“I’ve got a mandate to help middle-class families.” —President Obama

And he’s got delusions of competence as well.

Free Sh!t Army don’t give a….

catmman on November 15, 2012 at 4:49 PM

The likes of UES and Sesqui are fine with their food stamps and medicaid. Little motivation with those types.

We’ve stretched the definition of “poor” so far that a good number of middle class families can reach it. Sorry, but “poor” is not when you have to choose the 32″ TV instead of the 40″ one.

Shump on November 15, 2012 at 6:26 PM

The definition of poor entirely depends on who is expected to pay for that extra 8″ of TV.

It’s a new measurement system, ergo not dealing in constant variables, but the gist of all of this is that despite the additions to federal and state welfare spending, it’s been four years and by far too many measures, things have conspicuously not improved.

We need an election to get a President really soon!

And what a cowinky dink that this doesn’t come out until the week after the rat-eared wonder edged into a second term and the stories of election day fraud are only now leaking out.

24/7

Oh, shut up.

49.7 million “poor people?” Give me a break. In a country with roughly 300 million total people, that means we’re being told that nearly 20% of our population is poor? Uh-huh. We’ve stretched the definition of “poor” so far that a good number of middle class families can reach it. Sorry, but “poor” is not when you have to choose the 32″ TV instead of the 40″ one.

Shump on November 15, 2012 at 6:26 PM

I’ll bet those poor people even have to drive cars with cloth seats. Can you imagine that in America? The shame of it all.

The ranks of America’s poor edged up last year to a high of 49.7 million, based on a new census measure that takes into account medical costs and work-related expenses.

Oh, shut up.

49.7 million “poor people?” Give me a break. In a country with roughly 300 million total people, that means we’re being told that nearly 20% of our population is poor? Uh-huh. We’ve stretched the definition of “poor” so far that a good number of middle class families can reach it. Sorry, but “poor” is not when you have to choose the 32″ TV instead of the 40″ one.

I’m pretty sure that’s the equity Democrats look for in social programs.

… there will be no place to hide.

The ranks of America’s poor edged up last year to a high of 49.7 million, based on a new census measure that takes into account medical costs and work-related expenses.

I believe this new formula also says that people only spend 1/7th of their money on food, as opposed to the current government models that say people spend 30% on food.

SNAP still uses the 30% to calculate how much money families get for food…maybe it is time we update the equations for calculating food stamp eligibility?

Gee, Mr. President, if you really want to help the middle class, I have an idea…..

Barry really wants the middle class, or at least its political mentality, to disappear. Its tends to lean too much towards conservatism and political independence. Barry wants more reliable voters found in the government dependent classes, gimmiedats, if you will, by way of entitlements, or those beholden to government, such as union members.

M2RB: The Clash

The poor will lose in the end, you cannot equalize intelligence, without killing a bunch of people.

Now that he has won….So went my Retirement fund…100% OUT OF THE STOCK MARKET!!!!

No chance in God’s country for prosperity…

Welcome to the “OH MY GOD I HAVE NOTHING TO EAT AND WILL NOW DIE SOON” society of the Obama Regime.

Never fear! The libs just need MORE time and MORE money!

GarandFan on November 15, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Good line in an old Temptations song I was just listening to “Ball of Confusion” – “the politicans say more taxes will solve everything”. They wrote that over 30 years ago.

“I’ve got a mandate to help middle-class families.”

Yeah, help them into poverty. Liberals, you bought it, you own it.

Who needs a HOUSE?

Who needs to EAT??

Who needs clothes??

Who needs a functioning Stock Market?

Who needs a private sector???

NOBODY!!!!!!!!!!!!

We just need 4 more years of Obama, Candlelight, Vigils.

…. resign. So far, all you’ve done is make things worse.

Hell, how much has been spent on “The War on Poverty” since the mid-1960′s?

The war could and can never be won. But the primary goal was achieved. That of getting a growing perennial dem voting bloc thanks to creating generations having grown accustomed to the entitlements with which they have been rewarded. Not enough to get ‘em out of poverty but sufficient to keep ‘em on the dem plantation.

CHEERS to OBAMA!!! For he knows how to put everybody out of work for the sake of the Spotted Owl.

Tax the rich it is made up with higher prices on others…why is that hard.

It ain’t hard, and those that collect the tax don’t care about our paying higher prices. All they care about is getting their hands on additional tax revenues to redistribute to their cronies and faithful voter base, as well as pocketing a tidy sum of said taxes for themselves.

We spent trillions of dollars to end up with an employment rate barely budging the one we started with (minus the decreased labor participation rate!).

Hell, how much has been spent on “The War on Poverty” since the mid-1960′s?

Never fear! The libs just need MORE time and MORE money!

“But at least he doesn’t have binders full of women.”
–the US electorate

An astute group they are. I stand in awe of their wise choice in re-electing Barry.