If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(American Thinker)   Yes, technically Obamaphones are really Reagan/Bush phones which are not paid for by the taxpayer and James O'Keefe is a cherry-picking liar. But otherwise, Obama is Marxist out to steal your money for his poor voters   (americanthinker.com) divider line 329
    More: Dumbass, Marxist, Obama, digital literacy, lifeline, USF  
•       •       •

2238 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Jun 2013 at 3:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



329 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-22 11:39:37 AM
Current Lifeline Program eligibility requirements are:

Be at or below 135 percent of the federal Poverty Guidelines OR participate in one of the following assistance programs:
Medicaid
Food Stamps or SNAP
SSI
TANF
Section 8 Housing
LIHEAP
Free Lunch Program
Other government give-away programs

You can see how the government defines "poor."


I bet a lot of those moochers have refrigerators, too. GET A JOB!!1!
 
2013-06-22 11:44:25 AM
"American" "Thinker".
 
2013-06-22 11:45:52 AM
Other government give-away programs So do corporations get free phones?
 
2013-06-22 11:53:40 AM
The only defense offered by Lifeline Program supporters is that it was begun during Ronald Reagan's term, and expanded to include cell phones during George W. Bush's term.   But so what?


So What?
First shouldn't they be called either Reagaphones or Bushphones?
Second so their was a need for them when Reagan and Bush were president but now there isn't?
 
2013-06-22 11:57:36 AM
For American Thinker this is unusually self aware. Good headline too, subby.
 
2013-06-22 12:00:01 PM
img.fark.net
 
2013-06-22 12:03:49 PM

spongeboob: The only defense offered by Lifeline Program supporters is that it was begun during Ronald Reagan's term, and expanded to include cell phones during George W. Bush's term.   But so what?


So What?
First shouldn't they be called either Reagaphones or Bushphones?
Second so their was a need for them when Reagan and Bush were president but now there isn't?


Employed and entrepreneurially-inclined suburban family-values folks down on their luck utilized Reaganphones and Bushphones to start businesses and hire people, thus quickly obviating their need for them (and their employees need for them).

Obamaphones are used by welfare-mooching, drug-selling/using, violent urban-type people to order steak and lobster from high-end catering services (using food stamps to pay) while cooking drugs (with chemicals bought with welfare money) in front of their many truant, delinquent children.
 
2013-06-22 12:32:20 PM
There were cell phones in 85?
 
2013-06-22 12:44:10 PM

spongeboob: Other government give-away programs So do corporations get free phones?


I was wondering if they're gonna send phones out  with the checks when they give out the farm subsidies to millionaires with big back yards.
 
2013-06-22 12:45:54 PM

basemetal: There were cell phones in 85?


They gave away landline service under St. Ronnie.
 
2013-06-22 12:59:13 PM

basemetal: There were cell phones in 85?


The Reagan-era program assisted low income people in getting landline service at a discounted rate.
 
2013-06-22 01:21:03 PM

Bathia_Mapes: basemetal: There were cell phones in 85?

The Reagan-era program assisted low income people in getting landline service at a discounted rate.


Modeled on the Rural Electrification Program, a tax-funded undertaking which brought many of these bootstrappy voters out of abject, isolated poverty, and created the markets for the modern energy giants.

It's not communists vs. capitalists; it's capitalists vs. republicans.
 
2013-06-22 01:25:46 PM

basemetal: There were cell phones in 85?


There have been cell phones since 1973, but the Reagan era program only covered landlines.
 
2013-06-22 01:35:30 PM
Huh.  A Republican that has to lie to get his "point" across.  Who woulda thunk it.
 
2013-06-22 02:13:43 PM
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not require this charge to be passed on to customers.

Where do they get the money then? Some magic portal to another dimension full of cash? Or maybe their philanthropist shareholders host an annual bake sale to raise the funds.
 
