“Why do the causes of this problem (an inevitability considering the higher unemployment & incarceration rates for black adult males) not concern you, outside of attacking a "welfare state"? (More whites receive welfare statistically.)
The statement itself made a pointless juxtaposition with Obama (whose family unit is precisely the ideal sought), implying that his administration is 'somehow' promoting this trend.
It's disingenuous to feign concern over an issue whose solutions you're apparently rejecting, like affirmative action and judicial reform. I do not believe you really want black families (or those of the middle class in general) to thrive and be more cohesive, because that would not be the most likely result of your sides' policies being enacted. Admit you are not worried about families as a social unit, just preventing your tax money from going towards helping to feed the ones who are hungriest.”
GJCO-JMH on Jul 12, 2011 at 04:37:49
“Please provide some data to support that the steady expansion of welfare-state policies over the last 50 years has been an effective "solution" that has actually helped "black families (or those of the middle class in general) to thrive and be more cohesive".”
“Very little of what motivates the right-wing is fact-based, making a strong emotional impact is what's usually intended. Here the effort is obviously to instill an ironic concept that Obama is presiding over a nation where black people are worse off in a social sense than during slavery, because as a minority culture they have contributed to the degradation of their own family unit. Higher unemployment, higher incarceration rates for black males is not considered as causative, since these might be better addressed by affirmative action or judicial reform. It was clearly a racial smear with an implication of blame for Obama, and they've understandably deleted this portion. Few people have the mindset that would allow them to think of young human property as growing up in a stable family unit because there might be two parents around to be beaten, raped or killed by the master.”
“Guardian UK article notes while eastern Europe has 3 Reagan statues, but he was not helpful to Latin Americans (i.e., Nicaraguan Contra operation) or blue collar Americans (his actual origins), instituting a high-spending, low-tax formula that has flatlined their wages since the 80s. But Reagan's adopted class, the wealthy, has seen astronomical increase (and now expects growth as an 'entitlement' - privatizing profits and socializing losses).
GW Bush accelerated this inequity, the piece notes, concluding with comments on China's being "America's creditor," making use of the quote from the statue's placard, "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction" unfortunately ironic.
Yet the legacy of making the most vulnerable suffer for the sake of the upmost class has been amplified beyond packets of ketchup and relish being considered adequate as the vegetable component of school lunches, while enabling the financial elite to buy more furs and jewelry. Paul Ryan's GOP-approved budget would grow the debt by trillions, cutting Medicare (to premium support, not even vouchers) so the top tax rate can drop further, not to pay the debt as seemingly professed (the Plan is a Capitalist opt-out, not a pay-down); their 'balanced budget' plan just outlaws tax increases, making their position iron-clad. The UK article says Reagan would have probably been proud of the Tea Party, noting his 'gallantry to women'...”
“It's difficult to educate the public about the obstructing power of a unified 40% minority threatening to filibuster in the Senate, or the manipulative demands for amendments on bills they would continue to oppose. Unfortunately, it's very easy for the GOP to proclaim the majority has failed because they lacked a similar block participation. Voters with a superficial view will presume they gave the Dems enough power, and we are currently seeing the results of their control; they could also make the false assumption that GOP leadership would produce a diametrically more benefical environment than what they are now experiencing. However, the radical nature of some Tea Party candidates who prevailed in primaries could pose a clear choice in some races.”