Originally Posted by Rob

I don't believe that's accurate at all. I have no problem helping seniors, the handicapped, the mentally ill, homeless, or children in need. I'll gladly do my part to help. And I believe this statement is exactly what's wrong with the entire political landscape. It's either you're for helping EVERYONE or you're all about FUCKING EVERYONE therefore an advocate for the rich. It's all black and white, no gray area. And that's doing nothing but polarizing the sides. Things are not absolute, and they shouldn't be defined as such.

Why can't I be for the little guy? Help seniors, single moms, and mentally ill, but be against moochers and leeches of society? If someone is able bodied but flat out refuses to work because they're lazy, why should I be responsible for them? Why should I wake up at 6am and be responsible for someone who isn't? For those who lack the ability to take care of themselves, it's our responsibility to assist them. But laziness is not a lack of ability, it's a self inflicted ailment with handouts only enabling said sickness.

I lean more right, I'm a registered Republican, but I am pro-choice. I'm pro-marijuana legalization. I'm for gay rights, and think homosexuals should be able to get married. I'm not religious by any stretch of the imagination. But if I were to go into a room and state, "I'm a Republican", people would automatically assume none of this was true. That's because there is no in-between. Either you're all in, or all out...and that's not a proper way to approach the issues we currently have in this country.