Skip to comments.Democrats Create Permanent Underclass
Posted on 10/01/2012 12:32:14 PM PDT by Kaslin
REPORTER: You got an Obama phone?
WOMAN: (screaming) Yes! Everybody in Cleveland, low minorities, got Obama phone. Keep Obama in president, you know? He gave us a phone!
REPORTER: He gave you a phone?
WOMAN: He gonna do more!
REPORTER: How did he give you a phone?
WOMAN: You sign up. If you're... If you on food stamps, you on Social Security, you got low income, you disability...
REPORTER: Okay, what's wrong with Romney, again?
WOMAN: Romney, he sucks! Bad!
Original Obamaphone Lady: Obama Voter Says Vote for Obama because he gives a free Phone
RUSH: There are 16.5 million of those people with Obama phones (we thought last week it was 12 million) and the number is growing. And not just that. "Department of Agriculture personnel in the [regime] have met with Mexican Government officials dozens of times since the president took office to promote nutrition assistance programs -- notably food stamps -- among Mexican-Americans, Mexican nationals and migrant communities in America.
"Writing in response to Alabama Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions July request for information about the USDAs little known partnership with the Mexican government to educate citizen and noncitizen immigrants from Mexico about the availability of food stamps and other nutrition assistance programs, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack defended the partnership as a way to curb hunger in America -- and the continuation of a program formed under the Bush administration in 2004."
I thought we had an obesity epidemic! What is this "curb hunger in America" business? You know what you do to curb hunger? You work! It's called a job. Now, we have a problem with jobs in this country. Would you like to hear this statistic? Yeah, stop and think of this, though: What are we doing? We have a partnership with the Mexican government to do what? Expand welfare rolls. We have a partnership with the Mexican government to tell them how to tell their citizens to come here and access food stamps.
Not come here and find a job, because that's apparently not on the menu. From the House Committee in Small Business, this is a startling statistic: "From 1948 to 2008, a span of 60 years, the United States had 39 months of unemployment above 8%." From 1948 -- 60 years -- to 2008, we had 39 months in there of unemployment above 8%. Under President Obama, we have had 43 consecutive months of unemployment over 8% in just 3-3/4 years.
Now, you could do the same thing with debt, the amount of debt that was racked up in previous administrations versus this one. I mean, it is just a disaster, and it's happening right in front of our faces -- and we're giving away cell phones! We're buying votes with Obama phones, and now we're working a partnership with the Mexican government. And, by the way, this is not the only thing that partnership includes.
That partnership also, no doubt, explains to people how to get here. And then after they're here, how to access health care via the emergency room. And then food stamps. Because this is the new wave of permanent-underclass voters that the Democrats need. The Democrat Party cannot get by without a permanent underclass -- in need, incapable of taking care of itself -- and the last thing this regime is interested in is self-reliance and rugged individualism. They don't think people are capable of it.
This... We shouldn't be surprised.
It's just to see it here in black and white, in print, that we're working with the Mexican government to help them tell their citizens who are coming here, A, how did you to get here; B, once they're here, how to access food stamps under the guise of avoiding hunger. The way you used to do that is get a job. But, see, it's insensitive to say that. "Easy for you to say!" I mean, back in the homeless days, when that was a big cause celebre, I'd say, "Have you people ever thought about getting a job?"
"Oh, easy for you to say, Mr. Limbaugh; you've got one!"
Well, what if we all just decided to get a shopping cart and check out? Where would we be?
Anyone who deliberately holds you back in life is NOT your friend.
Nothing in this world is free, everything has a price of one sort or another, pay now, or pay later.
99ers, EBT, TANF, Obamaphones, Section 8, WIC, SSDI, yadda yadda.
That’s why the country doesn’t look like it did in 1930, even though the economy may actually be worse.
The Baraqqis are spending $1.40 for every $1.00 in income. Just like the 2007 family riding a wave of false prosperity based on maxxed out credit cards and helocs on houses with negative equity.
It's a Potemkin façade;
The modern bread line is over 48 million people long now, it's called "Food Stamps".
They've only modernized it and 'Potemkinized it' (removed it from view).