2013-06-22 02:21:41 PM
'You can see how the government defines "poor." '

Yup those "poor" people/ If you have to put poor in quotes, you probably have never been POOR in your life.
http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/12poverty.shtml 

$12,000 a year if you are single, $24,000 a year for a family of 4.
Those POOR people stealing our money and taking government handouts! How dare they!!
 
2013-06-22 02:47:55 PM
Be at or below 135 percent of the federal Poverty Guidelines OR participate in one of the following assistance programs:
Medicaid
Food Stamps or SNAP
SSI
TANF
Section 8 Housing
LIHEAP
Free Lunch Program
Other government give-away programs

You live in a van down by the river

You can see how the government defines "poor"
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-22 03:28:54 PM

vernonFL: Be at or below 135 percent of the federal Poverty Guidelines OR participate in one of the following assistance programs:
Medicaid
Food Stamps or SNAP
SSI
TANF
Section 8 Housing
LIHEAP
Free Lunch Program
Other government give-away programs
You live in a van down by the river

You can see how the government defines "poor"


Yeah, they sound pretty rich to me.  They probably even have refrigerators.
 
2013-06-22 03:30:11 PM

spongeboob: The only defense offered by Lifeline Program supporters is that it was begun during Ronald Reagan's term, and expanded to include cell phones during George W. Bush's term.   But so what?


So What?
First shouldn't they be called either Reagaphones or Bushphones?
Second so their was a need for them when Reagan and Bush were president but now there isn't?


No, it's that the programs were fine under a Republican president but now that a Democrat is in charge, it's full of fraud and waste.

/actual rebuttal he got from someone on Fark when I pointed this fact out to him
 
2013-06-22 03:31:31 PM
If you ever needed proof that companies don't pay taxes but rather their customers do, look no further than here.

The program, part of the Universal Service Fund (USF), is paid for by telecommunications service providers that contribute to the federal USF based on a percentage of their end-user telecommunications revenues.  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not require this charge to be passed on to customers.  Each company decides whether to assess charges to customers to recover its Universal Service costs.

Seriously, it's a fee levied by the government.  How is this not a tax? 

It was stupid under St. Reagan, and it's stupid now.
 
2013-06-22 03:32:28 PM
Wow, are liberals still on this idiotic plea?  I dont remember cell phones being handed out under Reagan.  Under Reagan it was a free LANDLINE.  Why is this distinction important?  It largely stopped the abuse rampant today under Obama.  The program was intended to be one phoneline per household, now it is multiple mobile phones per household, exacerbating the cost immensely.  Likewise, there is virtually no actual regulation to make sure the phones are only going to who qualify.

Keep defending your corrupt, full of waste program liberals.  I don't know why one would, but congrats on doing so.
 
2013-06-22 03:33:58 PM

MyRandomName: Wow, are liberals still on this idiotic plea?  I dont remember cell phones being handed out under Reagan.  Under Reagan it was a free LANDLINE.  Why is this distinction important?  It largely stopped the abuse rampant today under Obama.  The program was intended to be one phoneline per household, now it is multiple mobile phones per household, exacerbating the cost immensely.  Likewise, there is virtually no actual regulation to make sure the phones are only going to who qualify.

Keep defending your corrupt, full of waste program liberals.  I don't know why one would, but congrats on doing so.


I love how you ignored the fact that the program expanded to cell phones under Bush.

But yeah, it's all Obama's fault. I won't keep you from looking stupid.
 
2013-06-22 03:35:41 PM

basemetal: There were cell phones in 85?


Of course there were. Here's a picture of one.
img.fark.net
 
2013-06-22 03:36:30 PM

Mrtraveler01: I love how you ignored the fact that the program expanded to cell phones under Bush.


Bush was president in 1996?  Was that Bush Senior or Junior?
 
