Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Unemployment Recepients to be tested for drugs.....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:17 PM
Original message
Unemployment Recepients to be tested for drugs.....
Because as we all know... those who are unemployed are there because of something they have done wrong ....and they MUST be crack Addicts. The economy is the fault of the working people.. not the Bankster/Gangsters.
(do i need a sarcasm thingy here?)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another Republican weighs in on unemployment. He wants to make people receiving unemployment to PAY for their own drug test.....


Senator Mike Bennett (R-Bradenton

Unemployment benefits drug testing?
By WINK News

Story Created: Mar 6, 2009 at 7:29 PM EST

Story Updated: Mar 7, 2009 at 11:40 AM EST

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. - One Florida lawmaker thinks Floridians who apply for unemployment benefits should be subject to random drug testing.

Senator Mike Bennett (R-Bradenton) says with more people out of work, he wants to make sure that unemployment benefits are going to help people and not support drug hab
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
1. Right. As if this has anything to do with drug use.
Pay for the drug test, then pay the bank fees to draw down your benefits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
greenbriar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. like those that have no jobs can afford to buy drugs
how stupid is this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
7. Deleted sub-thread
Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Gman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. Random drug test the FL legislature.
It will be like the Congress in Mexico when that was proposed... everyone politely but firmly broke for the doors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. See, now this kind of thing makes me understand gulags and guillotines.
:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hello_Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. Who wants to bet that this Bennett character has connections to a drug testing company?
Who wants to bet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wartrace Donating Member (920 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #5
14. More than likely.
He is such a twit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sanity Claws Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:35 PM
Response to Original message
6. I have a better idea
Let's drug test the top execs at AIG and all other corporate recipients of bailout money.
I don't want them using our taxpayer money while drugged out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tim01 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Absolutly fair. The bailout is corporate welfare.
And the people you are talking about have cost us a LOT more money than a few food stamps. Drug test them, and fire them if they fail. No wonder they can't run a company.
I'll vote in favor of this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #6
24. And they pay for the tests with their own money, not ours. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #6
35. Let's randomly drug anyone who receives any public funds.
If they fail a test give them one shot at rehab and if they fail another one take all their benefits away.

David
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fumesucker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #35
56. If you include *all* politicians and bureaucrats, I'll agree with that..
But since the politicians will never, ever agree to it, it won't happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire_Medic_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #56
61. Yes, EVERYONE, disabled veterans, the unemployed, bankers, politicians, all government jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
58. Drug tests for bankers, not their victims!
From the NYT article on Washington Mutual:

While Mr. Parsons, a supervisor at a Washington Mutual mortgage processing center, oversaw a team screening mortgage applications, he was snorting methamphetamine daily, he said.

In our world, it was tolerated, said Sherri Zaback, who worked for Mr. Parsons and recalls seeing drug paraphernalia on his desk. Everybody said, He gets the job done.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/business/28wamu.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spindrifter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
8. The idiot should realize that these were WORKING
people who, through no fault of their own, have lost their jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. More likely the fault of the idiot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
10. Oh Good. Let's HELP. Crazy mf's.
Let's help push this stuff so the working right wingers will finally see just how crazy their party is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CountAllVotes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 08:58 PM
Response to Original message
12. will they be testing Rush?
once he is in the unemployment line as well? :D

:dem: :kick:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
13. I want everyone whose bonus was more valuable than a frozen turkey to be tested.
You Wall Street motherfuckers, get in line!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
15. This shit gets so old.... who made the Republicans the Mommy and Daddy of Society?
While Mommy and Daddy Republicans are lecturing the rest of us.. the Republicans are off in a bathroom tapping their feet and geting arousal....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
16. Well, it's because all those lives are at risk if an unemployed person takes drugs.
Airliners will plummet to the earth, buses will crash, and trains will derail ... and the lives lost as a result of the unemployed person piloting, driving, or engineering them taking drugs.

It's not as trivial as, say, serving in the Senate. After all, Senators actually benefit from their addictions.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
santamargarita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
17. Crazy ideas always come from some white lard ass Republican
:crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Retired AF Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
18. For my entire life
every job I have had I had to take unannounced piss tests. The current job I have I'm subject to unannounced piss tests. If my tax money is to go to people that don't work why shouldn't they meet the same standards I have to meet in order to receive my money?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabasco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. Because there is no rational connection.
No reasonable suspicion.

No probable cause.

You would have the government piss test the entire population for NO reason.

BOOHOOHOO - I had to take piss tests - why shouldn't those unemployed people?? Waaaaa!

Idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Retired AF Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:44 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. In order to keep my job
I have to take a piss test with no probable cause. It sucks if you work or dont.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. Not everywhere requires a drug test for employment, nor do they require random tests...
I wouldn't work anywhere that *did* require a test. You choose where you work, employers don't come seeking you out...