48 million people wait in that bread line every month for their food stamps.
Obama money! He get it from his stash.
“The modern bread line is over 48 million people long now, it’s called “Food Stamps”.”
The very purpose of the so-called “Welfare State” is to create a ‘clientele class’ riotously supportive of the ruling oligarchy, the same corrupting process as led to the inward collapse of the Roman Republic, and will lead to the collapse of this one.
All of this will be obvious in hindsight.
Yu gon take away mah Obamapho an mah foo stams, fool?!
(I’m afraid it may be too late for the Republic.)
Government subsidies make underclass pregnancies appear harmless and to some extent even sanction such.
But I have to add that all those that believe contraception in school spoils the innocence of these children don't know just how bad it's gotten. Many public schools are merely warehouses for humans that are acting as beasts of the field. The battle was lost years ago. Reproductive chaos reigns. An ever expanding welfare state is to some extent a mere consequence.
Fixing the problem involves good adults taking over schools and the moral instruction of children. It might even mean contraception in schools in the short term just to get things under control long enough for moral/cultural instruction to take effect. This battle has been going on for 40 years. The tide won't turn in a day.
And so now we know what the last days of the Roman Empire looked like - we’re living the 21st century version of it!!
Yeah, it was over once 16.5 million Romans got free carrier pigeons!
Roads are a public convenience subject to government intervention. We do not have a right to them, per se. Phones are not much different in terms of their ability to facilitate commerce. But . . . the Feds like to do favors for those who pay to play. In the scheme of things, I’m trying to figure out where it is an inherently bad thing to make it possible for everyone (within reason) to have a phone, just as we have made it possible for everyone (within reason) to use roads. Phones, like roads, are good for business and commerce. No, they are not “free.”
I would expect, with government issued phones there would be government restrictions on the manner and degree to which they are used. The ability to speak to a fellow citizen instantly over long distances is of benefit not only for commerce, but also for defense.
I’m playing the devil’s advocate here. Do you see any inherent harm in faciliting wider and better communication of, by, and for the people?
"The world owes you a living...no matter how lazy, dumb, slovenly, drunk, drug-addicted...no matter how many convictions for distribution/possesion, armed robbery, domestic violence, rape/sexual assualts, murder and mayhem, no matter how many screwups, jobs lost, kids abandoned."
"The world owes you a living and Obama's gonna make sure US taxpayers pay for it."
The modern bread line in America is over 48 million people long now, its called Food Stamps.
The original intent of the program back in the 80s was for
the elderly and handicapped poor to have a “lifeline” to the outside world.
I’d suspect in the 2008+ era of the Obamaphone, the major uses include drug deals, flash mobs, and sexual hook-ups.
Government issued phones may actually be a way to curb certain uncivil behaviors. The threat should always be present that one may have it taken away at any time, and may be prosecuted if used outside of prescribed parameters. AFAIK, every phone is regulated to some extent in terms of proper use.
Anyway, my knee jerk reaction to government issued phones is to say, “No way! Not on my dime!” Then it occurs to me that a civil, prosperous society may actually gain some benefits in promoting phone ownership, if only for its ability to facilitate commerce and defense.
I’d sure like to slug that loud-mouthed beotch on the O-Phone video, though. Can’t wait to see Zero voted out of office in a firm way.
Communication can be used for good or ill. Gang bangers have been using texting and social media to facilitate flash mobs. In that context, facilitating communication by certain elements of the underclass is a bad thing.
I would argue that "free" phones to the underclass should be limited, and NOT include multi-recipient texting capability.
The President wants to redistribute resources and use give away programs to get re-elected. He also wants to give the U.S.A. to other countries, by running up new debt and obligation. He is “The Giveaway President.” Soon we will not own the country. All resources will be given to others who did little or nothing to build it.
What bothers me most about the free phone program is how the underclass attributes it to the President, when in fact their phones were paid for by hardworking Americans.
I wonder if there would be a way for conservatives to hijack the “free” phone program in their favor. An individual - a free individual - with a phone may actually be able to become a more productive citizen. Maybe we need to check the assumption that recipients of free phones are stupid and lazy? Just tossing it out there.