be open minded to everyone's views.
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

I think I am more of a democrat. I believe more on that side than the other from things I've been reading lately. I always believed in helping my fellow man, and working together instead of fighting against each other...compromise I guess it should be called. I respect both sides, and I guess my rose tinted glasses are a little foggy, lol, but I think this country would be better off if our leaders could work out their differences and do what is right for the people. We can't base the whole country on being any one single religion, and all the people will never see eye to eye. I bet a lot of our families are like that too- we don't all agree 100% with them, but we work together to make our family work, right? (unless of course we go our separate ways- but even then no one is pushing their thoughts and beliefs if they aren't there). I believe in teaching my kids values that I feel are important- being smart, kind, compassionate people- that hard work builds character and pays off, all the golden rule stuff......As for whoever is running for president- none of the past ones have been perfect, none of the future ones will be either.

And you're saying these are Democratic traits? Republicans teach their kids to slack off and be lazy?

Yes I'm generalizing, but then again so is your entire post.

:surrender:

My blood pressure was good at my doctor's appointment yesterday, I really should stay out of this thread if I want it to stay that way.
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

I think I am more of a democrat. I believe more on that side than the other from things I've been reading lately. I always believed in helping my fellow man, and working together instead of fighting against each other...compromise I guess it should be called. I respect both sides, and I guess my rose tinted glasses are a little foggy, lol, but I think this country would be better off if our leaders could work out their differences and do what is right for the people. We can't base the whole country on being any one single religion, and all the people will never see eye to eye. I bet a lot of our families are like that too- we don't all agree 100% with them, but we work together to make our family work, right? (unless of course we go our separate ways- but even then no one is pushing their thoughts and beliefs if they aren't there). I believe in teaching my kids values that I feel are important- being smart, kind, compassionate people- that hard work builds character and pays off, all the golden rule stuff......As for whoever is running for president- none of the past ones have been perfect, none of the future ones will be either.

Barbara Bush has some harsh words about the current presidential election, calling it "the worst campaign I've ever seen in my life," according to the Dallas Morning News.

The former first lady, who held the position while her husband George H.W. Bush served as president from 1989 to 1993, made the comment at Southern Methodist University on Monday, during a conference chronicling the the experiences and legacies of presidents' wives. Bush appeared alongside her daughter-in-law Laura Bush, whose husband George W. Bush introduced both women to the stage.

Expanding on her opinion about the tenor of the current campaign season, Barbara Bush stated: "I hate the fact that people think 'compromise' is a dirty word." She did not single out any candidates, for better or worse. However, as the New York Times notes, she has campaigned for Mitt Romney in recent days.
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

And you're saying these are Democratic traits? Republicans teach their kids to slack off and be lazy?

Yes I'm generalizing, but then again so is your entire post.

:surrender:

My blood pressure was good at my doctor's appointment yesterday, I really should stay out of this thread if I want it to stay that way.


Oh, Joan, that's not at all what I meant. I'm sorry it appears that way. No I meant that I fall more to the democrat side.( because of issues such as gay rights, womens choice/ pro choice, etc). I probly should have just left it at that, lol , but I wanted to add the other stuff that I believed in as well.... All along I have said I respect both sides. I agree with republicans in the sense that welfare and other social programs are being abused, and of course both sides have good work ethic and morals- I never said "republicans dont believe" in the golden rule or working hard...I just said I believe in that. Just cuz I'm a "democrat'" (and I'm using the name loosely here) doesnt mean I'm saying only democrats believe that. I just believe it in general. I think most good hearted people do believe that. I apologize for hurting your feelings. I in no way intended to knock anyone else's political views.
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

Seems there's a study out today that discusses the costs of birth control.

$100 or $1,000? Wide price range for birth control

By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Medical Writer
Friday, March 9, 2012
(03-09) 00:31 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --

What does birth control really cost anyway?

It varies dramatically, from $9 a month for generic pills to $90 a month for some of the newest brands — plus a doctor's visit for the prescription.

Want a more goof-proof option? The most reliable contraceptives, so-called long-acting types like IUDs or implants, can cost $600 to nearly $1,000 upfront to be inserted by a doctor.

That's if you don't have insurance that covers at least some of the tab — although many women do. And if those prices are too much, crowded public clinics offer free or reduced-price options. But it might take a while to get an appointment.

Questions about cost and access to birth control have been swirling for weeks now, intensifying after a Georgetown University law school student testified before congressional Democrats in support of a new federal policy to pay for contraception that she said can add up to $1,000 a year, not covered by the Jesuit college's health plan. Talk show host Rush Limbaugh's verbal assault on her comments became the latest skirmish in the birth control wars.

