• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Republicans double down on welfare lie.

techs

techs

Lifer
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/romney-obama-welfare_n_1772151.html

Republican ad video followed by Democratic ad in response.

I report, you decide.


The Obama administration announced in July that states could seek waivers from certain welfare rules, but in doing so they would have to provide ideas for projects and initiatives that would do a better job of increasing employment among welfare recipients. Furthermore, the Obama administration has made it clear that it would not drop requirements for states that failed to promise better work outcomes.

Yet in the new ad, the narrator states, “On July 12th, Obama quietly ended work requirements for welfare. You wouldn’t have to work and wouldn’t have to train for a job.”
 
You just said that the Obama administration is allowing states to get a waiver to remove the requirement to work and do something other than require people to work. You also say it is a lie to say the Obama administration is removing the requirement for people to have to work.

Which one do you actually mean, since they are diametrically opposed?
 
cybrsage said:
You just said that the Obama administration is allowing states to get a waiver to remove the requirement to work and do something other than require people to work. You also say it is a lie to say the Obama administration is removing the requirement for people to have to work.

Which one do you actually mean, since they are diametrically opposed?
Click to expand...

A waiver is not forcing the requirements to be dropped, as the ad states. It would be a decision of the state. How is that Obama ending them? It is given each state the option to choose. Their own legislatures would be responsible for ending them if they chose to.
 
Obama is stating that the states can

1) Drop it first
2) Then propose to see if the new ideas will work.
3) Get permission to try the new ideas
4) It takes a few years for a new idea to get implemented; monitored and evaluated.
 
EagleKeeper said:
Obama is stating that the states can

1) Drop it first
2) Then propose to see if the new ideas will work.
3) Get permission to try the new ideas
4) It takes a few years for a new idea to get implemented; monitored and evaluated.
Click to expand...

What you want to believe is clearly interfering with basic cognitive skills, like reading comprehension.

Waiver requests must be made on the basis of alternate proposals.

"We want to try X, so we want a waiver from Y to do so."

The adoption of rightwing ideology seems to have the same effect as a pre-frontal lobotomy...
 
Obama has also decreased the number of welfare programs that would classify an immigrant as a ward of the state.

Now legal and illegal immigrants have a lot more welfare programs to choose from without having to worry about it affecting their chances of becoming a democratic party voter.

Techs - selective reporting since 2000.
 
This proves that mitt is finally growing some balls and going on the offensive. Look at that ad where obama said mitt killed somebody.
 
Kind of off topic but I hate Huffpo. They always have multiple videos on every page and for some reason they all start playing at the same time and the play pause controls are not responsive. Also, its like a web only fox news on the left, cherry picking and distorting facts for an agenda, just like fox.
 
techs said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/romney-obama-welfare_n_1772151.html

Republican ad video followed by Democratic ad in response.

I report, you decide.


The Obama administration announced in July that states could seek waivers from certain welfare rules, but in doing so they would have to provide ideas for projects and initiatives that would do a better job of increasing employment among welfare recipients. Furthermore, the Obama administration has made it clear that it would not drop requirements for states that failed to promise better work outcomes.

Yet in the new ad, the narrator states, “On July 12th, Obama quietly ended work requirements for welfare. You wouldn’t have to work and wouldn’t have to train for a job.”
Click to expand...

As usual the devil is in the details. What pray tell, is the "new" definition of "work" being used by the Democrats?

Milton Friedman: If you pay people not to work and tax them when they do, don't be surprised if you get unemployment.
 
a777pilot said:
As usual the devil is in the details. What pray tell, is the "new" definition of "work" being used by the Democrats?

Milton Friedman: If you pay people not to work and tax them when they do, don't be surprised if you get unemployment.
Click to expand...

Heh. It's proposed to be the definition established by each state, most of which are run by Repubs.

