-
Dismantling Networks, Preventing Footholds
May 23, 2013 | 2 comments
-
I Agree With Andy McCarthy: No Special Counsel
May 23, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Issa Recovers
May 22, 2013 | 4 comments
-
Colorado Governor Gives “Reprieve” to Murderer
May 22, 2013 | 1 comment
-
Steven Crowder: Jesus vs. Muhammad
May 22, 2013 | 2 comments
The Spectacle Blog
In case you haven’t heard about the federal government’s free cell phone program, “Lifeline”, derisively called the ObamaPhone by critics (including me), it’s not a joke, even though it seems like it should be:
http://washingtonexaminer.com/where-do-obama-phones-come-from/article/2509203#.UGXHNlHZ27x
The clever people over at ThePeoplesCube.com have a new article about the ObamaPhone including some of its most important features as submitted by Twitter users.
Here then are the key features of the ObamaPhone:
- It automatically rejects calls from people with a different opinion.
- Every time you take a picture, it produces a grimmer image of America.
- It doesn’t have a plan; it just keeps telling you how bad the other guy’s plan is.
- When it crashes, it blames your previous phone.
- All 3 AM calls go directly to voicemail.
- It has a really useless app called “Biden.”
- Pairing it with another device sucks all the energy out of the other unit.
- Type in “job search” and it gives you directions to the welfare office.
- The navigation feature covers all 57 States.
- The default ringtone for international calls is “I’m sorry, so sorry, please accept my apology.”
- The healthcare app downloads and installs itself without your permission.
- When you make a call, a teleprompter pops up to help you speak.
- Restaurant reviews are all written by Michelle Obama.
- There are never any winners on Angry Birds.
- Instagram takes two months to process a photo and you have to fill out 3 PDFs to do so.
- Paypal app is replaced with ReceivePal app.
- You can’t find “Jerusalem” on Google maps.
- It turns all your Facebook friends into enemies and all your enemies into friends.
- Don’t want to work? There’s an app for that, too.
- It automatically bows down to phones made by foreign companies.
- When you watch a YouTube video, a US ambassador gets killed.
- When you dial “home”, it calls Kenya.
- As opposed to the iPhone, it’s called the mePhone.
Congressman Tim Griffin (R-AR) has a YouTube video about this outrageous program and its costs:
As long as we’re mentioning ThePeoplesCube.com web site, this is really funny too:
View all comments (27) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Ross Kaminsky
http://spectator.org/blog/2012/09/28/obamaphone-humor
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
DRed| 9.28.12 @ 1:10PM
Obamaphone! Yes, that's a great name for a program that started in the 80s. How droll.
Trinacria| 9.28.12 @ 3:39PM
Wrong again, Einstein. The program that began in the 80s provided subsidies to help infirm/disabled recipients pay the monthly bill for a landline to ensure access to help in emergency situations. That's a far cry from the mobile phone free-for-all for anyone on the public dole (complete with "refer a friend" incentives and free downloadable game apps - after all, a bloke has to have something to do all day while he isn't out working).
DRed| 9.28.12 @ 4:05PM
Well, then, my friend, can you point me to the legislation Obama signed that created the Obamaphone program? Was it, perhaps, an executive order? Tell me, what did President Obama do to this program. Be specific.
This is from the fcc, by the way:
Low Income Support
In 1984, the FCC, in conjunction with the states and local telephone companies,
established a Lifeline program designed to promote universal service by helping low income
individuals afford the monthly cost of telephone service.
1
In 1985, the FCC adopted a broader
lifeline program, again designed to help low income individuals afford the monthly costs of
service.
2
In 1987, the FCC adopted Link Up America, designed to help low income households
pay the costs of connection and installation
Low income means infirm/disabled?
Skippy| 9.28.12 @ 4:11PM
"Obama sucks! Bad!"
That welfare queen on the video is the quintessential O'Bama voter.
She knows everything needed to get a free phone, and nothing about how to get a f*cking job.
Trinacria| 9.28.12 @ 5:49PM
Not my job to do your research for you, sport (of course, you should be forgiven for having made that assumption; when one relies on someone else for everything from healthcare to housing to phone bills, it's understandable how one might fall into the trap of thinking that one needn't put forth any effort).
With respect to your last question, dig a little deeper, Scoop (but I warn you, it might require a bit more than consulting Wikipedia). Here's a clue: why might the government believe it's important for everyone to have some means of communication? Here's a second clue: it ain't so Moesha can kick it old school with her BFF.
DRed| 9.28.12 @ 6:24PM
It was a rhetorical question. The answer is that Obama hasn't done anything to the program. Despite your claims to the contrary, the program started during the Reagan Administration (for landline phones) and then cellphones were added during the Clinton year. (in a bill sponsored by a Republican, but we can go ahead and blame slick Willy to make you feel better)
The idea behind the program was to help poor people get jobs. It's hard to get a job without a phone. Which is why it wasn't limited, as you dishonestly claimed, to the infirm and the disabled.
