Deleted Comments of The Day: How Many Stereotypes Can You Fit Into One Paragraph?

Sometimes when we open up the ol' comment queue, that limbo where new would-be Wonketteers must first prove they are neither spam nor complete teabagging idiots, we feel like the Medieval Marxist's wife: "Oooh, Dennis! There's some lovely filth down 'ere!" And so it was with two messages from "JustinHuman," who just wanted us to know that he shares Elizabeth Hasselbeck's disgust at all these poor people with fancy air conditioning:   

Sorry, but I agree with Elizabeth on this one. I work in healthcare, and it does get rather upsetting seeing all of the perfectly able-bodied young men and women who come in on disability benefits and Social Security in their 20s and 30s carrying the newest iPad while I work 6 days a week and can't afford one. It's infuriating to see people buying lobster and shrimp with their food stamps while I'm struggling working 2 jobs to feed my kids store brand basics. Then, I get to see them walk outside and get into their new luxury car while I hope my 96 Celica starts as it approaches the 200,000 mile mark on the odometer.

"JustinHuman" has seen this, people, seen it with his own eyes, and he thinks it's time for some class warfare on the undeserving poors. Ah, yes, we thought as we read on: there's some lovely filth down 'ere.

JustinHuman continues:

So, yes I agree with elizabeth. I'm fine with my taxes going towards the basic needs of those who need help, but not to fund the laziness of the people who have just figured out how to screw the system. The welfare and assistance systems need a major overhaul. Also, recipients should be subjected to random drug tests just like those of us in the workforce who pay their way.

This is just the sort of compassionate American we need more of in healthcare. Of course, one also wonders just why a healthcare provider is snooping into the finances of the people he encounters. Do they have to wear a scarlet "M" to indicate they're on Medicare or Medicaid? Or maybe he just processes their paperwork, so he has an opportunity to look the lazy scum over while he's filing? In either case, why is he following people out to the parking lot to inspect their vehicles?

We will concede that it is just possible that he's pulling it all out of his Fox-News watching ass. But JustinHuman wasn't finished; he submitted a second comment:

Why should a welfare recipients' standard of living be the same as or better than that of a person working for minimum wage? IT SHOULDN'T, but it is right now.

Actually, since minimum wage isn't really enough to support a family, they are often the very same people, JustinHuman.

Is it any wonder why people are so apt to conform and fall into the welfare system? They can either sit on their butt and have it paid for by the system, or they can work and pay for the same stuff themselves, but not be able to afford more or better. Of course they are going to choose the latter. My favorite thing is when I see someone paying with food stamps and they have thousands of dollars worth of tattoos and piercings. I like ink, but I can't afford any new tats because I have to pay to feed and house my family. But, since I'm also paying to feed and house that person's family, they have the time and money to go get whatever body mod they want that week. Yeah, that's fair!

Ladies and gentlemen, we present to you a true surprise: JustinHuman, the hipster teabagger. And no, JustinHuman, you do not get any points for your one additional comment agreeing that it was sad that the little girl in Philadelphia died after there was no nurse at her school. For all you know, she was on Medicaid and had an undeserved iPad.

Our other note for today's edition comes from "Coulterr," who may just be asking for clarification, or may be deliberately missing the point altogether; we honestly aren't sure, so we'll be nice and assume it's the former. In another report on the story from Philadelphia, "Coulterr" was apparently puzzled by all the comments about the government shutdown, because this was not a story about the government shutdown:

Just out of curiosity, how many of the people that commented on this actually bothered to read past the first 2 paragraphs? The reason I'm asking is because the 3rd paragraph in it's entirety states: "The Pennsylvania state legislature has declared war on funding for Philadelphia’s schools, and Laporshia Massey is just part of the collateral damage." So just exactly what does this have to do with the Federal government partial shutdown?

We'll confess to being at least partly responsible for that: our headline was, after all, "Government Cuts Won’t Hurt Anyone, Except Maybe When A 12-Year-Old Dies Because Her School Had No Nurse," and our lede encouraged thinking more broadly about "what happens when you make government small enough to drown in a bathtub: Children will die."

So if anyone was thinking that Laporshia Massey's death is the fault of the anarchy gang in Congress who shut down the federal government, we regret having given that impression. But we didn't really see any comments along those lines, just agreement with the general point that cutting government has consequences. So if Coulterr is merely asking why there's any mention at all of the shutdown, that's it.

If, on the other hand, Coulterr's intention was to say there is absolutely no reason to mention the shutdown or the teabaggers in Congress who want to make America look more like Philadelphia's public schools, so that people like JustinHuman can take home a few more dollars per paycheck, then all we can say is, you know what you can do with that chicken, OK?