I think piss tests are a complete invasion of privacy. What I do in my home, after work hours, is no one elses business at all. Period. I can *understand* them popping a test on you if you act like you're high, or if you've been in an accident, but that doesn't mean I have to *agree* with the practice.


YMMV...


Peace,

Ghost

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. I do mostly contract work and every single company
I have worked at in the last 4 years has required a drug test at the time of employment, which they also required of their employees. Maybe its been a while since you've been "out there" looking for a job.

Its fairly common now, and in this economy it would be self defeating to rule out companies that require drug tests. You'd have many fewer opportunities to become employed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Politicalboi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #28
37. I wonder how they will handle
Medical Marijuana? If you have a prescription will you be excused or will people have to collect disability? They should not be allowed to drug test anyone unless you give them cause. I myself had been tested and fooled it. Marijuana stays in your system for at least 3 weeks depending on your body fat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #37
38. Same as other prescribed drugs.
But I would think you'd have to mention it when the paperwork was submitted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #28
52. Most companies in my line of work do not drug test.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krabigirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #23
51. Exactly. At only one company was I drug tested. I hated working there. Connection?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
25. .
Edited on Sat Mar-07-09 09:51 PM by readmoreoften
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. Your money? I think they paid for it themselves when they were WORKING.
Way to stick it to someone worse off than yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raineyb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #18
27. It's not your damn money
Every single person collecting unemployment was a working tax-paying citizen. And if we're not testing the CEO's who are throwing parties (Probably complete with lots of blow for all we know) with the handout they got from the government we damn sure shouldn't be harassing people who are unemployed for the pittance they get.

What the fuck is wrong with people these days?

Regards
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Hyde Donating Member (314 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #18
31. I agree.
They'll just use someone else's clean piss though so they'll have to figure out how to prevent that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lyric Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #18
39. Because the government is not the same thing as a private employer?
Because the government is constrained by the Bill of Rights, whereas private employers are not? If I fail a drug test given by a private employer, I can always find another job, or choose to work somewhere that doesn't drug-test (such places DO exist.) The same is not true for public assistance and unemployment. People don't get unemployment unless they can't find jobs. If you fail THAT drug test, you have NO alternatives. Drug tests are not 100% accurate, either--you can fail if you eat a poppy-seed muffin too soon before taking it (something a lot of people don't know.) In fact, a LOT of legal substances can cause false-positives on drug tests. Sure, you can appeal the test and get a new one...eventually. In the meantime, you're fucked.

A list of substances that can cause false-positive results on a drug test:

http://www.askdocweb.com/falsepositives.html

You can always get another job, but you can't get another government. The Constitution protects our privacy for a REASON.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #39
41. How the fuck do we have people in our party
that do not understand this

:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:34 AM
Response to Reply #41
45. Give him a break. I assume he is retired Air Force.
Sucked off the government tit his entire life, still sucking off the government benefit tit and probably working for a defense contractor sucking off the government tit...........but now he's worried someone might collect on a benefit paid for by "HIS" tax dollars. Never mind that's it's actually insurance paid for by employees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Retired AF Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. People in the military work for the Government
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 01:00 PM by Retired AF Dem
You expect them to work for free? I guess that workers that work for Ford are sucking the tit of Ford. Military folks have a higher calling, they support and defend the Constitution of the United States and not 30 something hateful assholes still living with mom and dad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hassin Bin Sober Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #48
60. No, I don't expect them to work for free any more than I expect .....
..... unemployed workers to forgo their INSURANCE BENEFIT that THEY paid for just because some authoritarian douche-bag wants to feel all superior while they suck the government welfare tit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #18
40. Because that's your employer and you agree to that as a condition of employment
and this is the fucking government providing an insurance benefit everyone pays for in taxes.

There is this little thing called unwarranted search and seizures in the constitution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varkam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #18
43. Why is your employer concerned whether or not you are on drugs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Retired AF Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #43
50. I wear a gun on my hip
and I handle about $5 million a day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varkam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #50
53. So would you say that it is safe to assume...
that your employer wants to make sure the people that it employs are clear-minded so that they don't accidentally shoot someone or lose a few million bucks? Seems that if they didn't drug test, they would be opening themselves up to all sorts of nasty liability (e.g. negligence in hiring). I can certainly understand why your employer would drug test, but my previous question was more rhetorical or anything - and that is because of the following.