None of the Red State queens of welfare are going to do much to wean themselves from federal money, bet on that. If anything, they'll define "work" in such a way that they'll get more money, not less.
 
dank69 said:
Obama returns some power to the states, 'conservatives' attack the action. Just another day.
Click to expand...

Whatever Obama does is wrong, because he did it.

If he proposed tax cuts for the rich, rich Repubs would scream about him being an elitist, and their flock would bleat that message in unison.
 
Jhhnn said:
Heh. It's proposed to be the definition established by each state, most of which are run by Repubs.

None of the Red State queens of welfare are going to do much to wean themselves from federal money, bet on that. If anything, they'll define "work" in such a way that they'll get more money, not less.
Click to expand...

LOL! I bet they, the government, will use the very same method to re-define work as was used to define "green" jobs. Remember that?
 
Jhhnn said:
Whatever Obama does is wrong, because he did it.

If he proposed tax cuts for the rich, rich Repubs would scream about him being an elitist, and their flock would bleat that message in unison.
Click to expand...

Hey, let's hope he does that, lower taxes on the wealthy, then we can see what will happen.

I will not be holding my breath.

p.s., I do agree that whatever obama does is wrong.
 
a777pilot said:
As usual the devil is in the details. What pray tell, is the "new" definition of "work" being used by the Democrats?

Milton Friedman: If you pay people not to work and tax them when they do, don't be surprised if you get unemployment.
Click to expand...

Confucius says: He who learns but does not think, is lost. He who thinks but does not learn is in great danger
 
techs said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/romney-obama-welfare_n_1772151.html

Republican ad video followed by Democratic ad in response.

I report, you decide.


The Obama administration announced in July that states could seek waivers from certain welfare rules, but in doing so they would have to provide ideas for projects and initiatives that would do a better job of increasing employment among welfare recipients. Furthermore, the Obama administration has made it clear that it would not drop requirements for states that failed to promise better work outcomes.

Yet in the new ad, the narrator states, “On July 12th, Obama quietly ended work requirements for welfare. You wouldn’t have to work and wouldn’t have to train for a job.”
Click to expand...

Mittens lied? Again? Did the sun come up too? Lying to voters is the only way Republicans get votes.
 
MooseNSquirrel said:
Confucius says: He who learns but does not think, is lost. He who thinks but does not learn is in great danger
Click to expand...


I'll take Friedman over Confucius.

Besides the philosophy of Confucius is not applicable to Liberals/Democrats.

The philosophy of Confucius emphasized personal and governmental morality, correctness of social relationships, justice and sincerity.
Click to expand...
 
Ldir said:
Mittens lied? Again? Did the sun come up too? Lying to voters is the only way Republicans get votes.
Click to expand...

That's right. When a Democrat lies, it not a lie, it's a statement with good intentions that he wasn't able to deliver on.
 
The Welfare reform was bi-partisan plan approved by almost 2/3 of congress and 78 out of 100 in the Senate. More Democrats voted for the plan in both the House and Senate than voted against it.

All flushed down the toilet by one man. God Bless America.
 
Jhhnn said:
What you want to believe is clearly interfering with basic cognitive skills, like reading comprehension.

Waiver requests must be made on the basis of alternate proposals.

"We want to try X, so we want a waiver from Y to do so."

The adoption of rightwing ideology seems to have the same effect as a pre-frontal lobotomy...
Click to expand...

There are two physiological abnormalities in conservative brains that accompany their incapacity to think, and we do not know yet which comes first. All we know is that both their brains and their thinking is defective.
 
Bottom line....

Do you, any of you, all of you, believe that is it better to require those getting a government hand out, i.e., welfare, to do work for that money or is it better to just give them, the unemployed/destitute, money and let them do what they want?
 
Moonbeam said:
There are two physiological abnormalities in conservative brains that accompany their incapacity to think, and we do not know yet which comes first. All we know is that both their brains and their thinking is defective.
Click to expand...

Moonbeam, do you have a private sector job?

I'm just curious, because you sound like you either work for the government or don't work at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top