John Navratil| 9.28.12 @ 7:04PM
DRed,
Let's look at the math. $1.25 billion is approximately $400 per capita. For my family of four that amount to $1600/year. That's MORE than my cell phone service costs for my family. By my reckoning every person in America could have a free phone. Where is the money going?
Trinacria| 9.28.12 @ 7:10PM
JN -
Your family's cell phone service doesn't require a federal agency with 27 employees to every 1 customer to administer the program (or a union that kicks back a percentage of the money in the form of campaign contributions)...
John Navratil| 9.28.12 @ 7:11PM
Dred,
PS. As reported, this program cost has doubled in each of the last couple of years, so Obama has done something? And the couple of bucks a month I pay of my bill obviously isn't covering the $400/month/capita this program costs. So, where is the money coming from?
DRed| 9.28.12 @ 7:38PM
It's more like $4 per capita.
John Navratil| 9.28.12 @ 7:54PM
DRed,
You are right! I slipped a dollar from a penny. You see, even I am occasionally wrong. Hard to fathom, isn't it.
Trinacria| 9.28.12 @ 7:06PM
Rhetorical!!!? I'm impressed DRed; I see you've been using the thesaurus you got for the Kwanza/Winter Solstice/Non-Christian Holiday Celebration last year. Kudos!
While I admire the self assurance with which you present your argument, I hasten to note that you have failed to see either the flaw in your response or the solution to your original question. If the sole purpose of the program were to help individuals find a job:
1) Why was it offered to people who had a job (but otherwise qualified for federal assistance on the basis of income or disability)?
2) Why would participation in the program not end once the participant found a job?
Now on to Mr. Obama - perhaps one can argue that the executive order waiving the TANF work requirement will decrease the need for those on the public dole to have a public phone (if the sole purpose is to help them find a job, but they no longer have to look for a job in order to continue getting their government check, why I'm dag-blamed sure all those principled folks will turn their phones in...right?). Yes, one could argue that; unless, of course, one wanted to be correct.
DRed| 9.28.12 @ 7:36PM
Let's stay with Mr. Obama-have you found what he did to the program to lead us to call it the Obamaphone? He didn't start the program. He didn't expand the program. Am I missing something?
Trinacria| 9.28.12 @ 9:16PM
Look deep inside yourself, grasshopper, and there you will find your answer.
Here's another clue - those with low income are eligible to participate in the program. Has the number of americans who are out of work and on public assistance increased or decreased under Obama?
Hint 2: Under Obama, the number of individuals receiving food stamps has:
a) remained the same
b) decreased by 10%
c) TRIPLED, with the annual increases in the first 3 years of his administration representing the 3 largest annual increases in the history of the program
Hint #3: Median household income under Obama has:
a) increased by 3.2%
b) remained steady
c) fallen by more than $5,000/year (representing the first time in recent memory that a US president has presided over a DECLINE in household income)
DRed| 9.28.12 @ 9:53PM
Has the number of americans who are out of work and on public assistance increased or decreased under Obama?
It's decreased very slightly, and that's if you blame Obama for the job losses of his first few months in office.
As for food stamps, the answer would be d) none of the above. I don't know where you're getting your claim that the number of American on foodstamps tripled during the Obama administration, but it's bullshit. (the actual number is something like 45%, and the raw number is about equal to the increase in number of people on foodstamps during the previous administration)
Median household income has fallen during Obama's presidency, but by nothing close to 5,000 a year. So you're 0-3. I award you no credit.
DRed| 9.28.12 @ 9:57PM
So if I could sum up your argument, Obama bears full responsibility for a program he neither started nor expanded because of economic data you made up. Is that about right?
Trinacria| 9.28.12 @ 10:58PM
Unemployment was 7.8% in Jan 2009; it was 8.2% in Aug 2012, and it has remained above 8% for 43 consecutive months of Obama's presidency (this doesn't even capture the number of americans who have simply given up and left the job market).
Food stamps: correction - the NUMBER of people on food stamps has nearly DOUBLED since the big O was elected (from 26 million to 47 million); the COST of the program has MORE THAN DOUBLED (from $36 billion to $76 billion). It is DEMONSTRABLY false that the increase in the raw number of individuals receiving food stamps was roughly the same as the previous administration (EVEN IF YOU CONSIDER THE FULL 8 YEARS OF THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION). 18 million americans received food stamps in the first year of GWBs administration; 26 million in the last year (http://www.businessinsider.com/the-only-thing-rising-faster-than-food-stamp-usage-is-food-stamp-cost-2012-8).
Median household income in Jan 2009: $55,998
Median household income in Aug 2012: $50,678
Source: http://www.moneynews.com/Stree.....7/id/45779
YOU award ME no credit? Nah, keep your credit sport; unlike liberals, I don't look to others for validation...