Soon, the new policy will make contraceptives available free of charge as preventive care, just like mammograms, for women with most employer-provided health insurance. Churches are exempt. But for other religious-affiliated organizations, such as colleges or hospitals, their insurance companies would have to pay for the coverage, something that has triggered bitter political debate.

A major study of nearly 10,000 women that's under way in St. Louis provides a tantalizing clue about what might happen when that policy takes effect.

Consider: Nearly half of the nation's 6 million-plus pregnancies each year are unintended. Rates of unplanned pregnancies are far higher among low-income women than their wealthier counterparts. Among the reasons is that condoms can fail. So can birth control pills if the woman forgets to take them every day or can't afford a refill.

Only about 5 percent of U.S. women use the most effective contraceptives — a matchstick-sized implant named Implanon or intrauterine devices known as IUDs. Once inserted, they prevent pregnancy for three, five or 10 years. But Dr. Jeffrey Peipert of Washington University in St. Louis says many women turn them down because of a higher upfront cost that insurance hasn't always covered even though years of pills eventually cost as much.

"How can we cover Viagra and not IUDs?" wonders Peipert, who is leading the new study.

Called the Contraceptive CHOICE Project, the study is providing those options and a range of others for free. Participants also can choose from birth control pills, a monthly patch, a monthly vaginal ring and a once-every-three-months shot. They're told the pros and cons of each but that the long-lasting options have a lower failure rate.

About 75 percent of women in the study are choosing the IUD or the implant, Peipert says. After the first year of the ongoing study, more than 80 percent of the women who chose the long-acting contraceptives are sticking with them compared with about half the pill users, he says.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, the average woman who has two children will spend three decades trying to avoid an unintended pregnancy. The Institute of Medicine says that's one reason that women tend to incur higher out-of-pocket costs for preventive care than men.

Yes, there already are some options for more affordable contraception, such as public clinics or Planned Parenthood.

About 55 percent of local health departments offer some family planning services, according to the National Association of County & City Health Officials. Many of those receive federal Title X funding, which means they can offer contraception on a sliding fee scale. The poorest women may get it free, while others may pay full price or somewhere in between.

There are cheaper generic pills. Peipert says there's little difference between them and pricey new brand-name versions like Yaz.

But some women go through a number of brands before finding one that doesn't cause uncomfortable side effects, says Sarah Brown of the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy. Her organization operates a website, http:// www.bedsider.org, that details options along with the price range.

"Not every woman can use generic pills, by any means," Brown says. "Do we say to people, `Just go get generic cardiac medicines. Hope that works out for you?'"

Peipert notes that contraception is cheaper than what insurers or taxpayer-funded Medicaid pay for prenatal care and delivery. He says economic studies have found that every $1 spent on family planning can save nearly $4 in expenditures on unintended pregnancy.

Do women ask about the price?

"Oh, my gosh, absolutely," exclaims obstetrician-gynecologist Dr. Monica Dragoman of New York's Montefiore Medical Center.

Just last week, she saw a woman whose heart condition could make another pregnancy life-threatening but who couldn't afford the IUD that Dragoman wanted to prescribe, and chose a cheaper option.

If a family's already struggling financially, "sometimes contraception is one of the first things to fall off," Dragoman says.
___
EDITOR'S NOTE — Lauran Neergaard covers health and medical issues for The Associated Press in Washington.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2012/03/09/national/w002740S49.DTL
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

The "Democrat" and "Republican" parties have no idea what they themselves are any more, I have no idea why anyone identifies as either.
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

This thread is still going? :fart:
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

Just read this at csm.com:

The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com


Why did Rush Limbaugh defend Joseph Kony and Lord's Resistance Army?

Rush Limbaugh criticized Obama last October for sending US troops to kill Joseph Kony's 'Christian' fighters. When apprised by listeners of the LRA's record, he expressed surprise.

By Peter Grier, Staff writer
posted March 9, 2012 at 5:03 pm EST

Last October, Rush Limbaugh on his radio show defended Joseph Kony’s Lord’s Resistance Army, the Uganda guerilla group that is now infamous around the world thanks to a viral video from the Invisible Children organization that has exposed Kony’s cruel and murderous ways.

Why in the world would Limbaugh do that? One reason is that he was not so much promoting the LRA as questioning the Obama administration’s decision to send 100 elite US troops to the area to help quell fighting.

“Lord’s Resistance Army are Christians. They are fighting the Muslims in Sudan. And Obama has sent troops, United States troops to remove them from the battlefield, which means kill them,†Limbaugh said last Oct. 14, according to a show transcript.