The analogy between your employment (and the necessity of testing for drugs) and testing the recipients of welfare is flawed. Welfare recipients don't have to wear a gun, they don't have to keep track of millions of dollars, and their "employers" (e.g. agents of the state) are not subjected to liability if they're getting blazed. It's the rationale for drug testing that is totally different. With respect to employers, the rationale is a limitation of liability. With welfare recipients the rationale seems to be either heavy-handed paternalism or a punitive scheme.

Just my .02, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Caretha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #18
44. First off
it isn't YOUR money! Unemployment is a tax paid entirely by the employer into a fund that provides a safety net for people who loose their job through no fault of their own. The amount an unemployed worker receives is based upon how long they have worked & the amount of income they previously earned, and is for a limited amount of time legislated by the government. The government is extending those benefits in how long you are able to draw unemployment to people because of the sorry state of the economy and rising unemployment, thus making it harder for people to replace their lost job.

Perhaps you didn't read the story about 700 people showing up to apply for the 1 job opening for a janitors position.

Get off your high horse! You don't like taking a piss test? Then protest at your place of employment or organize and try to change the law that allows employeers to demand drug tests of their employees. I'm sure many of the people applying for unemployment were required to take drug tests at their previous places of employment too.

This benefit is not being offered to people who are or were not employed & are sitting around doing drugs etc.

Think man! That's what God gave you a brain for.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tonysam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #18
54. Actually, it isn't "your" tax money. Employers pay the UI tax.
And there is a good reason why employers pay it; it discourages employers from getting rid of people willy-nilly for those people can collect after they are dismissed/laid off (and yes, so-called "fired" employees can get UI--just not those who quit).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
19. I think we should drug test Congress n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
22. These people can't be unemployed because the economy sucks
It's got to be drugs.

Since we don't want to subsidize illegal activities let's test every single person who benefits from tax dollars. Who cares that people with more money are better prepared to fight these tests which can be inaccurate and biased?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllentownJake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #22
42. The sad thing some people on here are too ignorant to see
what the guy in Florida is trying to do. Take the responsibility off business failings on the business owners and place it onto the employees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Larkspur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
29. Let's test the CEO's and top execs for drugs
to see if that is why they drove their businesses into the ground. Republicans always pick on the poor or less fortunate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Hyde Donating Member (314 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
30. A dedicated drug addict will figure out a work around.
but it's a good idea anyways.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ConcernedCanuk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
32. OK - let's test our politicians EVERY DAY before they go into session to make decisions that affect
.
<<<<<<<<< wishful thinking
.

our lives

I went to a Union conference once in Toronto

I was a rep for my guys

The second day, there were so many hung over that we had to pause the conference, get some of them out of bed so we could have quorum -

yeah - over half the REPRESENTATIVES of the employees were partied out the night before

somehow I suspect our governments are run the same way . . .

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSlayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:00 AM
Response to Original message
33. These guys are such swine.
They will do anything to avoid helping people who need it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NoSheep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:04 AM
Response to Original message
34. Why Not CEO'S and Investment Managers? They are the failures!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
36. Fuck you bennett! I don't care if they're taking every drug known to man, if they qualify for UE,
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 01:24 AM by Hannah Bell
they get it.

They paid in, they get it.

Fucking nazis.

Drug tests for bankers getting bailouts, I want to be sure the money's not going up their collective noses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
46. jeezz.. what has Mike Bennett been smoking? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
47. Wouldn't the FL legislature have to pass a law on this?
Your thread title says "to be" but from what you've posted (without a link), I see "should be." Two different things all together. This guy is a schmuck for even suggesting it and I'm all for drug testing ALL of those we put in power over our lives, EVERY six months. Hell, I'll even support our tax dollars going toward paying for it, although on second thought, we DO need to cut back on spending so make THEM pay for the test. After all, they still have a job.

But I think your thread title is a little misleading insofar as it actually happening. I'm sure it would have to go through the Florida legislature and I dare any of them to actually impose this gross idea. Keep us tuned to any updates on this story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
49. Sen Mike Bennett looks drunk.
Or criminally insane.

Test him first, then the rest of our elected officials.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
55. lots of the coke fueled bbqs i went to in the suburbs were not
populated by thieves and villains. just functionally dysfunctional people who "like to party."

all drug users are not the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kalyke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
57. I guess Mike Bennett has forgotten that unemployment insurance
is paid for by the employee when he/she was working. It's the employee's money - not the state's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AmyCamus Donating Member (371 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
59. Only if Florida State Reps are subject to random tests too.
"he wants to make sure that unemployment benefits are going to help people and not support drug habits"
That's a hard one to argue against, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-08-09 04:43 PM
Response to Original message
62. That and drug testing for welfare recipients has been at the top of the KKK wish-list for decades.
Edited on Sun Mar-08-09 04:45 PM by tjwash
What a fine example of compassionate conservatism.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC