• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obamaphones Being Sold For Drugs, Shoes Ect. (Video)[W:33]

clownboy said:
I don't think so since he allowed the program to attach to his name and used it as a vote getter.
Click to expand...

I have not heard of this. Link?
 
Re: Obamaphones Being Sold For Drugs, Shoes Ect. (Video)

Born Free said:
Absolutely nothing to those of you that believes there is no end to the money supply. That is exactly why we are a society dependent on entitlements, nannies and freebies for everyone to suck on the tits of government.
Click to expand...

Ok, since you clearly have not read any of the sources in this thread, how about this: the money to pay for the program is not government money. The government does not pay for the program. It is not taxpayer funded.

Seriously, read the ****ing thread before spouting off nonsense.
 
Tucker Case said:
In 2012, Obama had only been president for 3 years.
Click to expand...

The end of 2012 was nearly 4 years into his Presidency. :roll:

Do you think that presidents are all-powerful beings that can do things which fall far outside the scope of their powers?
Click to expand...

We know the meme from you guys. Obama doesn't govern and isn't responsible for anything that happens on his watch. You're claiming Obama couldn't do anything about this. Redress is claiming Obama passed reform. You guys need to work out your talking points better in PMs or something.

The reforms documented in this very thread.
Click to expand...

Calling them reforms is laughable. 2.2B was spent on this program alone in 2012. Even though Food Stamp rolls have doubled since Obama took office, you'll probably try and claim Obama reformed those too. So first you claim Obama passed reforms and now you're claiming the USAC just does whatever it wants and has no Federal oversight. You keep talking about facts but have yet to provide anything. All you're doing is distracting and playing games of obfuscation. You can't have it both ways. Lifeline is a Federal program. The FCC is paying for this. Even after they "cracked down" the cost went up.

Lifeline Program fraud | 11alive.com

Redress said:
Yes, but it is Obama's fault. You know when you stubbed your toe awhile ago? That was Obama's fault. Communism...Obama's fault.
Click to expand...

Hyperbole and nonsensical gibberish because you don't have an argument.
 
PeteEU said:
Because we are in the 21st century now... where cellphones outnumber normal phones?

Why can't these people buy their own phones. I pay for mine!

Not projecting anything... facts are facts.
Click to expand...

You're right. Blacks contribute to more violent crime than whites per capita. Deal with it!

Yea and it is convenient that the facts happen to be around the rights second most hated ethnicity... the Latino...
Click to expand...

It depends on who's doing the hating. You seem to have a problem with anyone who isn't a minority.
Click to expand...
 
Redress said:
So you do know what he has done. Why claim otherwise then? Course I do not think much of your source of information...
Click to expand...
I get my news from the same sources Obama does, or so he recently said. I read left, right, and center information from all the usual suspects, and some other sources as well. The assumption that a "conservative" lean means one blindly follows a particular popularly entertained set of beliefs could be false, but I wouldn't want to upset anybody's apple cart here.
 
Re: Obamaphones Being Sold For Drugs, Shoes Ect. (Video)

Redress said:
Ok, since you clearly have not read any of the sources in this thread, how about this: the money to pay for the program is not government money. The government does not pay for the program. It is not taxpayer funded.

Seriously, read the ****ing thread before spouting off nonsense.
Click to expand...

Stop playing games

Every working taxpayer who pays the Universal Service Charge on their cellphone bill is funding this nonsense

1 million Ohioans using free phone program | www.daytondailynews.com
 
Kanstantine said:
The BushPhones provide a very limited amount of free minutes.

The rest are on the dime of the user.
Click to expand...

These leaches should buy their own phone. I know, it would require getting an actually job and, God forbid actually working for a living, but that's the was it should be.
 
Redress said:
Wrong again. The money does not come from the government. Please read the sources provided in this thread.
Click to expand...
It's a tax writeoff, so yes, it comes from the government. That'd be like if you owed me $20, and I said to just buy me a $20 DVD and we'd be cool. So whose money bought the DVD? That $20 was owed to me, therefore it was my money that bought it.
What if...? said:
Not at all.

I'm talking about hands up, not hand outs.

How much is last years JC Penny suit cost? Does it have to be new?

Costs me $30 a year to provide a slew of services BESIDES the cellphone program.

Like subsidizing rural service and phones for schools and the indigent/elderly.