2013-06-22 03:37:42 PM

MyRandomName: Wow, are liberals still on this idiotic plea?  I dont remember cell phones being handed out under Reagan.  Under Reagan it was a free LANDLINE.  Why is this distinction important?  It largely stopped the abuse rampant today under Obama.  The program was intended to be one phoneline per household, now it is multiple mobile phones per household, exacerbating the cost immensely.  Likewise, there is virtually no actual regulation to make sure the phones are only going to who qualify.

Keep defending your corrupt, full of waste program liberals.  I don't know why one would, but congrats on doing so.


I know you're just a dumb shill, but the cell phone increased under W, so write him a sternly worded letter about the fraud, waste and abuse committed within this program.  Maybe even add a note about the billions missing in Iraq while we're worrying about dollars and cents here.
 
2013-06-22 03:38:28 PM

serial_crusher: Mrtraveler01: I love how you ignored the fact that the program expanded to cell phones under Bush.

Bush was president in 1996?  Was that Bush Senior or Junior?


How dare you speak ill of Pope Clinton!
 
2013-06-22 03:39:04 PM
O'Keefe puts out a video that supposedly shows people getting phones that they say they intend to sell for drugs.  Raw footage shows that, um, THEY DIDN'T GET THE F*CKING PHONES.

"American Thinker" author calls pointing out that last bit "a rather weak attempt to obfuscate, to change the subject."

Is my fellow American thinking about getting his head out of his ass any time soon?
 
2013-06-22 03:39:21 PM
technically correct - the best kind of correct
 
2013-06-22 03:39:23 PM
So, technically, MM is correct --

[bestkindofcorrect.jpg]

They made a big deal about this "false claim."

Why the scare quotes there, "American" *cough cough* "Thinker"?
 
2013-06-22 03:40:55 PM
Any body could easily done the research to look at the government program, that has been in existance since Reagan. Yet, that was the era when you still had some rational people in government. I guess now that if the talking heads can't reduce the issue to a talking point meme for the senile,add crowd, or the stupid one cannot gather votes.

This at least gives me the excuse to post this Link
 
2013-06-22 03:41:42 PM
FTFA: The program is designed to increasing digital literacy by use of the internet to help bridge the skills gap and reduce job search discouragement.

maybe they should spend more money increasing regular literacy. then again, it is just an AT biatchfest, written in a furious red haze no doubt.

After all, the internet was AlGore's invention.

/libs libs libs dot jpeg
 
2013-06-22 03:42:04 PM

Lolpwnt: If you ever needed proof that companies don't pay taxes but rather their customers do, look no further than here.

The program, part of the Universal Service Fund (USF), is paid for by telecommunications service providers that contribute to the federal USF based on a percentage of their end-user telecommunications revenues.  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not require this charge to be passed on to customers.  Each company decides whether to assess charges to customers to recover its Universal Service costs.

Seriously, it's a fee levied by the government.  How is this not a tax? 

It was stupid under St. Reagan, and it's stupid now.


Because telecommunications companies use the public bandwidth and spectrum in order to run a profit-making venture.  They pay fees for the privilege to utilize that infrastructure at vastly reduced costs than it would for them to build it themselves.  Ergo, not a tax.
 
2013-06-22 03:42:25 PM
img.fark.net
 
2013-06-22 03:43:03 PM

voran: technically correct - the best kind of correct


Gawdammit so much. 2 seconds away from being an epic simulpost. Still pretty close.
 
2013-06-22 03:43:45 PM

Mantour: [img.fark.net image 798x700]


I don't get the Mickey Mouse ears. Is Disney supposed to be in the tank for Obama or something?

/they are far from liberal
 
2013-06-22 03:43:53 PM

InvertedB: MyRandomName: Wow, are liberals still on this idiotic plea?  I dont remember cell phones being handed out under Reagan.  Under Reagan it was a free LANDLINE.  Why is this distinction important?  It largely stopped the abuse rampant today under Obama.  The program was intended to be one phoneline per household, now it is multiple mobile phones per household, exacerbating the cost immensely.  Likewise, there is virtually no actual regulation to make sure the phones are only going to who qualify.

