Make a liberal mad. Tell them the truth.
Archive for Welfare
Courtesy of The National Review.
Democrats’ proprietary attitude toward African-Americans is a disgrace, one that nine in ten black voters unfortunately reinforce at every electoral opportunity. Welfare reform is not about limiting the transfer of money from white taxpayers to non-white welfare recipients, but about ensuring that programs intended to help the poor and ease their transition into the productive economy do not in the end damage the poor, corrupt public institutions, and constrain the economy. The Democrats know that a voter dependent on the government — whether a welfare recipient or an EPA employee — is a Democratic voter, and they actively cultivate that dependency. President Obama’s economy is driving more Americans onto President Obama’s swelling welfare rolls. Republicans seek to reverse both of those trends, which would be self-evidently good for all Americans. The best the Democrats can do in such a situation is to shout “Racist!” and so they will.
There’s nobody so racist as a liberal with a race card.
Hat Tip: YouViewed.
Bringing Clinton’s signature success into the campaign? Team Romney has broken out the brass knuckles! Woooooot!
Take one down, pass it around. This will sway some independents, I pwomise. Very touchy subject in today’s economy.
A new movie featuring the stories of black conservatives finding their way off of the Democrat Plantation is opening across the country.
Herman Cain caught a great deal of flak for his comment on the campaign trail that he “had left the Democratic plantation,” but he’s not the only one saying it. Indeed, C.L. Bryant has now joined the ranks of a number of black closet conservatives who are speaking out against big government, which is what they perceive to be the new plantation. And the list of black conservatives finding the courage to speak out is growing.
Joining Bryant in this documentary are famous faces like Herman Cain, Allen West, Thomas Sowell, AlfonZo Rachel, and Alveda King. Sirius radio host David Webb speaks out, and we meet a host of other black conservatives who share their stories such as Mason Weaver, Marvin D. Rogers, and K. Carl Smith, who is the founder of Frederick Douglass Republicans and subscribes to the “four life-affirming values of Douglass: respect for life, respect for the Constitution, belief in limited government and individual responsibility.”
Given all this, why such a monolithic turnout from the black community for the Democratic Party? This is one of the questions Runaway Slave attempts to answer. How has black America been improved by all these handouts? Part of the problem seems to be the controlled decimation of the black family perpetuated by the requirement that to receive that entitlement check, there must not be a father in the home. You get married, you lose your welfare check.
Planned Parenthood and the high rate of abortions in the black community are also cited. Most Planned Parenthood centers are in black communities; in New York in 2008, for example, more African-Americans had abortions than gave birth.
In her new book, Blacklash, Deneen Borelli asks, “Why aren’t black kids improving and growing at the same rate as their peers? My opinion: It’s all in the message from the career black politicians who promote big government solutions that result in stagnation and government dependence.” The better way, Borelli suggests, is to quit blaming everyone else and take responsibility for your life. The Constitution does not guarantee you success, but it does guarantee you the opportunity for success.
This President is a menace to our republic. The pathologically irresponsible part:
President Obama has rightly become known as the Food Stamp President, as enrollment in the program has exploded during his administration. Obama’s Department of Agriculture believes its mission is to get as many people on the program as possible, and it has succeeded magnificently, as one-seventh of Americans–an astonishing 46 million–are now on food stamps.
But, as is so often the case with the Obama administration, the facts are even worse than they first appear. The Daily Caller reports that the Obama administration is partnering with the government of Mexico to get more Mexican immigrants and Mexican-Americans on food stamps:
The Mexican government has been working with the United States Department of Agriculture to increase participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps.
USDA has an agreement with Mexico to promote American food assistance programs, including food stamps, among Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals and migrant communities in America. …
The partnership … sees to it that the Mexican Embassy and Mexican consulates in America provide USDA nutrition assistance program information to Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals working in America and migrant communities in America. The information is specifically focused on eligibility criteria and access.
The goal, for USDA, is to get rid of what they see as enrollment obstacles and increase access among potentially eligible populations by working with arms of the Mexican government in America.
He’s conducting an active war upon entreneurs while spending tax money promoting dependency. Do the math, Obama supporters… it’s not hard to see where his vision leads you.
Mona Charen discusses a possible fatal decision for the Obama campaign in regards to welfare reform. Juicy parts:
But the decision to embrace one of the least popular Democratic positions of the past 100 years — opposition to the work requirement for welfare recipients — is inexplicable politically. It’s also illegal and imperious. Let’s stick with politics, because it’s old news that Obama has contempt for the rule of law. He’s declined to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” on many subjects: immigration, the Defense of Marriage Act, labor laws and environmental rules, among others. Those were lawless but politically logical acts. Not this.
Welfare policies (along with weakness on defense and crime) had been a vulnerability for Democrats throughout the 1970s and 1980s — an Achilles heel that Bill Clinton recognized in 1992. His promise to “end welfare as we know it” was the gravamen of his claim to “new Democrat” status. Once safely elected, Clinton downgraded welfare reform, and, in fact, increased funding for all of the traditional welfare programs in the federal budget. But when Republicans gained control of the House of Representatives in 1994, they took the initiative. By 1996, after vetoing two welfare reform bills, Clinton was advised by Dick Morris that if didn’t sign the legislation, he wouldn’t be re-elected; it was that important to voters. Immediately after signing the bill, Clinton’s approval rating on welfare jumped by 19 points.
The prospect of asking welfare recipients to seek work struck most liberals in 1996 (including Obama) as degrading, cruel and doomed to failure. Three high-ranking Clinton administration officials resigned in protest. The New York Times called the reform “atrocious,” objecting that “This is not reform, this is punishment.” Tom Brokaw, interviewing the president, said “all the projections show that … (the reform) will push, at least short term, more than a million youngsters … below the poverty line.” The Children’s Defense Fund called the law “an outrage … that will hurt and impoverish millions of American children … and leave a moral blot on (Clinton’s) presidency.” Sen. Daniel P. Moynihan called the law “the most brutal act of social policy we have known since the Reconstruction. … In five years’ time, you’ll find appearing on your streets abandoned children … in numbers we have no idea.” Sen. Edward Kennedy, with characteristic understatement, called the bill “legislative child abuse.”
Well, what really happened? Welfare caseloads declined by 50 percent within four years of the law’s passage and by 70 percent by the time Obama took office. The overwhelming majority of those who left welfare rolls did so because they found jobs — and not just the worst jobs, either. By 2001, a Manhattan Institute study found, only 4 percent of former welfare mothers were earning minimum wage. The poverty rate declined from 13.8 percent in 1995 to 11.7 percent in 2003. Black child poverty dropped to its lowest levels in history. Childhood hunger was cut in half. It was the greatest social policy success of the past 50 years.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 83% of American Adults favor a work requirement as a condition for receiving welfare aid. Just seven percent (7%) oppose such a requirement, while 10% are undecided.
Just like his disastrous campaign decision to pick a fight with the Catholic Church before the election, this is a fatal error. Pertinent question: Does he even want to win?