DRed| 9.28.12 @ 11:45PM
Your link doesn't work, but those numbers don't show a decline of $5,000 a year. So yeah, you were wrong.
Your food stamp link says that in the last 4 years the number of Americans on food stamps has increased by 64.7%. Do you suck at math or reading comprehension?
In January 2001 there were 17.1 million Americans on foodstamps (according to the department of agriculture). In December of 2008 there were 31.7 million Americans on foodstamps. 31.7-17.1=14.6. The most recent number I've seen is from June 2012, and there were 46.7 million Americans on food stamps. 46.7-31.7=15. 15 is pretty close to 14.6. Tell me again how that is demonstrably false? I guess the answer is you suck at math and at reading comprehension.
If you want to check the numbers, you can find them here:
http://tinyurl.com/97yum3t
Anyhow, seeing you get this stuff wrong again and again is interesting (it's less surprising how wrong you are when you don't seem to have read the sources you're citing), but it doesn't have much to do with the Reaganphone, does it?
Trinacria| 9.29.12 @ 9:06PM
Median household income is measured on (are you ready for this?) an ANNUAL BASIS. Therefore, if median household income has fallen from $55K PER YEAR to $50K PER YEAR, median household income PER YEAR has fallen by how much?
Food stamps - If I spend $8 million dollars over 8 years and you spend $8 million dollars over 4 years, who is spending money at a higher rate? That's right! You're spending it at twice the rate. Same applies here - if the previous administration added 15 million recipients in 8 years and the current has added 15 million in less than 3 years, the current administration is adding recipients to the food stamp program at TWICE the rate of the previous administration. In case you weren't paying attention, that's how it's demonstrable false to suggest that the current administration is roughly the same as the previous administration when it comes to food stamps.
By the way, still waiting for an explaination to the following:
If the sole purpose of the program were to help individuals find a job:
1) Why was it offered to people who had a job?
2) Why would participation in the program not end once the participant found a job?
Defend your big-eared disgraceful puke of a president all you want; but you simply can't bend the numbers enough to make him anything other than an astonishingly incompetent failure who hasn't a clue how to begin to dig himself and the country out of the shit hole.
DRed| 9.29.12 @ 10:53PM
Hey, settle down Trinny. It's only the internet. It's difficult to defend a really stupid argument-don't get frustrated. I'm sorry I misunderstood what you were saying about median income-do you feel better now?
As to food stamps-not that it has a fucking thing to do with the phone program, but let's sum up what you've argued, and then try to decide who is right. You said that number of people on food stamps had TRIPLED during the Obama administration. That turned out to be, uh, completely wrong. Then you said 'oh no wait-it increased 64%, which means that it nearly DOUBLED'. Well, not really. But you didn't quit while you were ahead. Oh no-you smugly told me "EVEN IF YOU CONSIDER THE FULL 8 YEARS OF THE PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATION" it is "DEMONSTRABLY false" that the increase in the number of people on food stamps was similar for the Obama and Bush administrations. Deliciously, that is a demonstrably false argument. Now you claim what you really meant was something totally different. Just admit you were wrong. I was wrong about what you were saying about income-shit happens. Be a big boy.
DRed| 9.29.12 @ 10:53PM
As to your questions about the phone program, I have no idea. Ask Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan-it's their program. (or ask the Republican congressmen who sponsored the bills that created it) It's not Obama's program. You call it Obamaphone because it fits the right wing narrative that the President is taking our money to give stuff to lazy black folks. Obama may well be an astonishingly incompetent failure, but a program he had nothing to do with isn't the best demonstration of that. That you're so worked up about it says a lot more about you than it does about Obama.
abdulah| 9.28.12 @ 1:29PM
Good for you Ross, you are catching up! ThePeoplesCube.com has been my favorite site for years. A lot of the contributors of this site are former refugees from the Soviet Union and their (now grown) children. Nothing cures you off communism disease like the life in Worker Paradise. We are inoculated, but natives are having a bad case of socialist fewer. No Obama-care can treat that.
SYAsked| 9.28.12 @ 10:47PM
I think of all the Czars, each with a big staff, able to come up with ways that have a legitimate history and precedent, that can bankrupt us all, buy votes and divide, distract and discourage us.
The original intent taken to a grotesque extreme, to bring the Nation in line with the dreams of some liar's father.
geronl| 9.29.12 @ 4:50AM
Apparently you can find "Jerusalem" on an IPhone 5 but its not connected to any country because Israel isn't on their map. Remember the stories about peanut butter & Jelly sandwiches being derided as racist in Seattle or Portland schools?
http://asspos.blogspot.com/201.....ghten.html
Oldefarte| 9.29.12 @ 4:24PM
Hopefully the taxpayers of this country will shove that his phone """"WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE"""" on 11/6/12
BarackOff | 9.30.12 @ 6:57AM
Here's a pic of the 2012 version of the free Obama Phone, including pop-up teleprompter.
http://bit.ly/ObamaPhoneFeaturesList