Keep defending your corrupt, full of waste program liberals.  I don't know why one would, but congrats on doing so.

I know you're just a dumb shill, but the cell phone increased under W, so write him a sternly worded letter about the fraud, waste and abuse committed within this program.  Maybe even add a note about the billions missing in Iraq while we're worrying about dollars and cents here.


THIS.  We spend trillions, outright lose billions, and these Republican asshats can't stop from touching themselves when they think about it.

But give a brown poors a phone, and IT'S AN OUTRAGE@!!
 
2013-06-22 03:43:55 PM
I must admit, SOME conservative humor can tickle my funny bone...
 
2013-06-22 03:44:00 PM
Not a day where you can't trust American Thinker?

Maybe I should read the article to see who it favors....hence why people aren't pouting about not clicking American stinker.


Hypocrites.
 
2013-06-22 03:45:00 PM

Giltric: Not a day where you can't trust American Thinker?

Maybe I should read the article to see who it favors....hence why people aren't pouting about not clicking American stinker.


Hypocrites.


No, we're still making fun of American Thinker.

The title is quite ironic.
 
2013-06-22 03:45:07 PM
I can't imagine what it must be like to actually buy into the right wing noise machine these days. Being outraged and full of hate 24/7 must be exhausting. That kind of persistent negativity can't be good for one's health.
 
2013-06-22 03:45:55 PM
For the inevitable "I don't want to give the Stinker a click, what were they biatching about?":

"If you make a few basic and obvious assumptions, then it is plain to see that Obama is giving out free phones to blahs which then sell them for drug in return for voting for Obama.  The fact that we freely admit that every one of those assumptions is incorrect in no way invalidates out preordained conclusion."
 
2013-06-22 03:45:56 PM
Bush phone?
img.fark.net
 
2013-06-22 03:46:00 PM

Mrtraveler01: Mantour: [img.fark.net image 798x700]

I don't get the Mickey Mouse ears. Is Disney supposed to be in the tank for Obama or something?

/they are far from liberal


The pics i ffrom Freerepublic.com

I imagine the Mickey Mouse ears refers to Obama's big ears. They are not THAT big but they like to exaggerate them.
 
2013-06-22 03:46:52 PM

basemetal: There were cell phones in 85?


Reagan gave them all to the coloreds.
 
2013-06-22 03:48:05 PM

Mantour: Mrtraveler01: Mantour: [img.fark.net image 798x700]

I don't get the Mickey Mouse ears. Is Disney supposed to be in the tank for Obama or something?

/they are far from liberal

The pics i ffrom Freerepublic.com

I imagine the Mickey Mouse ears refers to Obama's big ears. They are not THAT big but they like to exaggerate them.


They really do suck at this humor thing don't they?

/And who the hell still has a Blackberry anymore?
 
2013-06-22 03:49:23 PM

Granny_Panties: basemetal: There were cell phones in 85?

Reagan gave them all to the coloreds.


They were in the train cars with all the crack and AK47s that Regan left unattended for the blahs to take.
 
2013-06-22 03:50:48 PM

basemetal: There were cell phones in 85?


Yes, there were.
 
2013-06-22 03:51:44 PM

serial_crusher: Mrtraveler01: I love how you ignored the fact that the program expanded to cell phones under Bush.

Bush was president in 1996?  Was that Bush Senior or Junior?


Obama was President in 1996?
 
2013-06-22 03:52:30 PM

Ivo Shandor: Bush phone?
[img.fark.net image 280x284]


LOL! What's the context for that photo?
 
2013-06-22 03:52:42 PM

manbart: I can't imagine what it must be like to actually buy into the right wing noise machine these days. Being outraged and full of hate 24/7 must be exhausting. That kind of persistent negativity can't be good for one's health.


We can hope.
 
Displayed 50 of 329 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report