Limbaugh then went on to read from what he said were the group’s self-described objectives, which included “to remove dictatorship and stop the oppression of our people.â€

“Those are the objectives of the group that we are fighting,†said Limbaugh, implying that the US had taken the wrong side in the battle.

What Limbaugh did not say was that the list of LRA objectives appeared to have come straight off Wikipedia, according to a contemporaneous New York Times account. Nor did Limbaugh mention that for years the group had been widely accused of torture, murder, looting, and wanton destruction.

Perhaps the other major reason Limbaugh made this faux pas was that he was just talking too fast about stuff of which he knew little. Today over 50 million people have seen the Invisible Children video, which documents such LRA abuses as its kidnapping of children for use as soldiers. But Limbaugh’s discussion of the group occurred long before it became so well known.

In fact, as his broadcast progressed last October, Limbaugh obviously began receiving reports from listeners of the LRA’s real nature.

Near the end of the show he said, “Is that right? The Lord’s Resistance Army is being accused of really bad stuff? ... Well, we just found out about this today. We’re gonna do, of course, our due diligence research on it.But nevertheless we got a hundred troops being sent over there to fight these guys – and they claim to be Christians.â€

At the time, the broadcast created an uproar among those who knew of the LRA’s actions. The next day conservative Sen. James Inhofe (R) of Oklahoma went on the Senate floor to set the record straight, noting that Joseph Kony was in no way a Christian, and that he had been disavowed by the Ugandan Catholic Church.

“I stand behind the president in his decision ... Josephy Kony and the LRA are responsible for one of the longest, most violent, and costly conflicts ever on the continent of Africa,†Senator Inhofe said.

Even Stephen Colbert took after Limbaugh for his maladroit move. On his Oct. 19 Colbert Report, the comedian picked up on the talk show host’s “due diligence†comment, saying, “Of course due diligence always comes after accusing the president of killing Christians.â€

“That’s why it’s called re-search,†said Colbert, drawing out the last word. “If you do it before, it’s called pre-search.â€


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Electi...defend-Joseph-Kony-and-Lord-s-Resistance-Army
As usual, Rush was an idiot. He doesn't care what the truth is, doesn't matter to him at all.
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots

2gwyzq1.jpg
 
Re: The big fat idiot is at it again, but calling him an idiot is insulting to idiots



Update
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/1...-fraud-charges-attorney-says/?test=latestnews

A lawyer for a Michigan woman who continued to get food stamps after winning a $1 million lottery jackpot said his client plans to fight welfare fraud charges.
Twenty-five-year-old Amanda Clayton of Lincoln Park stood silently Tuesday at her arraignment in Lincoln Park's 25th District Court. A not guilty plea was entered on her behalf.
Defense lawyer Stanley Wise said he hopes to have charges dismissed at her next court hearing April 24. He didn't elaborate.
The Michigan attorney general's office earlier in the day announced two felony charges against Clayton. She was arrested Monday. The charges are punishable by up to four years in prison.
"It's simply common sense that million dollar lottery winners forfeit their right to public assistance," Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette said in a statement Tuesday. "We will continue to work with local, state and federal authorities to uphold state laws intended to ensure wise stewardship of taxpayer dollars."
Clayton, of Lincoln Park, Mich., chose a $700,000 lump sum, before taxes, last fall after winning the jackpot on "Make Me Rich!" a Michigan lottery game show.
The 25-year-old said she continued to receive $200 a month in food stamps, as well as medical assistance benefits.
"I thought that they would cut me off, but since they didn't, I thought maybe it was OK because I'm not working," she said in March.

and from this article
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-17/lottery-winner-welfare-fraud/54342934/1

Amanda Clayton, whose use of a food stamp bridge card was uncovered earlier this year by WDIV-TV, was to be arraigned Tuesday on charges of failing to inform welfare officials of her winnings or the fact that she was employed for five months in 2011, Schuette said in a joint announcement with Director Maura Corrigan of the Michigan Department of Human Services.
They said Clayton illegally collected about $5,475 in food and medical assistance from August 2011 through March 2012.
Each of the two charges of welfare fraud, failure to inform is punishable by up to four years in prison.
"It's simply common sense that million-dollar lottery winners forfeit their right to public assistance," Schuette said in a statement.
Clayton won the televised game Sept 12, 2011, and reportedly took home more than $500,000. She told WDIV-TV that she thought she was justified in continuing to collect the state payments after her windfall because she was now unemployed.
"I feel that it's OK because, I mean, I have no income and I have bills to pay,' she said. 'I have two houses.' "
 
Back
Top