That a bargain. One I choose to participate in by having a phone.

Anybody who doesn't like the program is free to not participate.

They can communicate by mail.
Click to expand...

Hand ups? I have no idea what that is. Are you saying you like giving money to the rich?

Summerwind said:
Perhaps you need to learn about the care of the disabled. The primary care giver will be one of 2-5 people if 24 hour care is required as they take their shifts from their employer. Therefore their primary care givers could change at any time, regardless of whether the caregiver quits, he/she may just be reassigned to another client. I guess you could put it in the name of the company who provides the care, but then you're forcing the client (and his/her guardian who may or may not live near enough to be the one on the benefits cards) to have to stay with that provider regardless of the care given.

Sorry, just doesn't work as you desire and your knowledge is seriously lacking to have any legit opinion.
Click to expand...

Then why can't it be made out to the company AND the person? Why are you so furiously against preventing people from selling their benefits? Are you even offering a solution or just saying "It's impossible"?
 
Kanstantine said:
Eric Holder refuses to press any charges against big banks or lending agencies over the mortgage crisis, and you're worried about Obamaphones???
Click to expand...

Typical deflection. This thread is not about banks. If you cannot defend your position, doing things like this only show your foolishness and desperation. Do try to stay on topic.
 
Re: Obamaphones Being Sold For Drugs, Shoes Ect. (Video)

Redress said:
Ok, since you clearly have not read any of the sources in this thread, how about this: the money to pay for the program is not government money. The government does not pay for the program. It is not taxpayer funded.

Seriously, read the ****ing thread before spouting off nonsense.
Click to expand...

I would suggest ****ing reading this

Is the government giving out free cell phones?

Yes. This part is true. They fund low end cell phones plans, and offset some of the cost of landline phones. The programs that authorize the phone distribution program are called Lifeline Assistance and Lifeline Link-Up. Lifeline Assistance helps pay monthly phone bills and Lifeline Link-Up helps pay the initial outlay for the phone and installation. The two programs are often lumped together and simply called Lifeline.

These Lifeline cell phones are delivered through relatively new, government-approved cell phone companies like Safelink Wireless, Assurance Wireless and Reachout Wireless, among others. These companies were spun of off larger prepaid cell phone companies to specialize in the Lifeline program.

Obama Phone: Urban Legend or Real?
 
What if...? said:
So how does one get a job again if they can't afford a phone?

How do you call 911 if yoir kid is choking, etc?

How much more likely are you to get a job if you can respond from the bus yoi're on instead of the next day when you get the message when you get home after business hours?

The program is paid for by fees on cell service, not taxes. There's still a fee on landlines for Lifeline service, 911 etc.
Click to expand...

More importantly, how do you get a hold of your crack dealer!
 
Bronson said:
The end of 2012 was nearly 4 years into his Presidency. :roll:
Click to expand...


You didn't specify the end of 2012. :roll:

We know the meme from you guys. Obama doesn't govern and isn't responsible for anything that happens on his watch. You're claiming Obama couldn't do anything about this. Redress is claiming Obama passed reform. You guys need to work out your talking points better in PMs or something.
Click to expand...

Obama couldn't have done **** to make this happen or prevent it form happening. He's the president, not the legislative branch, nor is he the FCC. People really need to learn how the government works before they should be allowed to vote. It ****ing sickens me that the majority of my countrymen think the POTUS is some sort of all-powerful being who passes laws whenever they disagree with his political alignment.

Also, I'm not redress, nor am I even remotely close to redress politically. Just because we happen to agree that what you are attributing to Obama is asinine doesn't mean we agree politically.
 
radcen said:
I see this all over DP from the extremes of both sides of the political aisle.
Click to expand...

Yes, but we only have a conservative alternate history.

Every discredited manufactured meme lives on as truth, creating a "past" that never happened.

O'Keefe alone has given us more than one of these "false pasts".

Partisanship goes both ways, but the abuse of persuasion science by the right is FAR more pervasive.

The left does seem to have decided they can't beat them so they'll just join them.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
It's a tax writeoff, so yes, it comes from the government. That'd be like if you owed me $20, and I said to just buy me a $20 DVD and we'd be cool. So whose money bought the DVD? That $20 was owed to me, therefore it was my money that bought it.


Hand ups? I have no idea what that is. Are you saying you like giving money to the rich?



Then why can't it be made out to the company AND the person? Why are you so furiously against preventing people from selling their benefits? Are you even offering a solution or just saying "It's impossible"?
Click to expand...
How does a company show ID? How does a company shop for that matter? And the person? He/she cannot, are not able, to be present for an ID. Really you just don't think things through past step one do you? Seems a tic tac toe perspective in a Othello or Pente or GoMoKu reality, to be sure. IE not terribly useful and worthy.
 
Summerwind said:
How does a company show ID? How does a company shop for that matter? And the person? He/she cannot, are not able, to be present for an ID. Really you just don't think things through past step one do you? Seems a tic tac toe perspective in a Othello or Pente or GoMoKu reality, to be sure. IE not terribly useful and worthy.
Click to expand...

Ok, so you're either are too lazy to come up with your own solution, or have absolutely no problem with people selling or trading their handouts.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Ok, so you're either are too lazy to come up with your own solution, or have absolutely no problem with people selling or trading their handouts.
Click to expand...
I think the solution will cost more than the problem, considering the percentage of offenders.
 
PeteEU said:
Because we are in the 21st century now... where cellphones outnumber normal phones?



Not projecting anything... facts are facts.



Yea and it is convenient that the facts happen to be around the rights second most hated ethnicity... the Latino...
Click to expand...

Because nothing is allowed to be said about either blacks or Latinos unless its about how racist and oppressive whites are against them..... right??? #Protectedstatus

Notice he didn't even make it about race. You did. There are already plenty of things that show poor whites as being gun-touting, bible-thumping hillbillies by the same people who would pull the race card on something like this. Mind boggling.
 
Summerwind said:
I think the solution will cost more than the problem, considering the percentage of offenders.
Click to expand...

There's not much cost to the implementation. The old and sick could possibly get exemptions if they can prove it. Printing someone's name on a welfare check, and requiring that ID be shown to redeem, is not expensive.

It would definitely be a lot less than throwing massive subsidies at massive corporations.
 
iliveonramen said:
I guess what I'm missing is how people eligible for the program becoming aware they are eligible is waste/fraud/abuse.

As of 2010 there were measures being instituted to combat actual waste/fraud/abuse.
Click to expand...


Come on ramen, you're smarter than that.

They FCC took two years to implement those "measures", putting them into place in 2012. This fact is documented in their own press releases.

My gripe has more to do with the way government agencies take simple programs and jack them into multi-billion dollar boondoggles rife with fraud and abuse. Don't you think by now they should expect it?

According to the FCC, they saved over $200 million last year by requiring people to requalify for the program. $200 million? In one year? If memory serves me right, that was something like 25-30% of the program!

That's rediculous. How much longer do people expect to be rewarded with this kind of stuff?
 
RabidAlpaca said:
There's not much cost to the implementation. The old and sick could possibly get exemptions if they can prove it. Printing someone's name on a welfare check, and requiring that ID be shown to redeem, is not expensive.

It would definitely be a lot less than throwing massive subsidies at massive corporations.
Click to expand...

Geez, you really are uninformed. Welfare isn't in checks anymore, it's on a debit type card and a PIN is required to use it. Exactly like a debit card. It's good enough for banks but not you?
 
Bronson said:
'I don't care what you do with it': Hidden camera catches wireless company employees passing out 'Obama phones' to people who say they'll sell them for drugs, shoes, handbags, spending cash | Mail Online



1711-woman-obama-phone.jpg


GOT OBAMA PHONE [10 HOURS] REMIX - #ObamaPhone - YouTube
Click to expand...

1. No where does it actually show any of these people receiving phones. They actually only receive applications.

2. Typical dishonesty coming from these people.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
It's a tax writeoff, so yes, it comes from the government. That'd be like if you owed me $20, and I said to just buy me a $20 DVD and we'd be cool. So whose money bought the DVD? That $20 was owed to me, therefore it was my money that bought it.


Hand ups? I have no idea what that is. Are you saying you like giving money to the rich?



Then why can't it be made out to the company AND the person? Why are you so furiously against preventing people from selling their benefits? Are you even offering a solution or just saying "It's impossible"?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean.

"Hand up" is a generic term for social.programs that help people out of poverty. As opposed to "hand outs" which is just giving **** away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom